by: John C

The following is adapted from NY Times Tech Guild steward John C’s remarks at the “New Luddism” conference on November 7.

There was some language that we wanted in our first Times Tech Guild contract that was novel and AI-specific. For example, if a layoff can be attributed to AI, enhanced severance kicks in. What we’ve seen so far is that that kind of specialized measure has been less effective at getting workers what we need than really strong fundamentals. What we find useful are bright lines that protect and win more of what matters to us.

AI is used to justify attacks on workers. The content of the attacks is longer hours, speed-up, surveillance, threats of layoffs, and intensified performance culture. In response, the agenda that we can most effectively muster is: 1) shorter work hours with full pay; 2) workers have a say over how or whether any new technology is implemented, blocking management’s attempts to use new technologies to push the pace of work; 3) bright lines against surveillance; 4) make it more expensive to lay off anyone; 5) establish stronger base pay that is more predictable, less contingent on algorithmically determined performance scores or any other discriminatory basis; 6) just cause requirements for firings, make it harder to discipline out anyone unfairly.

Then there is the practice of militancy. How do we win any of the aspects of that agenda? Since we’ve won our contract, we’ve battled management’s attempts to put workers on performance improvement plans, to discipline us out. We’ve battled to protect work hours, to thwart management’s attempts to circumvent our contract with unpaid on-call. When management moves to layoff workers, we take action. We took action earlier this year in response to layoffs, which were catastrophic especially for visa workers. We won deferral of termination for visa workers by insisting on it. That was something beyond the contract.

Beyond these day to day battles we need to learn how to undertake more effective labor stoppages. That means striking for a contract, like the strike that we went on in November. But there’s also a more informal day-to-day practice that builds up that capability to strike longer and more effectively. I think about what we’ve learned from workers in warehouses. How do we resist the speed up? We have to talk to each other about how we’re going to work, why it’s important to not jump when the boss says so. Those conversations can give rise to a shared analysis of where our power lies. When we learn how to do that, we muster resistance in the day-to-day moments when we need it, and we build the muscles that allow us to strike for longer, for greater impact. Our horizon is winning demands that protect us against all sorts of management actions – and those also protect us against the actions it undertakes justified by “AI”.