Junior workers often bear the cost of mass walkouts, study shows
A mass resignation at a leading gender studies journal spotlights a troubling trend - how workplace protests often harm the careers of people they aim to protect.
About 500 editors at the journal Gender, Work & Organization (GWO) quit en masse in March, claiming that the publisher Wiley was steering the title away from its feminist roots. Wiley’s moves to hire new editors were undemocratic, they argued, sidelining experts in feminist research and putting profits first.
The headline-hitting boycott made waves as a bold stand against corporate control of academia.
But the resignations also derailed the careers of early-career and marginalised academics who rely on the journal to get published, build their reputation, and land jobs, a new study shows.
It’s a pattern echoed across industries says Mustafa Özbilgin, Professor of Human Resource Management at Brunel Business School. “In many industries, such as labour unions and entertainment, strikes often disproportionately affect junior or precariously employed workers who lack financial security or established reputations.”
Prof Özbilgin and Dr Milena Tekeste at New York University Abu Dhabi spoke to academics across all ranks for their study in Equality Diversity and Inclusion An International Journal. The GWO resignations mirror broader power dynamics in workplace activism across industries, it suggests.
At GWO, the protests derailed manuscript review processes and career-building opportunities. “Early-career researchers rely on publishing in top journals like GWO to get jobs and promotions,” said Özbilgin.“This mass resignation took that away.”
The virtue-signalling walkout sent a strong message to managers, they found. But it highlighted the power dynamics seen across many sectors. Many who resigned were backed up by strong networks and reputations. Meanwhile, workers starting out in their careers bore the brunt of the disruptions caused by the mass resignation, strikes and other sorts of protest.
For a lasting impact beyond a symbolic gesture, the study suggests that workforce leaders facing similar challenges would do well to ask themselves who will benefit from protests, walkouts or strike action, who will be harmed, and how can these risks be reduced.
The resigning journal editors, many of whom were senior academics, perhaps saw the career risks involved in action, but underestimated how it would harm less experienced colleagues. Talks with Wiley could have softened the blow, Dr Tekeste suggested. “By engaging collaboratively, they might have pushed for systemic change while protecting junior scholars from the fallout.
The study shows the need for solidarity across all levels of the workforce during protests. “I also believe that established scholars have a duty of care to shield marginalised scholars and early-career researchers from precarity and risk,” Tekeste said.
For protests to make positive lasting change, the researchers argue, they must balance bold action with careful planning to lessen harm. Dramatic gestures might grab headlines, but all workers need protecting — not just ones with the loudest voices.
“Protests, strikes and resignations are powerful tools,” Özbilgin said. “But they must be wielded wisely. Otherwise, they risk turning the very people they’re fighting for into collateral damage.”