| Hearst, in the person of TU Publisher George Hearst III, wants to be able to outsource any Guild position and eliminate seniority for Guild members.
The Guild naturally opposes that, and has offered a package of about $1 million in a 5 percent pay cut, a week's furlough, giving up sick-day bonuses, buyouts, flexibility to lay off some workers regardless of seniority, lump-sum rather than percentage raises, and other givebacks.
The TU refused that offer, because, Hearst's bottom line in the contract negotiations is that it wants to lay off longtime employees in order to cut the company's pension obligations and outsource everything it can, including local reporting and editing.
Here's some of what Guild president Tim O'Brien, a longtime reporter, has had to say on the Guild's website about what Hearst wants to do:
We've been fair. We've been reasonable. We've offered concessions.
The Times Union is looking to lay off 65 to 75 workers between the exempt and Guild ranks. Despite assurances cuts would fall equally among Guild members and management, Hearst went on to estimate that 60 jobs would come out of the 240 the Guild represents and the remaining 10 to 15 would come from the 110 people in the exempt ranks.
As the Guild has already documented, the Times Union is already top heavy with management, with one "manager" for every 2.5 employees.
If you're laid off before you turn 55, that could mean a whopping 50 percent cut in your pension.
The Guild is so upset with the Hearst billionaires' obstinent insistence on screwing their members that it has launched an unprecedented campaign to urge people to cancel their TU subscriptions.
There's a website, electronic billboard ads (visible at the website), demonstrations, a Page 3 ad in Metroland, the local alternative weekly, and lots of outreach to the hundreds of thousands of union members in the Capital District.
The ad in Metroland states, honestly, that:
Firing one-third of the Times Union's reporting staff and outsourcing the work means one-third less paper.
Can someone from Albany, Georgia, really cover the news in Albany, New York? Can an ad salesperson from Troy, Texas, really know the community like one from Troy, New York? Will an editor from Saratoga, California, really know how to spell Schaghticoke?
Rhetorical questions that play on city names, obviously, but the plain fact remains that, according to O'Brien, Hearst has prepared to outsource copy editing, at least, to lower-paid and much less-informed workers in Houston, and local reporting to a contractor which pays its subcontractors $20 a story with no benefits.
A personal note: I've been a longtime commenter at the TU's Capital Confidential blog, the major political blog around here.
A few days after the Hearst billionaires canceled their contract with the Guild, I made my last comment there, until this matter is resolved fairly.
I have not been alone -- several local people who have blogs on the TU site (for free, naturally) have also, as Albany Common Council President and current mayoral candidate Shawn Morris put it, decided not to cross the virtual picket line.
Like them, I'd love to blog/comment again on the TU site.
But I will not do so until and unless the Hearst billionaires agree to a fair contract with the Guild.
Personal note, part deux: The TU had already cut its local coverage, except for Albany and Colonie, a lot, well before the Great Recession set in.
My city, just across the river from Albany, gets no coverage of basic things like how much taxes are going up next year.
It's hard to foresee how the TU's local news coverage could get worse, but it seems the Hearst billionaires are determined to find a way. |
