I disagree I think the fact the boss of wikimedia is very well paid and that he is benefiting at the end of day from free labor.

They could reward/pay the most important contributors and they don't. Yes it's voluntary but it's also a comparatively very "" small "" group of people that write a big chunk of wikipedia.

I absolutely can't stand that the boss of such utility service as wikipedia thinks first about his salary rather than rewarding their contributors.

Also you say this is not a problem but I'm sure the Union would have pointed out the same thing I just did.

That's not the problem, 'tho. Wikipedia is volunteer-written and needs money to pay for the SW development and the servers.

Also you are missing an important point if you just say "hey they are volunteers, they choose to work for free". It's not like that because as I said it's a few contributors that do the bast majority of article edits.

I'm wasting my time if you think that wikimedia has one problem and that's it. Multiple problems that would need to be adressed by a Union.