TU: Employees will get 45-day layoff notice

The Company acknowledged Wednesday its legal obligation to provide 45 days’ notice to employees if they are to be laid off.

Last week, the Company had said the 45-day notice provision began when it started negotiating with the Guild over the implementation of its layoff language. Guild bargainers noted Wednesday that while the Company’s proposal imposed (we believe illegally) new language on layoffs under Section 3(D) of the contract, it did not alter Section 3(C) which clearly states: “In lieu of notice to the employee, forty five (45) days pay shall be given.”

The Company acknowledged that is true. It attorney, Peter Rahbar, said: “We will provide individuals with 45-days’ notice.”

During the session, the Guild gave the Company two information requests. The  first asked for the results of the so-called “test runs” the Company did of its criteria — in other words, the employees’ names that would be on the layoff  list if that criteria was used. We also asked for the number of employees in each job title who would be laid off and for details on what would happen to that work. We asked what employees would be expected to do the work, if any job duties would  change and if the Company will seek to outsource any of the work.

The second request was an extensive review of the Company’s typo-ridden questionnaires in editorial. Many of those questions mentioned “quality standards,” “length standards,” “productivity standards,” etc. In every instance, the Guild asked the Company to provide copies of those standards, when and by whom they were developed, proof that employees had been informed of the standards and evidence that the standards were negotiated with the Guild as the law requires.

The  evaluation forms also made repeated references to employees expressing an interest in learning. We asked the Company to provide evidence that it has indeed tracked every time an employee asks for training.

The forms also asked questions about video and multimedia. Again, the Guild asked for information on what training was done and whether everyone was given an equal opportunity.

The Company said it would take some time to gather the responses, so they ended the days’ talks and the parties set the next meeting for Wednesday, July 8 starting at 10 a.m. As always, employees can attend on their own time.

The Guild also filed charges with the National Labor Relations Board over the illegal declaration of impasse. A board agent contacted the union Wednesday to begin gathering information for an investigation.

“It’s unfortunate we have to go this route but the Company has left us with no choice,” Guild President Tim O’Brien said. “From day one, the Hearst Corp. has refused to modify the core of its two main proposals, giving the Company unfettered discretion to lay off anyone or to outsource any job.”

Company forces overtime at regular pay rates

When the Company imposed an impasse (illegally, we might add) it didn’t just post the most controversial proposals on outsourcing and layoffs. There are other changes it is trying to force on us as well.

For example, some employees have been told to work past 37.5 hours but that they would not get paid overtime until they hit 40 hours. (They would get paid at normal rates instead.) The Guild did not agree to this contractual change and will be legally challenging it.

So what do you do if your boss tells you to work overtime but not to put down for it? First, obey the directive. You can be found insubordinate for refusing to follow orders even if the order itself was later found to be illegal. (Exceptions are rarely made and usually if the employee fears for his or her health or safety.)

Second, keep track of it. Save a record. Because if we are successful in our legal appeals, the Company will be ordered to pay back everyone whose overtime it denied.

Guild to meet with those on target list

The Newspaper Guild has scheduled meetings for people to hear about the Company’s proposed criteria for laying off outside seniority.

The Guild will meet at 12:30 p.m. Friday in the cafeteria with the marketing media specialists. It will meet at the same time Monday in the cafeteria with the advertising artists. (If it’s nice, we can sit outside.)

Since there is a far larger group in editorial, we will hold two meetings Tuesday at the Best Western on Wolf Road. One session will start at noon and the second at 5. (Space at the town library is hard to come by, sadly, now that schools are out and summer programming has begun. We also looked into the meeting room at the Crossings Park, but that was unavailable.)

We want to hear your thoughts on the Company’s proposed criteria for layoffs, which you can find in our earlier post.

Please join us at one of these very important sessions. The information you provide will be useful as we meet with the Company on Wednesday, July 1.

Come join your colleagues and help us figure out what this means: “Does the Editorial Assistant have the appropriate sense of urgency and understand the importance of deadline meet standards?” (Seriously, that’s one of the questions in the newsroom’s performance evaluations.)

No names, numbers on layoffs this week

There will be no names or numbers on layoffs this week.

In most departments, the Company said layoffs would be done in reverse order of seniority. Exceptions would be made for almost all of editorial as well as for advertising artists and marketing media specialists.

The Company must negotiate the criteria first before it can announce the names of people who will be laid off, but department managers all said they had done a “test run” of their criteria by applying it to individual names. In other words, they’ve got their lists but want to go through the motions of appearing to negotiate.

The Company also said it would accept further buyout applications if anyone wanted to step forward. It also said it would reconsider at least some of the four buyout applications from Guild members it rejected.

In a moment, we’ll share with you the Company’s documents outlining what they said would be the criteria for layoffs for each of 11 job titles. We had thorough discussions of all of them that ended after 6 p.m.  Tomorrow, Guild President Tim O’Brien will be on leave and will work out a schedule for people in those job categories to meet and discuss the proposed criteria with Guild leaders.

The two sides are scheduled to resume negotiations at 10 a.m. Wednesday, July 1. The company contended today’s meeting started the 45-day clock on layoff notices, meaning that employees would be let go effective Monday, Aug. 10. The Guild believes the 45-day notice begins when a list of employee names is produced.

For the titles of advertising artist and marketing media specialist, the list of eight criteria is identical. In these two instances, the Company said it would rank employees in each of the first seven areas with a score of one to three. It would then add up the scores. In the event of a tie between workers, seniority would then be used to decide who stays and who goes.

In editorial, the Times Union produced an 18-page document that was riddled with typos, punctuation errors, missing words, and words in nonsense order. O’Brien called it “an excellent example of why you need content editors.” He said it was stunning to realize the people responsible for presenting such a document would be judging others’ performances.

Sample question: “Arre the reporter’s language skills — spelling, grammar and vovabulary — sufficient?”

Fortunately for you, the document was e-mailed to the Guild as nine different two-page documents, one for each of the affected job titles. We’ll share those in a second. Now we’re going to try to explain to you how the Company would use this form.

(You might want to get a couple of Tylenol and a glass of water ready.)

First, it would use the two-page questionnaire to evaluate each employee, with employees rated by a score of zero, one or two points for each answer. A zero would mean an employee doesn’t meet expectations, a one would mean the worker meets expectations and a 2 would mean the employee exceeds expectations.

Different questions would be weighted differently, again on a scale of 1 to 3. For example, the answer to the question “Does the reporter’s work regularly make it to the front page and section front positions?” would be weighted with a factor of two. The employee’s score would be the points multipled by the weighting. (An employee who meets expectations for getting work out front would get a score of 1 times 2 or 2.)

In another example, the question “Is the reporter reliable or punctual?” would have a weight of 1. So an employee who met that criteria would get a score of 1 times 1.)

(Hey, don’t blame us. We didn’t come up with this system.)

But that’s unfortunately not it. The Company would then use your score on the evaluation and apply it to six other areas to make a final decision.

We realize if you’re not confused by now, there is either something wrong with you or you have a great future in management. This is why we will schedule meetings with individual groups. There is only so much clarity you can provide in a blog, and at this hour after a long day, we’re not entirely sure we’re up to the task.

But before we go, here is the last bit of information we’d like to share with you. These are the nine editorial titles and the two-page questionnaires the Company proposed for each:

Content editor.

Page designer/artist.

Page designer/editor.

Reporter.

Photographer.

NIS Coordinator.

NIS Associate.

Editorial Assistant.

Wire Editor.

And the Company said on the reporter evaluation form, it gave the wrong numbers (and in one instance no number) for the weight factors. The first four factors on page one of the reporter form are supposed to have a weight factor of 2. The top factor on the second page is supposed to have a factor of 3, and the second question is supposed to have a weight factor of 2.

Company bumps meeting to 1 p.m.

The Company has moved today’s bargaining session to 1 p.m., rather than the original 11 a.m. start time. Members are free to attend on their own time.

Bargaining Committee members will meet in the cafeteria at noon if you want to stop by, wish us luck and ask any questions you may have. When we have information, we will share it with you as quickly as we can — though it will likely require a drive back to the Guild office. If you’re not sure we have current contact information for you, please feel free to e-mail us at office@albanyguild.org.

Guild will tell you if you’re on layoff list

As we prepare for Wednesday’s meeting, people naturally have questions. The Guild intends to answer them as quickly as we can and to share information as rapidly as we are able. We intend to have a membership meeting later this week to discuss these issues with you directly. We will let you know as soon as that is scheduled.

We want to share our thinking with you as we await that date.

First, many members have asked if we will tell them if they are on the proposed layoff list. While we believe the Company should tell you whether you are on their layoff list, we do not keep secrets from our members. We will tell people if they are on the list (or if they are not.) To protect people’s privacy, we will not publicly publish the list on our Web site or share it with the media. We will detail the numbers and what departments they come from.

Now much of what will happen is a matter of dispute, and we will be filing legal charges against the Times Union next week.

First, we do not agree that we are at a legal impasse. In fact, we believe we have a strong case and can show that the Company bargained in bad faith, and sought to subvert prior rulings of the National Labor Relations Board that bar companies from imposing the kind of vague language on layoffs and outsourcing the company pushed to obtain. The language they added about negotiating for 45 more days if an impasse occurred, we do not believe, negates the prior rulings. In fact, it is a blatant attempt to avoid complying with them.

We also did not agree to the company’s language on negotiating these issues for an arbitrary and limited period of time during an impasse so while we will meet and discuss their proposed criteria and layoffs, we are not bound to any timetable the Times Union has set.

Since we are not at a legal impasse, the only way the Company can legally proceed with layoffs is by reverse order of seniority. We had offered language that would have enabled the company to make some exceptions, but the Times Union refused to negotiate anything other than a blank check. Absent an agreement, the Company cannot legally lay off anyone outside seniority. We expect they will do so anyway, and we will legally challenge it if they do. This may mean having to fight the layoffs after the fact with the Company risking that it will one day have to rehire those laid off and give them back pay. This has happened at other companies that improperly laid off workers.

It is unfortunate that cases such as these take a long time to work their way through the National Labor Relations Board. And yet we believe it is better to continue to legally challenge the Company over its behavior than to allow it to get away with what we consider attempts to subvert the law. We do so knowing that this means the union may have to go without dues collection until it legally compels arbitration on that issue, and  that employees may not have the ability to take their disputes to an independent arbitrator for a long period of time.

“We know all of this is very traumatic for our members,” Guild President Tim O’Brien said. “The Company could have handled this all so much more gracefully. It could have negotiated a fair agreement that would have made some exceptions on layoffs and outsourcing. Instead, from day one, this company has been hellbent on imposing language its employees found unacceptable and legal precedent shows they cannot legally impose. We are in for a long fight, but we cannot allow the company to get away with such disrespect for the law, its employees and its community.”

As soon as we have additional information, we will share it with you. Please feel free to e-mail any questions to us at office@albanyguild.org or call there at 482-9218.

Live from the TNG Convention

Tim O’Brien here, blogging live from Washington, D.C.

I am down here with Ken Crowe for the annual Newspaper Guild sector conference. As you can imagine, it’s not a happy crowd. I sat through a meeting  today where a panel discussed the awful givebacks that were demanded of them.

One of them was Michael Cabanatuan, president of the California Media Workers Guild. He leads the union at our fellow Hearst paper, The San Francisco Chronicle, you know the one George Hearst cited as giving up seniority rights when he demanded we do it too.

Michael, a great guy who has been through hell and still smiles, said that in 2005, the newspaper let the union see the books. The Chronicle was losing $52 million a year. It’s gotten worse. The newspaper said it was give back or the paper would close.

In Albany, George Hearst said the Times Union is still profitable. Got that? The Company thinks we should take the same hit as a paper that is losing more than $50 million a year. And, by the way, the Chronicle staff can still take grievances to arbitration.

I asked Michael and others at that session a lot of questions about handling layoffs. They had great advice about compassionate ways to help people cope. It’s been painful listening to their stories, and imagining what we’ll be facing next week, but I am so proud to be with these people. They are kind, giving of their time, dedicated to their colleagues and willing to put up with criticism from management and even sometimes their union members as they cope with the unimaginable pain some of these companies are inflicting, often in the most callous ways possible. (At one newspaper, they told everyone to stay home on a Monday morning and they would call to tell you whether to report to work.)

I’ve spent plenty of time too talking to Guild officials and the union’s attorneys, who are dealing with horrible situations day in and day out but are always generous with their time and advice.

You wouldn’t know about these wonderful folks from reading the news media, of course. That’s who employs them, and that’s who is cutting their jobs and benefits.

Hearst: Layoff notice will be next week

Publisher George Hearst said today he will produce the names of people he wants to lay off next week, and some of them will be out of seniority.

Guild President Tim O’Brien replied that the union will file a legal challenge to any attempt to impose any of the Company’s proposals. The union does not believe we are at a legal impasse, especially given the broad discretion the Company demands under its outsourcing and layoff language.

The parties will meet, discuss the criteria the Company intends to use for deciding who gets laid off and then Hearst said he will provide the names. That will start the 45-day clock under the Company’s language to negotiate any layoffs.

O’Brien noted that while the union will meet with the Company, it is not waiving any of its rights to legally challenge whatever the Times Union attempts to do.

The publisher did not say how many employees would be forced out of a job, though he says it should be in line with the estimate he gave earlier. He had 60 to 70 employees could be let go, but that was before some 16 people took voluntary buyouts.

O’Brien will fly down to Washington, D.C. Thursday for the Guild’s annual sector conference, where he will meet with the International’s leaders and the union attorney to prepare the case to challenge the company’s declaration of impasse. The sector conference runs through Saturday. O’Brien will skip the CWA portion of the convention in order to be back in Albany on Monday to prepare for the layoff discussions.

TU SEEKS TO PUNISH EMPLOYEES FOR NO VOTE

The Times Union is seeking to punish employees for voting ‘no’ on its proposal to outsource any and all jobs and to lay off employees regardless of their length of service.

Shunning offers of compromise, the company said Tuesday it is declaring an impasse and will impose terms effective June 24. While Guild President Tim O’Brien had come to Publisher George Hearst in person immediately after the vote Monday to offer an olive branch, Hearst informed the union leader of his decision by e-mail sent through his secretary Tuesday evening.

“The publisher, sadly, did not have the courage to deliver the message face to face,” O’Brien said.

The publisher’s letter said he would drop the $500 bonus he had proposed to pay workers in lieu of raises this year and next. That decision breaks a promise he made to editorial workers in one of his sessions prior to the vote.

The Company will seek to force employees to accept layoffs without regard to seniority and the wholesale outsourcing of their work, conditions they soundly rejected in their vote. While it won’t pay the bonuses, it will seek to increase your share of health care costs by 5 percent effective Jan. 1, costing more than $300 a year under current rates. The Times Union also will try to impose language enabling bosses to change your days off once a year without your consent.

“The publisher told employees repeatedly he really wanted them to vote,” O’Brien said. “When they rejected his offer by a more than 3 to 1 margin, however, the Times Union rejected offers of compromise and decided it needed to punish the employees who make the Times Union profitable.”

The TU also seeks to punish the employees by making the end of dues collection and arbitration rights permanent.

“Every step of the way in these negotiations, the Guild has offered compromise,” O’Brien said. “And every time we have done so, the Company has responded by demanding more and more and more. They have failed to bargain in good faith. They have demanded the kinds of concessions that newspapers that have declared bankruptcy or been losing millions for years have received. The publisher has said this newspaper is profitable. He has refused to show us the books. There is no excuse for his behavior. The Times Union should be ashamed of itself.”

In one of his meetings prior to the vote, Hearst told editorial employees that canceling the $500 bonus was something he could do if he declared impasse but he assured workers he had no intention to do so. Clearly upset at the vote, he broke his promise.

The Guild will not take this action lightly. We will file a legal challenge to the Company’s claim of impasse.

“The only winners as a result of the publisher’s actions will be the lawyers,” O’Brien said. “But we will continue to fight for our members, and we know the public is solidly behind us and will continue to voice its opposition to the company’s reprehensible behavior.”

Albany Guild elects two new board members

The members of the Newspaper Guild elected two new leaders to the Executive Board.

Dan Roesser, an employee in the marketing/specialty publications subdepartment, stepped up to the position of treasurer. Hired by the Times Union in 2006, Dan joined the board last year as a vice president. He agreed to fill the treasurer’s position vacated by Renee Iannone, who took a buyout. The Guild is extremely grateful to Renee for her years of service to the union and its members. She continued to help the union through a transition to a new treasurer during a particularly challenging time.

Replacing Roesser as second vice president is Sarah Diodato of the Web desk. Sarah joined the Times Union in 2004. She is the main contributor to the Savings Source blog, and she recently earned her master’s degree in human-computer interaction from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. For the past two years, she has been the Guild’s Webmaster. As anyone who has viewed the Web site knows, she’s done a terrific job, enabling us to post a blog, videos, an online contract survey and an online historical quiz.

In nominating Sarah at Sunday’s membership meeting, Guild member and past president Ken Crowe noted that both she and Dan represent a new generation of Guild leadership and reflect the union’s deep commitment to being part of the Internet-based future of the news business. Both candidates were elected unanimously by voice vote.

“We are grateful to both Dan and Sarah for stepping up to these roles in a challenging time,” Guild President Tim O’Brien said. “They both bring a fresh, young perspective to the board that we very much appreciate.”