I don't blindly give unions a pass, but you're asking if a business would use the value of their product at a particular point in time to set terms. Of course they do. If NYT didn't want to be caught in the lurch, that's what contracts are for, which they've had plenty of time to secure.

By the way, the price of Christmas trees is about to skyrocket, ridiculous!

If using what leverage you have is so ridiculous, a suggestion to NYT management: agree to every contract provision on a temporary basis, and continue ongoing negotiations with the union which provisions to take away in the permanent contract.

That would end some of the leverage the NYT has and level the playing field for fruitful negotiations.

Businesses already hold a lot of leverage over employees - like healthcare or the ability to feed their families.

> Would a business battle with any other partner like this?

Regularly. One striking example is that way our monopsonies treat often treat their suppliers.

Yes, a business would use all their advantages at the maximum, with disregard for any other consideration than money, and tell you "it's just business". Or "it's fiduciary duty".

Now that the shoe is on the other foot, suddenly they want to be reasonable? Funny that.