I disagree. The past several years have proven that when Trump is in the news, more people watch them. It's now peak election season, and it's more relevant than ever to report on Trump. If their strike impedes the New York times from releasing propaganda, then this is going to be a huge loss for them. They will be greatly incentivized to come to the table as soon as possible.

Not to mention, if, God forbids, the democrats cheat another election win and Kamala becomes "President", then the economy will become even worse, very quickly. If they don't make wage increase demands now, when else would they have the opportunity to do so?

And if Republicans are able to counter the voter fraud and Trump wins, then the economy will quickly improve, so having a bad economy now will no longer be a factor. The Times will also start making a lot more profit than they currently do, because they now have years of experience proving that printing 99% negative coverage of Trump generates a lot of traffic. As such, they might not be so concerned about granting their demands, despite the uncertainty of the election results.