Federal labor and union attorneys painted a picture of newspaper management intent on undermining the newsroom union at any cost — by delaying negotiations, firing union employees and hiring temporary employees to handle union work.
Attorneys for the newspaper countered by calling many of the allegations inconsequential and petty, charging the National Labor Relations Board attorneys with being overly zealous in prosecuting the News-Press.
The newspaper faces allegations of bargaining in bad faith, illegally firing a union employee, hiring “temp” employees for union work, discontinuing annual raises and interfering with investigative efforts.
“This case is about the employer’s overarching desire to thwart the union,” union attorney Ira Gottlieb told Administrative Law Judge Clifford H. Anderson.
At the bargaining table, for example, he said the newspaper management is offering proposals that would leave newsroom employees worse off than if they didn’t have a labor contract.
Barry Cappello, representing the News-Press, said the newspaper has been bargaining in good faith since the union was officially certified. He went through each allegation, one by one, and argued why each should be dismissed or deemed irrelevant.
“They started piling on the charges in a shotgun fashion,” Cappello said. “…They’re throwing as much spaghetti up on the wall and seeing what sticks.”
Steve Wyllie, lead attorney for the NLRB, began his opening statement by discussing what he termed a “common thread” running through the 15 charges at hand — the newspaper’s attempt to undercut the union both at the bargaining table and in the newsroom.
During negotiations, he acknowledged the union and management have exchanged proposals, but said the newspaper’s actions represent bad-faith bargaining in that it is offering to give the employees fewer rights than they currently have under the law.
Cappello argued that labor law doesn’t require an employer to agree to any concession or proposal, but merely to bargain. He said his client has participated in 27 bargaining sessions since late 2007 and made 48 counterproposals, examples of an attempt to bargain in good faith.
“This is not an intransigent situation in which the two parties are locked in a death struggle,” Cappello said, noting that the union and management have yet to reach an impasse on any issues.
Gottlieb, however, said the newspaper has made it clear that it wants to maintain unilateral control over wage increases, overtime, holidays, healthcare and the grievance process, among other terms and conditions of employment.
“It’s essentially taken the employee handbook, slammed it on the table and said, there it is, take it or leave it,” he said.
Away from the table, Wyllie said the News-Press has engaged in an “elaborate shell game” by hiring temps as reporters and copy editors to do union work without any notice to the union. Some temp workers spent several years on the job or were brought on full-time only after working as a temp for a year or longer, he said.
In other instances, Wyllie said the newspaper hired freelance writers to handle jobs that were typically covered by full-time reporters, such as local crime and investigative reporting.
Cappello countered by noting that the newspaper has previously hired temporary employees for a variety of work, including freelancers for editorial content, and called the practice “totally consistent” with past policy. He also said the newspaper is not currently using any temp workers for newsroom purposes.
Wyllie continued his opening statements by touching on layoffs involving several employees that took place without notification to the union, as well as the suspension and firing of one of the most ardent union backers still on the staff.
He said the newspaper used “trumped up” reasons for firing the sports department employee, apparently for failing to cover a local golf tournament. Wyllie noted that the sports department had dwindled from eight employees down to three in recent years.
Cappello again responded by saying the newspaper had legitimate reasons for firing that particular employee, which he plans to bring out during the hearing.
Touching on another unfair labor practice allegation, Wyllie argued that the newspaper eliminated annual bonuses the same year that the union was formed, in 2006, and gave no notice or opportunity to bargain on the issue.
During his statement, Cappello said annual raises are based on several factors, including economic and business considerations. He said the union and federal labor attorneys are ignoring the “meteor” that has hit the newspaper industry, noting that dozens of layoffs have occurred at the paper, impact both the newsroom and other departments.
No pay increases have been given to any employee, Cappello continued, and all non-union employees and managers recently took an 8 percent pay cut to deal with the economic downturn. He argued that such actions clearly show the newspaper is not out to gouge the union employees.
“The News-Press treats its employees with a great sense of honor and tradition,” he said.
In wrapping up his opening statement, Wyllie said he hopes to see restoration of newsroom work to union employees, backpay of benefits and bonuses, and the reinstatement of several laid-off employees.
“The most forceful remedies must be applied because we’re talking about a recidivist employer here,” Gottlieb added.
During his opening statements, in addition to countering many of the arguments brought up by federal and union attorneys, Cappello also touched on a topic that came up regularly during a 17-day hearing into alleged labor law violations against the newspaper that took place in 2007.
He alleged that the union sought to gain influence in the newsroom as a way to take power away from the publisher and owner, Wendy McCaw.
“That has been the central theme of what has happened here from the very beginning,” he said.
Cappello brought up a district court ruling on an injunction seeking the reinstatement of eight employees fired by the newspaper — a topic that was also addressed during the 2007 hearing.
He said the judge in that case ruled that the newspaper management’s rights to freedom of the press would be violated by the injunction and that a central demand of the union was to control some aspect of the publisher’s editorial discretion.
“Apparently we have at least one learned federal judge that agrees with our position,” Cappello said, later adding, “It’s her paper. They don’t like it, they can get a job somewhere else.”
Wyllie, perhaps anticipating that line of attack, touched on the First Amendment argument during his opening comments and said he is not disputing the owner’s right to control the content of the newspaper.
“Nothing in the allegations or this complaint would force the publisher to publish any content,” he said. “Instead, this complaint seeks to safeguard employees’ rights.”
During his statements, Cappello also chided the federal and union attorneys for “preening” to the media, gesturing to several reporters in the back of the courtroom and telling Judge Anderson that they were there to write “ugly” stories about their competitor.
He closed by urging the judge to “separate the wheat from the chaff” and to recognize that many of the issues at hand are irrelevant or have already been resolved.
The ongoing labor battle between the News-Press and the union has continued since 2006, when a group of top editors and writers quit in protest of what they deemed inappropriate meddling in newsroom affairs by management.
Following the 2007 hearing, another administrative law judge found the newspaper had committed numerous labor law violations, including the illegal firing of eight reporters. That decision has been appealed and is set to be ruled on by the full NLRB.
Prior to opening statements yesterday, Judge Anderson spoke with attorneys on both sides and blocked out a total of five weeks for the hearing. Before court proceedings got underway, one attorney was heard saying that approximately 80,000 pages of documents had been produced for the hearing.
The attorneys had started addressing subpoena issues late yesterday morning. The hearing is scheduled to continue today at the law college, 20 E. Victoria St.