Union days, sweepin’ the clouds away

On March 4,  2025, workers at the Sesame Workshop, the nonprofit corporation behind the Sesame Street children’s show, based in New York City, publicly announced their overwhelming desire for union representation with the Office and Professional Employees International Union (OPEIU) Local 153. According to their press release, the group of over 200 workers “seeks to unionize to ensure that employees can participate in decisions that impact them, including those related to job security and fair pay.” On the same day that the workers went public with the union, the CEO of Sesame Workshop, Sherrie Westin, a millionaire and longtime political functionary in various Republican administrations, announced that 20 percent of Sesame Workshop employees would be terminated. Westin and Sesame Workshop management have since engaged in an anti-union campaign. (A petition in support of the Sesame Workshop workers and their unionization effort can be signed here). Phoebe Gilpin, Senior Director of Formal Learning at Sesame Workshop, is part of the union organizing committee and one of the workers recently laid off. Gilpin spoke with Keith Rosenthal for Tempest Magazine about the struggle, how it transpired, and what comes next.

Keith Rosenthal: What kind of work do you do at Sesame Workshop? What kinds of workers are involved in this unionization campaign?

Phoebe Gilpin: We do a range of things. Some people work on the show and show-related content, which includes cast and crew members, who may also be partially covered by the Writers Guild of America (WGA) and Screen Actors Guild (SAG) unions. So someone may be writing for the show, in which there are a certain number of pages and duration that must be fulfilled to qualify for WGA wages, and they get those rates and benefits only for the time that they’re working on the show specifically as writers. However, many of those people are also full-time staff, so during the rest of their time, when they’re not writing, they’re getting much lower compensation rates.

There is a production team that works on the show. There is also a research team, which does deep research every season involving social impact programs, both domestic and international, which makes sure that the programming is effective in doing what is claimed, namely, supporting children with meaningful and appropriate early education. A show goes through rigorous testing before it is ever fully produced. We use these things called ‘animatics,’ which are like very crude cartoons, and non-SAG voice actors, and we test out material to see what kids are learning, whether the show’s working or not, what is getting a laugh, etc.

 In addition to the research team, there is a marketing team. There is a brand creative team. There are facilities and maintenance workers. There is a small studio with various technical and electrical engineering workers. It basically works a lot like any other company that makes something. There are people who actively make the thing. Then there is all the support that goes around that. And for a place like Sesame, licensing is a large part of the revenue; things like book publishing, diapers with pictures of Elmo, etc.

As for the work I do at Sesame, the role of my team is to ensure that the material coming out of Sesame is developmentally appropriate and educationally sound for kids. 

KR: When did the current unionization campaign begin?

PG: We started to seriously talk to each other about unionizing in the summer of 2023. However, before that, during 2020, there was a big movement within the workshop around racial justice. This was the time of the Black Lives Matter protests and the George Floyd uprising. During this time, there was a company-sponsored group formed, which was focused on racial justice. It was described by company management as an avenue through which “we can hear from you about how we can improve our practices” around racism. Then, there were several other “Employee Resource Groups” (ERGs) that were formed in addition to this one, which were basically affinity groups, and these grew over time. There was one for young professionals; people of AAPI descent; Queer people, which I was part of; and many others. During one of the remote meetings for the Queer ERG, someone wrote in the chat something like, “if only we had a union …”, and lots of people began “liking” and “loving” and “thumbs-upping” that comment, and that was an inciting moment.

The worker who made this comment had been pretty involved in the ERGs, such as the racial justice group, the psychological safety group, etc. They had been active in trying to change things for the better for all the workers in the workshop, and they were coming up against management’s roadblocks. Management would offer a lot of, “We’re listening” and “We care about you,” but when specific actions were recommended to them, nothing would happen.

Of course, this is just how power operates and is distributed in any workplace. So I think workers felt that they had tried all these other things to advocate for themselves and each other, and none of them were effective.

KR: There are a couple of interesting dynamics in what you describe. First, there is the relation between seemingly non-economic or “political” issues occurring outside of the workplace, like the George Floyd uprising for Black Lives, which nonetheless have a role in instigating or catalyzing workplace-centered struggles. Second, there is this phenomenon in which administrative or employer initiatives, coming from the top-down as a way to try to manage simmering discontent or disgruntlement among the workers, can nonetheless be used by workers, against intended design, as a basis for more subversive or meaningful organizing.

PG: Both of those are accurate, especially on the second point you mention. Many of us did not know each other at all. But then the company developed these groups to foster a “sense of belonging” among the employees. And we really effectively utilized the ERGs, which were basically like “yellow” or company unions, which were a way for the company to pay lip service to worker inclusivity without actually ceding power. They clearly did not expect this to be a sort of genesis of a much more substantial empowered campaign.

KR: So then how do you go from these expressions of a general interest in the idea of a union to actually putting flesh on that possibility?

PB: Like pretty much every union, ours started with a small set of workers who began talking to each other outside of the workplace about our shared working conditions. We were developing these relationships, and we realized we needed help, so we reached out to the Emergency Workplace Organizing Committee (EWOC). EWOC was formed during the height of the COVID pandemic by volunteers from the labor movement who wanted to help workers organize and safeguard their interests in their workplace. EWOC helped us with some basic but essential things, such as determining who we thought should be included (or excluded) from our bargaining unit. Initially, we didn’t try to organize people from the Human Resources department, Office of the CEO, or the legal and finance departments. Eventually, we did end up taking people from legal and finance, but not the other HR-based groups, such as those who had access to confidential information. For instance, a paralegal does not have access to confidential information concerning the marketing unit or the deep inner workings of the Sesame Workshop.

We made a spreadsheet with everyone’s name on it, what department they worked in, what their title was, and what “tier” of employee they were. At Sesame Workshop there are three different types of employees. The first tier, which is what I am, is a staff member. Staff members don’t have to be full-time, but they get full benefits, including things like a 401K with a 200% match for 5% of your salary; healthcare; the standard benefits of a full-time employee.

The second tier is the cast and crew, including people who work directly on the show. The show shoots for 17 or 20 weeks, and the cast and crew will be on contract for that time, and then their contract ends, and you see them next year, for the next season. Some people are on cast and crew for over a decade, where they would have either four, six, or eight-month contracts that they are renewing, and it is the same contract every time. If you are a staff member, you receive an annual pay increase, depending upon your level, and bonuses. Cast and crew never get these. They don’t get as good healthcare or retirement benefits as staff members, if at all. They are “second-class” employees, often thought of as “independent contractors.” The supposed appeal of being an independent contractor is that you have more personal agency or autonomy, but in reality, that is not the case. They have to be in the office just the same; they have to use a company computer just the same. Their conditions of work are the same as those of a staff member, but they are treated much worse. And there is no clear way to transition from cast and crew to staff member.

The third category is a “variable” employee. It is sort of the lowest in this employee hierarchy.

The reason I am bringing all this up is because, regardless of who you talked to among the workers, everyone knew that this setup was unfair. It was one of the main unifying issues that everyone cared about. And so we made up our spreadsheet, including the various employee tiers, and then we looked through the list and figured out who we had relationships with and how we wanted to talk to them.

KR: What was the size of this group of “small set of workers” involved in organizing at this point?

PG: It started small and then grew. First a small handful of people and then a bigger handful. At the peak, when we went public with the union drive, we had maybe two dozen people who really identified as organizers. But the process and involvement are different for different people. Some people came into the organizing committee and organized their two friends at work, and that was the extent of their contribution. Others built relationships through organizing and developed or already had strong relationships with people because they were a leader in the workplace. Through these relationships, people were able to engage in really earnest organizing conversations. That’s organizing. I think people view organizing as some sort of magical thing, when it’s literally just talking to people.

KR:This is in the summer of 2023?

PG: I think it was August 2023 when people really started talking to each other actively about unionizing. By December, we had a large number of people, maybe 12 people, which is 5% of the unit, who were consistently attending weekly organizing meetings.

KR: Between August 2023 and when you “go public” on March 4 of this year, during that year and a half, how did things unfold? Are you all having surreptitious conversations with coworkers, like, in the bathroom or supply closet at work, until you sense that you have enough support?

PG: Well, we were sort of bad at it to start. Organizers don’t necessarily start out as good organizers, and we were really fearful. It started with, like, assessing “vibes.” I would go grab coffee with someone and mention something about the labor movement. In 2023, the Writers Guild of America went on strike too, so that was something to talk about with people, and depending on how they responded, get a better sense of what they thought.

A lot of our initial evaluations of people and their level of support were not that accurate, actually, because they had been based only on “vibes.” At first, we weren’t really asking people to “do” anything–just gauging their support. Over time, however, we got more direct with people, indicating that we wanted to have a conversation about organizing. Maybe not in those exact words, but saying, “Hey, I want to talk to you about something that is going on at work. Can we go take a walk outside or grab a coffee?”

It is ironic because the ERGs were developed to give people a sense of belonging. But people found their sense of belonging through organizing; through talking with their co-workers about stuff that really matters.

Before long, we decided to contact and interview some different unions. We did not initially pick the union that we are currently with, Office and Professional Employees International Union (OPEIU) Local 153. We were with another union for about a year before that, from late 2023 to 2024. Over time we found that our organizing committee was slumping, and things were not going well. We just were not receiving the support that we wanted. They did not really provide meaningful organizer training, and the union itself was not modeling the behavior that we wanted to see from our organizers. For instance, if there was a disagreement, it was just squashed. If a worker came with a concern, it was casually dismissed as an anti-union talking point, rather than authentically engaging with people about their concerns or whatever it is that they are bringing up.

Things had really slowed down, and then in late November 2024, we decided to switch unions to OPEIU. After that, things sped up again, and we were ready to go public a few months later. OPEIU gave us excellent training. They made it really clear that this is our union, and that we are the ones making choices and decisions, making relationships. They really supported the ways that we wanted to go about doing our campaign. They had recommendations and suggestions and expertise, but they also recognized that we needed and wanted to make our own mistakes.

KR: What kind of training did the union provide?

PG: They offered really targeted training on how to have specific conversations. A lot of it is stuff found in Labor Notes, actually, in their organizer training materials. This includes stuff on the different parts of an organizing conversation, or how to answer firmly, redirect, or use clear language, when someone brings something up. Even how to get a coworker that you do not know to take a walk with you for the purposes of talking.

A lot of this training was also co-facilitated by someone from the union and someone from the workers’ organizing committee, because we had over a year of practice. We found that people were hungry for this kind of support.

KR:On March 4, 2025, you go public with the union, informing the CEO, and holding a “block party” rally outside of the workplace. Later that day, however, at an all-staff meeting, the CEO announces that 20% of the workforce will be terminated for “financial” reasons. Do you think management knew about the union drive before you went public? Were the layoffs a response, in part or in whole, or in character or who they targeted, to workplace organizing?

PG: I have gone back and watched the archive of quarterly all-staff meetings that are available to workers, dating back to June 2024. In June, management was optimistic about the financial situation of the company. They were confident that they were going to get a distribution deal for Sesame Street and that all these groups were interested, from Disney to Netflix to Amazon. By the December 2024 meeting, they had changed tunes. They were claiming they had to take some money out of their reserves, and there was more financial talk about the troubles that the company was facing. The following meeting was the one where they announced the 20% layoffs, which affected nearly 50% of our organizing committee, and a disproportionate number of pro-union workers.

I don’t know if management knew about the union in advance, but doing a cut like they did is certainly a really dramatic choice.

KR: Did you know in advance that such large cuts to the workforce were being planned?

PG: We knew there probably would be something happening. There was definitely a rumor. We were planning on going public soon anyway. But our immediate decision to go public was based on two things. One, we had obtained verbal support for the union from a super-majority of people, in which they said, “yes, I would sign a union card.” Two, we had received information from a reliable source that we would be facing significant layoffs in Spring 2025.

We talked with OPEIU organizers, and they agreed that we should proceed to put out union authorization cards, which we did. We also had a public letter that we were asking workers to sign in addition to the union card. A lot of people were really scared to sign the letter. The impending layoffs made people feel really worried about their jobs. Our plan was to submit the letter if we had a strong majority sign it, but we only got about 45% of the unit to sign, so we decided not to submit it.

However, we kept collecting union cards from workers, and when we reached a strong majority, we decided to go public. The idea was to go public before the layoffs were announced as a tactic to possibly compel the company to reconsider.

The night before we went public, someone from OPEIU called Sherri Westin, the CEO, and told her exactly what would be happening tomorrow. Westin was informed that a delegation of workers would go to her office in the morning to indicate their intention to unionize; they would deliver some flowers and a book about Sesame values, including cooperation and respect. After that, the workers will go outside to hold a rally and “block party” to celebrate the union. Westin was invited to voluntarily recognize the union at that point. She declined to do so, or to even be in her office to receive the workers’ delegation that morning.

So, we did that. We delivered everything to Westin’s executive assistant, went outside, partied, and then immediately went upstairs into an all-staff meeting where we were told about the layoffs.

At the meeting, Westin began by acknowledging that “some” workers want to form a union. She then announced that layoffs would proceed as planned. Among those terminated were many in our organizing committee, some of whom had seniority in their department, and for which we are filing unfair labor practices. Other cuts were announced, too. Consolidation, cuts to 401K contributions, no raises, no bonuses, and broad changes to benefits.

 Throughout this meeting, Westin talked about the importance of “transparency,” which is the opposite of what they were actually doing. And she was crying, which was one of the things on our checklist we had made beforehand, covering possible reactions or countermeasures we might face on the part of management.

The next morning, all workers received an email message from management informing them whether their employment had been terminated or not.

The layoffs hit half of our organizing committee and disproportionately affected workers of color or those on the lower rungs of the workplace labor hierarchy.

KR: That’s terrible. So that happened at the beginning of March, several weeks ago. Where are things at now? What is the mood like among workers? How has this changed the unionization campaign and its prospects? 

PG: On the day we went public, over 70% of workers had signed union cards in the bargaining unit we had identified. Of those who were not terminated and who remain in the workshop, we probably have about 64%, which is still a very strong majority. Support is still very strong, but so is fear. The company is doing an anti-union campaign, which includes the fear-mongering emails to workers, the anti-union training meetings for managers, etc. Management is refusing to voluntarily recognize the union, despite the majority of workers signing cards, and instead, they are hoping to wear us down by going the longest, most arduous route, which is through a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) election. And against our proposed bargaining unit of some 200 workers, they are proposing a unit comprising 67 workers.

People are angry, people are scared, people are sad. Tomorrow (March 19), our union organizing committee is holding a going-away party for a huge number of staff whose last day is this Friday (March 21). This includes people who have worked there for 20 years.

One thing we are trying to offer right now is hope. Fear is a really powerful emotion. But we’re doing as much as we can to foster hope. We’re just doing the thing that we have become experts at, which is relating to, knowing, and supporting each other. And it is significant that this will be a party, hosted by the organizing committee, attended by workers who remain employed, in order to support and celebrate their coworkers and comrades who will no longer be employed at Sesame Workshop. 

And we’re doing mutual aid. We’re talking to people about their severance packages, making sure it’s fair and correct, and helping people figure out how to navigate unemployment insurance and health care. That’s not like an official thing that the union does, but a union is also your relationships with your coworkers.

KR: Right, it is what people do for each other when they care about each other. What can other people, such as readers of Tempest, do to lend support?

PG: Circulating and signing our petition would be great.

KR: I have one more question. How have management or workers, if at all, talked about the current political climate we are facing, namely the Trump presidency, in relation to the situation at Sesame Workshop (either with respect to the layoffs or the union drive)? There’s certainly a lot of retrenchment and cutbacks and austerity, and anti-unionism coming from the top-down right now.

PG: Well, I do want to make clear that our organizing started within the same empire that we have today. This is not just a response to this current moment. The other thing that is important to say is that our CEO cited the current presidential administration as a reason for Sesame’s financial woes and the need for layoffs. At the same time as she disclaims Trump, however, the CEO is relying on the weak and curtailed national government and NLRB as a way to drag out the process and kill our union. Isn’t that contradictory? To say that the Trump administration is forcing you to do this and then turning around and leveraging every tool that the administration is offering as a way to delay and deny our union?