Newsletter of the Milwaukee Newspaper Guild
Annual meeting
WHEN: Noon, Tuesday, Sept. 25.
WHERE: Turner Hall
AGENDA: Vote on Executive Board, other issues. Lunch included.
Choosing a phone plan
Journal Sentinel Inc. has extended its deadline for implementing its new mobile phone policy to Sept. 11, giving Guild members more time to decide whether to stick with AT&T or sign up with another carrier.
The Guild is evaluating the new policy to see if it violates provisions of our contract and expects to have a response for its members before or shortly after the new plan goes into effect. Be certain that if the plan does violate terms of the contract, the company will be informed it must change the policy.
A couple of things to remember:
- If you plan to keep your number, you must assume your account with AT&T. Be sure you sign up for a month-to-month plan if you want to change carriers. You’ll have the option to switch as soon as you assume your AT&T account and get your number back.
- Make sure you know what your supervisor’s expectations are for you as far as phone capability. Do you need voice/data/texting? Do you need an iPhone? Do you need just voice capability? That should help you chose the right plan.
Watch for updates about what steps the Guild is taking to make sure the phone policy doesn’t violate our contract.
Contract signed; raises coming soon
Raises are expected to appear on our paychecks sometime in September, the first significant impact from the new contract signed Aug. 15 by representatives of the Milwaukee Newspaper Guild and Journal Sentinel Inc.
But even with those 2% across-the- board raises and a 0.5% merit pool, most of us still will be paid less than we earned in early 2009, with no guarantee that we will get back to that level before the contract expires at the end of 2014.
Guild members ratified the agreement Aug. 1 by a vote of 46-23, the closest vote on a contract in our local’s history. Only the margin of approval on the 2009 wage cut was slightly narrower.
The vote reflected significant misgivings about the concessions in job security, wage structure and health care included in this deal. During the extensive debate over the agreement, even the deal’s supporters said they would only reluctantly vote for a contract that, between now and 2014, will reduce our severance pay from two weeks to one week per year of service, end the requirement for 60 days’ notice or 60 days’ pay in downsizings, and eliminate the 35% cap on our share of health insurance premiums.
Only one guaranteed raise is included in this deal: The 2% across-the-board increase from current pay rates, which along with a smattering of merit raises from the 0.5% pool, will be retroactive to July 8. Raises in 2013 and 2014 would be linked to raises for non-represented employees and would be divided between across-the-board and merit raises, with a growing share of the pot tilting toward the merit side. Minimum pay rates would be cut by 2.4%, reflecting the 6.6% pay cut of 2009, the 2.2% across-the- board increase of 2011 and this year’s 2% increase.
Nonetheless, our bargaining committee was able to stave off management’s push for even larger concessions, including provisions that would have allowed the company to target the highest-paid journalists for layoffs, would have removed the requirement to show an economic justification for downsizing and would have granted managers complete control over all pay raises. We won some very modest improvements in a few areas, including vacation, where we also escaped a company policy that would have restricted our ability to carry over vacation weeks to future years.
Here’s what the new contract provides:
Wages: For 2013, if the company provides raises for non-represented employees, we would receive the same percentage increase, with 60% as across-the- board raises and 40% as a merit pool; for 2014, that split would be 40% across-the-board raises and 60% merit pool. We would get nothing if the non- represented employees get nothing.
All language referring to restoration of the wages lost in 2009 has been eliminated.
Unlike the merit pools before 2009, when virtually everyone received some kind of merit raise every year, management will have more power to deny merit raises.
When our merit pool is 1% or less, management would have broad discretion over how to distribute it. But they would have to distribute it equitably among the various occupational groups in the newsroom — writers, copy editors, designers/artists, photographers/ picture editors, online producers/web app developers, assistant editors and support staffers. If our merit pool is more than 1%, management would have to give merit raises to at least 85% of the employees in our bargaining unit. All of us will be notified in writing of whether we received a merit raise and, if so, how much the raise was.
Instead of one merit pool for full-timers and one for part-timers, we will have one pool for full-time journalists and one for everyone else, ending a situation where full-time support staffers’ wages were used to help calculate the size of a merit pool from which they received a disproportionately low share.
Job security: For 2012, we will keep severance pay of two weeks per year of service, as well as 60 days’ advance notice — or 60 days’ pay — for downsizings. Severance pay will be reduced to 1.5 weeks per year in 2013 and one week per year in 2014, with notice pay ending as of Jan. 1, 2013. However, starting in 2013, the company will have to pay a minimum of eight weeks’ severance to anyone who is downsized, regardless of seniority.
Buyouts will have to offer better terms than what we would receive in a layoff. (Previous language said offers must be no less than the severance payout.)
Employees who are laid off or take a buyout and are rehired within a year would be paid no less than their old wage and would return with their seniority intact for such purposes as calculating vacation and advancement up the wage scale.
Health care: For 2012, we will keep the current 35% cap on employees’ share of premium costs. Starting in 2013, that cap will be eliminated. (Only smokers’ rates are currently bumping up against the cap; non-smokers pay somewhere around 25%, give or take.)
Vacation: Employees who are laid off or take a buyout after using more vacation than they earned under the pay-as-you-go system will not be required to pay back the company for the excess vacation time taken.
Part-timers hired after 2005 will get five weeks of vacation after 20 years of service. Under the old contract, they were the only ones in our bargaining unit who were ineligible for the fifth week.
All workers at the 20-year level still will be able to roll over their fifth week of vacation to future years. By contrast, non-represented employees are subject to a new policy that would eliminate that practice.
Reuse: Payments to photographers and artists for commercial resale of their work will end. Everyone who contributes to a book still will receive a share of the proceeds, but if the book is a reprint of just one employee’s work, the company will have more power to decide that person’s share without truly negotiating.
Other changes:
- When full-timers transfer to part-time, their hourly wages cannot be cut if their duties remain substantially the same. Also, they can ask the company for calculations of how their vacation time will be affected by the transfer, and the company could provide additional leave if they came up short because they switched between the earn-as-you-go and accrue-in-advance vacation systems. Both provisions address issues that staffers have encountered in such transfers.
- The Guild can offer feedback to the company on ergonomic issues. Any training to improve ergonomic practices will be conducted on company time and at company expense.
- A Guild representative will be able to meet with a company representative at least once a year to discuss employee concerns about the 401(k) plan.
The Guild bargaining committee consisted of Larry Sandler, as chairman; members Tom Silverstein, Tom Content, Don Walker and Jenn Amur; and alternate member Karen Samelson. Content replaced Doris Hajewski, who served until she left in a buyout, and Amur joined the committee as negotiations entered their most critical and contentious phase. We were assisted by International Representative Jay Schmitz.
New leaders to be selected at meeting
It’s about time we had an election in Wisconsin with no attack ads, no robocalls and no “Pants on Fire” campaign claims — and, even better, an election where every candidate for every office is firmly on the side of working people like us.
And that’s exactly the kind of election we’re going to have on Sept. 25, when Milwaukee Newspaper Guild members choose our next Executive Board at our annual meeting at noon at Turner Hall. Members also will elect convention delegates and vote on keeping dues at their current low level.
Our local’s second-in-command, 1st Vice President Mary-Liz Shaw, left the Journal Sentinel in a buyout in May. That means we need someone to fill her position, in charge of grievances and contract enforcement. Shaw, who was a part-time feature writer, was elected in fall 2011. She previously was a steward and also served on our Good & Welfare Committee.
In addition to the 1st vice president, members will elect a president (our chief executive officer and public spokesperson), 2nd vice president (in charge of membership and mobilizing, as well as communications and social events), secretary (to manage our office, keep our records and take minutes), treasurer (our chief financial officer) and three at-large board members (all expected to be active in other Guild roles). All will serve one-year terms, starting Oct. 1.
After taking office, the new board must fill appointed posts. That includes up to three steward leaders (each overseeing grievances, membership and stewards for part of our unit); chairs of the Communications, Social, Health & Safety, Human Rights and Good & Welfare committees; and a newsletter editor, webmaster, technology coordinator (in charge of our office equipment) and Grievance & Representation Committee members to enforce wage provisions, deal with benefit matters and handle posting and jurisdiction issues. Next, steward leaders and vice presidents will select stewards.
At the meeting, members will decide how many delegates to send to the Guild’s international sector conference, then elect delegates and alternates to that conference and to the international convention of our parent union, the Communications Workers of America. Last year was the first time we didn’t elect delegates, because both the Guild and CWA shifted from an annual to a biennial schedule and didn’t meet in 2012.
We’ll also take our annual vote on whether to keep our dues rate at its current 1% level, a discount from the normal rate set by the international.
The meeting is open only to dues-paying members. Lunch will be served.
Contract status uncertain if newspaper sold
As this newsletter went to press, speculation was rampant about whether the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel or its corporate parent, Journal Communications Inc., would be sold.
That kind of speculation isn’t anything new, of course. But this time, it was prompted by a significant development: The corporation’s action to buy out all the stock held by the heirs of former Publisher Harry Grant. With the Grant family and its extra voting rights out of the way, a sale of the newspaper or the entire company would be easier than ever.
Within the newsroom, one major question is how such a sale would affect the workers and our rights under the Milwaukee Newspaper Guild contract. The answer: It depends.
In a stock transaction, such as a sale of the whole corporation, our contract would remain in full force. But what if the company sold only the newspaper and its online service?
Journal Sentinel management has consistently refused to guarantee its newsroom employees the highest level of protection, through contract language that would require any new owner to assume all of the obligations of the contract. Without that language, we still would have some legal rights, but the extent of those rights would depend heavily on the details of precisely how the transaction was structured.
Our contract does call for the company to meet with the Guild to discuss the impact of any sale or merger, in what is legally known as “effects bargaining.” For example, if a sale would lead to layoffs, the company would have to bargain with us on the terms of the severance package.
Guild leadership is monitoring this situation closely. President Tom Silverstein contacted our international office and our local attorney for guidance immediately after the Grant family stock sale was announced. We are gathering information to determine what preparations we need to make, and we will keep members informed if anything develops.
We must stand up for our rights
From the president
As many of you know, I was not thrilled with the contract management shoved down our throats or the antagonistic approach it took with a newsroom that does everything it can and more to keep the Journal Sentinel afloat.
For all the “we’re in this together” phoniness we hear from management, it’s pretty clear that they’re interested only in an Us vs. Them relationship. You don’t bring in a union-busting attorney from outside the company to deal with your employees if the object is to build goodwill among all.
You’ve heard me talk about the concessions we handed over and the reach for more the company made over and over again. As a group, we showed that there was serious consideration among our members for rejecting this contract offer.
The fact we didn’t reject it doesn’t speak to the weakness of our union. I think we’re very strong. We continue to grow in size — not decline as many unions do under these circumstances — and membership has been nothing but supportive of the bargaining committee’s attempts to hold off the pillaging company.
What we must do now is be vigilant about our union work and make sure that whatever rights the company has left us are enforced in full. It’s not uncommon for us to overlook the overtime we’re putting in or the expenses we cover or the extra work we absorb because the newsroom has been trimmed so severely.
We have protections for those things and they’re only effective if we use them, if we have the courage to stand up and say enough is enough.
It’s ingrained in us as journalists to work until the work is done, and for that we should be proud of ourselves. But we also are human beings with families and lives outside work, and we deserve some of the protections our contract allows us.
The company has found a way to take out its financial losses on the people who do the work while at the same time rewarding the few whose greatest accomplishment often seems to be squeezing more out of us.
In the three years leading up to the expiration of this contract, I’d like us to show a firm commitment to upholding our rights. I’d like us to stand up for what is just and for what we deserve.
The company will continue to show us those arrows pointing downward in order to convince us that we need to give up more. But until the bank accounts of the executives stop going up, why should we feel guilty about demanding what the contract says is ours?
In the not-too-distant future, you will see some campaigns aimed at making sure the company honors its legal obligation to pay overtime, allows for people to take their comp time and compensates us for all reasonable expenses as the contract states.
None of us is happy with the contract we got, but we shouldn’t neglect the rights we still have. Let’s make sure we continue to stand up for everything we’ve fought for in this contract.