The Wikimedia Foundation waited until the days following its largest worldwide conference to issue a statement saying it would not voluntarily recognize a union of its workers.
Last week, Wiki Workers United, which is organized through the Communication Workers Union and represents U.S. workers at the nonprofit Wikimedia Foundation, requested voluntary recognition of their union. Wiki Workers United said that it had secured a “supermajority of union-eligible workers who have signed union authorization cards.” A group of more than 1,100 Wikipedia editors have also signed a letter of support for the union.
On Monday, just days after the massive Wikimania Conference concluded in Paris, the Wikimedia Foundation announced it would not voluntarily recognize the union and said the union would have to conduct a vote as overseen by the National Labor Relations Board.
“The Foundation’s responsibility is to ensure that they can make their own choice freely,” the foundation wrote in the statement. “So that every eligible employee has an equal voice, we believe a secret-ballot election conducted by the National Labor Relations Board is the appropriate path forward.”
“We have heard a range of views from staff, including concerns from those who have felt pressured to support union efforts and those who are confused by the unionization process,” the foundation added in a frequently asked questions section. “We have also seen a misunderstanding around what the union can do for global staff and Wikimedia movement communities.”
The Wikimedia Foundation’s statement and its frequently asked questions section is full of very carefully-worded language that is common among companies and organizations that have fought against unionization. For example, the FAQ includes a long section about the benefits that Wikimedia Foundation already offers its staff, and the statement suggests that there is a “wide range of views on unionization” among employees.
Wikipedians immediately took issue with the timing of the statement and the language of it. On a talk page discussing the statement, the Wikimedia Foundation is getting hammered for the timing of the statement and the statement itself.
“What a shameful decision to tie the process to the willingness of Trump-controlled NLRB. Everyone involved in denying the voluntary recognition should resign in disgrace or be driven out,” one editor wrote.
“The fact that this response came exactly 1 day after Wikimania shows that you are afraid of being confronted,” another wrote.
“This is an extremely disappointing statement. It says that ‘Foundation leadership respects the right of staff to unionize, if they choose to do so. That decision rests with them.’ But that decision has been made – by a supermajority of US-based staff. The only thing standing between the US WWU and recognition is WMF executive leadership, who could recognize the union today if they cared to,” a third wrote.
“As a U.S. trained labor lawyer and past organizer with WWU, this statement, alongside the WMF’s public facing community post reek of union-busting disinformation. What’s critical for the community to know is that a supermajority of the workers already did vote by signing a card. This ‘extra step’ is just a delay tactic that employers are advised to do when they don’t want a union,” a fourth wrote. “These WMF workers have already been extremely brave by expressly affirming their commitment to a union. Years of efforts to get this accomplished. This is not some rash decision by them. Moreover, the community supports their union too! It literally makes no sense as to why WMF thought this was the right decision here in this critical moment.”
At Wikimania in Paris, the Wikimedia Foundation’s Chief Executive Officer Bernadette Meehan was asked about voluntarily recognizing the union. Meehan said “our focus is on executing and helping the core organizing team execute a great event. We will respond to that particular request when we have a chance to review it.”
“We are supportive and we support employees’ right to unionize. The context is complicated because we operate in multiple different places,” she added. “We respect the right if it is the majority will of eligible staffers to unionize.”
The Wikimedia Foundation did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
