This site is for Washington Post engineering employees to learn more about the proposed tech union.
Perspective
Work Visas and The Guild **NEW as of Apr 28, 2025**
Q&A Topics
Job Security and Layoffs Updated: Apr 21, 2025
1. If we vote to unionize, can the union prevent The Post from doing layoffs during bargaining for a new contract?
2. What are the current Guild contract’s rules for selecting who gets laid off?
Seat at the Table Updated: Apr 23, 2025**
Why am [I] forced to be involved with this? I didn’t agree to have people speak for me or assign my position to “The Tech Guild” notice. **NEW as of Apr 24, 2025**
Why are you union busting? **NEW as of Apr 24, 2025**
- Facts about NLRB Elections
- Importance of Voting in NLRB Elections
- What Happens if the Union is Elected?
- Facts about the Collective Bargaining Process
Letter from CTO Vineet Khosla
Team,
I want to respond to the important conversation that has emerged in the last few days regarding a potential union of Washington Post tech workers – a move that would impact each and every one of you regardless of how you vote in an NLRB election.
Please know that The Post’s executive leadership and I hear you, especially regarding the opportunity to build a stronger culture where you feel your voices are better heard and your careers can thrive.
We respect and support your right to vote to form a union. It’s an important conversation that companies should not be afraid to have. If our tech workers vote to unionize in a secret-ballot NLRB election that protects their right to vote privately and as they freely choose, The Post will respect that decision and will work with the union in good faith.
This said, it’s important we all operate from the same set of facts so you know exactly what your vote means. I share these thoughts not just as The Post’s CTO, but also as someone who is deeply invested in your professional growth and success.
First, it’s my personal view that unionization – and the resulting collective bargaining process that would result – do not fit well with the type of technology work we do at The Post along with your desire to have your individual voices heard.
Our work is dynamic, and you currently have the flexibility and entrepreneurial room to shape your roles, pursue projects of interest (both across The Post and, in some cases, outside it), and rapidly progress in your careers. These are unique, personal benefits I fear could be negotiated away in bargaining.
Based on The Post’s many years of experience with the Guild in collective bargaining, we expect that the Guild will strive to greatly limit The Post’s ability to individually tailor your contribution, role, compensation, responsibility level, and growth prospects.
Under collective bargaining, compensation and benefits usually become more standardized and you could lose a degree of control over your own trajectories if you become subject to collective terms in a union contract. It is vital you keep in mind that, if the Guild is elected, the terms of the resulting collective bargaining agreement would apply to all employees in the bargaining unit — regardless of whether you voted for or against the Guild.
Second, many of the claims made in the Guild’s materials are inaccurate and misleading. For example, voting to become Guild-covered will not alter the company’s previously announced return-to-office policy. While The Post will bargain in good faith during negotiations for a contract, The Post does not have to agree to change policies it has no interest in changing — and, as a business, we have decided that having employees working in the office five days a week is a priority.
It is also not realistic to expect that voting in a union will lead to salaries that are the same as those at large successful technology corporations. We are a news company working through a very significant and badly needed transformation, not a thriving Silicon Valley tech company. The Post would not be willing to agree, in labor negotiations, to a wage structure detrimental to our financial health.
Our entire industry continues to confront economic challenges that force us all to evolve. We’re in that process right now. Nonetheless, the entire Post leadership, including me, is confident in our future. Our plan has always been to ensure that you’re here not only to build products and tools, but also to build your careers at a great journalistic institution that truly values your individual creativity, initiative, and hard work.
Please understand that, at the end of the day, the choice before you isn’t between our current state and a union. That would be a false choice. Instead, it’s about collaborating to build a culture that is both more responsive to your needs and drives The Post forward. We are committed to doing that, and we hope you are as well.
I look forward to continuing the conversation, and my door remains open in the days ahead.
Vineet
REMEMBER TO VOTE.
If just 10 people vote, then only six people will determine the outcome for 300+ employees.
If we vote to unionize, can the union prevent The Post from doing layoffs during bargaining for a new contract?
No.
We have heard misconceptions that the status quo period prevents layoffs. That is not the case. During the period between an election and the signing of a contract, the employer can still lay off employees after giving notice to the union and providing an opportunity to bargain over the layoffs. After good faith negotiations over things like severance, the employer is allowed to proceed with layoffs even during the status quo period.
What are the current Guild contract’s rules for selecting who gets laid off?
The Job Security language in Article X of the current Guild contract provides the Post with the broad right to layoff employees, including determining the number of employees to lay off and the work areas affected by layoffs.
The current Guild agreement favors seniority-based layoffs to use “last-in-first-out” seniority rules, meaning the most recently-hired employees are subject to be laid off before more senior employees, regardless of skills, talent or abilities.
However, the agreement allows The Post to exempt up to 30% of employees in an affected job classification in an affected work area from seniority-based layoff for any reason that The Post deems essential to its operations. While The Post has proposed additional flexibility in this layoff language to give it the ability to rely even more on employees’ skills, talent and abilities, the Guild has resisted those efforts; the Guild prefers instead to use “last-in-first-out” seniority rules, meaning the most recently-hired employees are laid off before more senior employees, regardless of skills, talent or abilities.
Why am [I] forced to be involved with this? I didn’t agree to have people speak for me or assign my position to “The Tech Guild” notice.
Unfortunately, when the Tech Guild filed its election petition with the NLRB, that petition swept up many of you, irrespective of your personal choice.
You have the opportunity to exercise your choice when you vote.
Whether you want to be involved or not, it is very important for employees to vote. If the Guild is elected through a majority of votes cast, the Guild will represent all engineering employees, even those who did not vote and those who voted “no” to having a union.
It is worth noting that information about you may be shared with the union if a union is elected. Before starting negotiations, unions typically demand employers to provide the union with a significant amount of information about every employee in the bargaining unit, including their demographic information, their salary and bonus history, personnel files, performance reviews, health insurance selections, etc. (The union’s entitlement to this information, as the collective bargaining agent, is broad under NLRB rules.)
The outcome of this election will be decided by a simple majority of employees who actually vote in the election. For example, if only 10 people vote, just six votes will determine the outcome for everyone in the proposed unit – which in this case is several hundred Post engineering employees.
Why are you union busting?
We are glad someone asked this question because it provides the opportunity for additional context around our communications to employees.
I categorically reject any claim that we are engaging in union busting. As my very first email to employees made clear, we respect and support your right to vote to form a union.
That does not mean, however, that we need to be silent.
We are providing employees with factual information and our opinions about the impact of unionization so everyone can make an informed decision when they vote. We believe the Guild has made misleading claims to our employees. For example, voting to become Guild-covered will not alter our previously announced return-to-office policy. While we will bargain in good faith during negotiations for a contract, The Post does not have to agree to change policies it believes are in the best interest of the business — and, as a business, we have decided that having employees working in the office five days a week is a priority.
If you have any questions, please reach out to Vineet Khosla or his Senior Leadership .