Here Is A List Of Weenies Who Work At The New York Times
4:44 PM EDT on June 4, 2021
Earlier today, The Daily Beast published a story about NewsGuild members circulating a letter that opposes a proposed union dues increase of less than one half of one percent. The proposed changes, which would raise dues from 1.3846 percent to 1.75 percent of a member's salary, and also eliminate a dues cap which prevents the union from collecting dues on income over $140,140 per year, would be the first revision to the dues structure in the union's 88-year history. To give you an idea how how silly it is for the New York Times' best-paid staffers to be throwing a collective tantrum over a pittance of a dues increase, even hiring lawyers to help them fight it, here's an example: For someone making $200,000 a year, the proposed hike would result in that person's annual dues increasing by about $4 a day.
The Beast reported that New York Times politics writer Nick Confessore was "among the most vocally opposed to the dues increase," and also published the names of about two dozen star (and presumably well-compensated) New York Times reporters who oppose the increase, which included Maggie Haberman, Jodi Kantor, Megan Twohey, Eric Lipton, Katie Rosman, Kenneth Vogel, Mark Leibovich, Cecilia Kang, and Trip Gabriel.
Defector obtained the full letter, which was signed by more than a hundred Times (and a small handful of Reuters) staffers as of Wednesday. Below is the letter and its signatories; the names of people who work for New York Times sports section are in bold, as a service to our readers to remind them where these writers and reporters stand on solidarity the next time they write about labor in sports.
Dear Union Colleagues:In the coming days, you will receive a ballot in the mail from the Guild asking you to vote on a proposal to raise your annual union dues by at least 26 percent. This will cost many of us between $400 and $500 more for every year we remain in the union. The highest earners in our Guild will pay more than $1,000 extra per year. The Guild has said its executive committee voted to recommend permanently raising our dues to ensure our union has the money needed to fight for and organize new shops across the region.We the undersigned stand with all of our colleagues and shops, new and old alike, and agree that the Guild must not back away from helping the newly organized. But the proposed dues increase is a permanent solution to a temporary problem and we firmly oppose it. We urge you to vote ‘no.’Here’s why:Five years ago, Guild leaders began a strikingly successful effort to organize new shops and expand our membership. That spoke to a broad hunger among those in our business for union protections and we salute that. But the Guild never figured out how to fund this ambitious expansion.Instead, it has run ever larger deficits and depleted our union’s reserves by more than half. Payroll at the Guild has doubled as we’ve added organizers and as spending on contract negotiations has grown ever faster as the number of our new members has grown four-fold, to nearly 1,200.This is not sustainable. New members only pay dues when they win their first contracts, and that can take many years. For instance, new Guild members at Conde Nast are in the third year of negotiations and recently took a strike vote. For now, the Guild’s existing dues-paying members -- you -- are paying for this expansion effort with no clear projections for how much it will cost nor when new dues will begin to sluice into our coffers. Guild’s leaders have provided few details, other than to say they plan to hire more organizers.In fact, a top Guild official recently told us the Guild never writes a budget that extends more than one quarter ahead and that there is no “reliable way to predict” future revenues and costs.That is an alarming response. No business looking to expand would simply shrug its collective shoulders and say: “Revenues? Costs? Sorry, no real idea…” Rather than give the Guild a blank check to spend more of our money, we need to consider a proposal for higher dues in a careful accounting of likely costs and revenues. The dues hike, coupled with removal of a cap on dues above $140,140, will not pay for the Guild’s current expansion efforts, the recruiting of yet more members and the replenishment of union’s reserves, as the Guild’s leadership has promised. There simply isn’t enough money to go around. The increase is unlikely to even raise enough money to cover this year’s projected deficit.There are many alternatives, including trimming expansion efforts to slow spending, removing the cap on dues above $140,140, introducing a one-time assessment to replenish the reserve fund and assessing dues on overtime hours. We can also seek more help from our International Union. All of this should be grounded in transparency and careful budgeting with benchmarks going forward. We will not leave any organized shop behind. We take our obligations very seriously. But we need to slow down. In this coming referendum, the Guild leadership has allowed non-dues paying members to vote on the increase. It is critical that those of us who will immediately pay these higher dues make our voices heard. A majority of votes cast -- from across all of the Guild’s media outlets, dues-paying and not -- will decide the referendum. Please return your paper ballot that will come in the mail. Vote ‘no’ so the Guild can develop a more sensible, sustainable plan to ensure our future.FYI: The vote will be conducted by mail ballot, on a timeline to be determined in the coming days by the Guild. Ballots will be mailed to each member’s address on file with the Guild. To check or update your mailing address on file, contact Tim Try at firstname.lastname@example.org. If you do not receive your ballot or need a replacement, contact Global Election Services (Phone: 1-877-455-9367, E-mail: email@example.com). Signed,Ken Belson -- NYTPatti Cohen -- NYTNick Confessore -- NYTMichael Powell -- NYTReed Abelson -- NYTDaniel Adkinson -- NYTBinya Appelbaum -- NYTKim Barker -- NYTJulian Barnes -- NYTTony Barone -- ReutersNellie Bowles -- NYTDan Barry -- NYTSusan Beachy - NYTTara Siegel Bernard -- NYTJacob Bernstein -- NYTNellie Bowles -- NYT Scott Cacciola -- NYTBrian X. Chen -- NYTDavid Chen -- NYTRoselle Chen -- ReutersHelene Cooper -- NYTMichael Corkery -- NYTKaren Crouse -- NYTConor Dougherty -- NYTJoe Drape -- NYTJesse Drucker -- NYTSteve Eder -- NYTSydney Ember -- NYTKevin Flynn -- NYTHenry Fountain -- NYT Matt Futterman -- NYTEllen Gabler -- NYTTrip Gabriel -- NYTDavid Gelles -- NYTJames Glanz -- NYTAdam Goldman -- NYTMaggie Haberman -- NYTRichard Harris -- NYTSvea Herbst -- ReutersTiffany Hsu -- NYTLara Jakes -- NYTCecilia Kang -- NYTJodi Kantor -- NYTKate Kelly -- NYTCorey Kilgannon -- NYTGwen Knapp -- NYTSerge Kovaleski -- NYTCliff Krauss -- NYTNick Kulish -- NYTMichael LaForgia -- NYTSharon LaFraniere -- NYTMark Leibovich -- NYTEric Lipton -- NYTJuliet Macur -- NYTSapna Maheshwari -- NYTJonathan Mahler -- NYTJonathan Martin -- NYTMark Mazzetti -- NYTPatrick McGeehan -- NYTShawn McCreesh -- NYTMike McIntire -- NYTTim McLaughlin -- ReutersWesley Morris -- NYTJack Nicas -- NYTDennis Overbye -- NYTMichael Paulson -- NYTAzi Paybarah -- NYTAmy Padnani -- NYTIvan Penn -- NYTRandy Pennell -- NYTBill Pennington -- NYTJeremy Peters -- NYTRichard Perez-Pena -- NYTMatt Phillips -- NYTEduardo Porter -- NYTBen Protess -- NYTRoni Caryn Rabin -- NYTWilliam Rashbaum -- NYTLynda Richardson -- NYTCampbell Robertson -- NYTKatie Rogers -- NYTMatthew Rosenberg -- NYTKatie Rosman -- NYTMichael Rothfeld -- NYTRebecca Ruiz -- NYTBedel Saget -- NYTRichard Sandomir -- NYTDavid Sanger -- NYTStephanie Saul -- NYTCharlie Savage -- NYTJennifer Steinhauer -- NYTDionne Searcey -- NYTMichael Shear -- NYTErnest Scheyder — ReutersJennifer Schuessler -- NYTBen Shpigel -- NYTDan Slotnik -- NYTBen Sisario -- NYTLiam Stack - NYTEmily Steel -- NYTHiroko Tabuchi -- NYTMegan Twohey -- NYTNeil Vigdor -- NYTKenneth P. Vogel -- NYTDan Wakin -- NYTDavid Waldstein -- NYTJoe Ward -- NYTNancy Wartik -- NYTElizabeth Williamson -- NYTMichael Wines -- NYTBilly Witz -- NYTKaren Yourish -- NYT
Stay in touch
Sign up for our free newsletter