Feds charge newspaper company with 20 more unfair labor practice violations

National Labor Relations Board vs. The Providence Journal - October 2002

Oct. 24, 2002
Tomorrow's news today
Sole edition

Day 3, Trial 2
After company witnesses, trial ends
· Metro M.E. Heslin: Night job was for young but 'proven' state staffers
· H.R. chief McDonough: Monti's leave was unauthorized

New: Details of Trial Testimony about Features Department

NLRB Trial 2
Press release
Charges

When: Began Monday, Oct. 21, 11 a.m.; ended Wednesday Oct. 23.

Day 2 / Tuesday, Oct. 23 Reporter Ziner takes the stand; tells of award-winning career and transfer to 'night cops'; Guild and management witnesses testify

Day 1 / Monday, Oct. 22 Journal denies retaliation In first day of NLRB trial, company explains its position, Schick testifies

Where: Workers Compensation Courtroom 4(H), Garrahy Judicial Complex, One Dorrance Plaza, Providence, R.I. (Directions)

Coverage

Daily reports of the trial will be posted at www.journalontrial.org.

Oct 20 - Advance story, charges explained

Background
The Guild has been without a contract since 1999.

NLRB Trial 1 - February 2002

February 2002 trial coverage

GUILTY! The ruling (.pdf) (.zip) [48 pages, 3.8 megs]

History of the contract dispute

Index of Guild Leader newsletters from January 20, 1997 to now

Providence Newspaper Guild

Contact: Felice Freyer: (401) 949-5668
Cell: (401) 932-1912
Tim Schick: (401) 421-9466

PROVIDENCE -- Metro Managing Editor Tom Heslin testified today that from 1996 to October 2001, most of the reporters assigned to the "night cops" beat in the newsroom were drawn from the bureaus, and typically worked the job for about a year.

Under cross-examination in the final day of the Journal's trial on 20 unfair-labor-practice charges, Heslin acknowledged that most of those reporters were young and had limited experience.

The National Labor Relations Board alleges that veteran reporter Karen Ziner was forced into the night job in October 2001 in retaliation for union activity.

The trial ended early this afternoon after testimony from Heslin and Human Resources Director Thomas McDonough. There were no closing arguments. Instead, Administrative Law Judge William G. Kocol ordered lawyers for the company and the NLRB to file briefs by Dec. 10. A decision is expected by the spring.

Heslin testified that the person who previously held the nightbeat job, Michael Corkery, had expertise on Afghanistan and was asked to cover issues related to terrorism after the Sept. 11 attacks. But he acknowledged that Corkery has since been covering stories unrelated to Sept. 11.

"Is it fair to say," asked NLRB lawyer Joseph Griffin, "that the stories he covered Ms. Ziner could cover?"

"Yes," Heslin said.

Heslin, whose testimony was often halting and hesitant, said that he never saw reporter Morgan McVicar circulating a petition on behalf of Ziner in the newsroom, and never discussed the petition with either McVicar or Executive Editor Joel Rawson.

Griffin asked Heslin whether, in August 2001, he was aware that the Guild had filed an unfair-labor-practices charge regarding the Journal's refusal to allow Ziner to use taxicab vouchers outside Providence.

"I knew there was an issue with the taxicabs. Where it was with the charges, I don't know," Heslin said.

"The decision to reassign Ms. Ziner -- was it yours alone?" Griffin asked. After a pause, Heslin said, "Yeah." Then he added, "I ran it by Mr. Rawson."

Under further questioning by Journal lawyer Richard Perras, Heslin said that after (reporters) Lee Dykas and Tom Morgan left the night cops job, "what we decided to do was make an assignment that would not be permanent. ... We did go to the people on the state staff who were proven, very good reporters, who we knew we wanted to develop."

But sometime in fall 2001, Heslin said, "I was told I had to fill that nightbeat job from within that work group. I wasn't going to get anyone from the state staff to come in." Heslin said that directive came from Rawson.

Asked by Perras about any changes in staff size underlying that directive, Heslin mentioned the recent buyout, along with continuing concerns about the staffing at the bureaus. (The buyout -- in which employees aged 55 and older were offered early-retirement packages -- did not begin until more than a week after Ziner was transferred.) Heslin later acknowledged that he also felt the newsroom was understaffed.

Judge Kocol then posed several questions to Heslin. He asked whether Corkery had been sent to Afghanistan, whether his reporting on the subject has diminished, and what else he has been doing. Heslin said that Corkery spent about three weeks in Afghanistan, that now "we're getting him some training" to cover the military in the Middle East, and that he had been covering the election campaign.

Kocol asked whether Ziner's assignment to the nightbeat is permanent.

"We haven't discussed that, but I don't imagine it would be permanent," Heslin replied.

Asked how he would go about deciding when or whether to change her assignment, Heslin said. "I don't know. I imagine at some point there will be -- we, I just don't know. We haven't talked about that. . . . It would come up if we felt we needed Karen's skills in some other place."

The judge asked Heslin to describe his conversations with Rawson about assigning first McVicar-- who quit after he was assigned to the nightbeat -- and then Ziner to that job. Heslin said they were brief discussions in which Heslin told Rawson his decision, and Rawson approved it.

"There was no conversation," Kocol asked, "as to whether it was wise to assign an experienced reporter . . . whether someone else would be better?"

"We didn't dwell on it as I recall," Heslin replied.

The company entered into evidence every Page One and Page B-1 story that Ziner has written since being assigned to the night cops beat.

Human Resources Director McDonough then provided additional testimony on the case of Michael Monti, a promotions specialist who was fired retroactively when he asked to return from medical leave. The NLRB alleges that the firing was a unilateral change in medical leave policy because in the past workers on medical leave were terminated only after reaching the end of their contractually allowed leave time.

Monti was eligible for two years leave. McDonough testified that when Monti contacted him asking to return to work after 20 months on medical leave, he reviewed Monti's medical file and concluded that his leave was unauthorized.

He said his decision was based on the facts that Monti had been denied a worker's compensation claim, had been denied long term disability payments, and had not updated documentation of his disability for more than year.

McDonough wrote to Monti saying that he had been terminated effective November 2001, one year after he went on leave.

Under questioning by NLRB lawyer Elizabeth Vorro, McDonough acknowledged that Monti had provided a note from a medical professional confirming his disability when he went out on leave, and that the contract's only requirement for medical leave was that medical certification of disability.

He also acknowledged that Monti's name continued to appear on payroll lists and Monti continued to carry Journal group medical insurance throughout his leave, indicating the company regarded him as an employee. The company never asked Monti to submit to evaluation by its own doctor, McDonough said.

Felice J. Freyer is the Providence Journal's award-winning medical writer. She joined the paper in 1982 andwas assigned to the medical beat in 1989. A member of the Guild's Executive Committee since 1994, she has taken a leave from the newspaper to cover the trial.

There is much more information about the dispute at the Guild's main website, www.riguild.org. E-mail the Guild at png@riguild.org. The union's mailing address is: The Providence Newspaper Guild, 270 Westminster St., Providence, RI 02903. Telephone: (401) 421-9466. FAX: (401) 421-9495



Major charges in Trial 2
Oct. 20, 2002

Here's a summary of the major charges in this week's trial:

Retaliation -- real and threatened

The NLRB charges that the company retaliated against veteran reporter Karen Ziner, by assigning her to night cops -- working 4 p.m. to midnight Tuesday through Saturday -- after she participated in "concerted activities" and after she filed a complaint against the Journal with the Human Rights Commission.

The "concerted activities" involved a petition protesting the Journal's decision to remove Ziner from a crime story after one of the story's subjects complained -- even though the Journal acknowledged that her coverage was fair and accurate. Ziner's human rights complaint alleged that the Journal violated the Americans with Disabilities Act because it refused to allow her to use taxi vouchers outside Providence when she was temporarily unable to drive.

The Journal changed the duties of copy editors in the features department in retaliation for their successful grievance against the company. An arbitrator ruled that the Journal had wrongfully withheld "small grid" differentials that have always been awarded to people who work in a higher classification than their usual job. After the ruling, the company changed the copy editors' duties so that they could no longer collect the "small grid" payments. This also was a unilateral change in working conditions.

The company also faces a charge that Carol Young, deputy executive editor, "threatened employees with the loss of career opportunities because of the employees' union activities." The charge stems from a comment that Young made to a Guild member last April. The Guild member mentioned to Young that one of the two-year interns had helped distribute Guild fliers at a Brown University event. Young is alleged to have then said: "Thanks for ruining his career!"

Unilateral changes in working conditions

The company fired an employee who wanted to return from medical leave. Michael Monti, an advertising promotion specialist, went on medical leave in November 1999. In July 2001, Monti notified the company that he was ready to return from leave. The company responded with a letter informing Monti that he had been terminated retroactive to November 2000. This was a dramatic change in the Journal's previous policies on medical leave.

The company faces three charges for transferring two employees from the promotion department, which is part of the advertising unit, to the visuals department, which is part of the news unit. The contract prohibits the involuntary transfer of employees between the news and advertising units. The company also failed to follow the contract rules regarding the posting and filling of positions. The transfer of two people from the advertising unit amounted to a layoff in advertising unit -- and the company did not follow the contract's provisions on layoffs. As a result of the transfer, the two employees lost their seniority.

In November, 2001, the company refused to pay an editorial assistant in the features department the "small grid" differential that she was entitled to for taking over the duties of a departmental assistant, a higher classification.

In January 2002, the company changed its policy on use of the company credit card, saying that any charges the company thinks may be personal will be deducted from the employee's paycheck. In the past it had been understood that there was no penalty for accidental use of the company card for personal items.

Denial of legitimate information requests

The Guild requested information about: payroll data, particularly discrepancies regarding merit pay, pay grade, job title and experience steps; the company's failure make 401(k) payments for certain employees; the names of part-time employees who participate in the 401(k) plan; and details about any case since 1995 in which an employee was required to return to work over the objections of the employee's physician. The NLRB deemed this information necessary for the union to meet its duties to members, and alleges that the company had an obligation to provide it.

Illegal bargaining tactics

The NLRB charges that the company made a regressive wage proposal -- an illegal bargaining move -- when it took its wage offer for 2002 off the table, saying that there was a wage freeze for all Belo employees.

In October and November 2001, the company refused to bargain over the effects of its buyout program, such as the reassignment of the remaining staffers.

A few days before the February NLRB trial, the company made a revised contract proposal. The Guild replied with an invitation to bargain over it, which the company rejected. The NLRB alleges that the company's actions ran afoul of the law because it refused to bargain and because it required the union to drop all unfair-labor-practice charges before negotiations could begin. In addition, because the company sent its proposal to all Guild members, the NLR B has charged it with "direct dealing," an illegal attempt to bypass the union and negotiate directly with the employees it represents.

 

There is much more information about the dispute at the Guild's main website, www.riguild.org. E-mail the Guild at png@riguild.org. The union's mailing address is: The Providence Newspaper Guild, 270 Westminster St., Providence, RI 02903. Telephone: (401) 421-9466. FAX: (401) 421-9495


Pre-trial editions 1 . 2 . 3 . 4 . 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 Trial edition: 6.0 Aftermath: 7.0

Copyright © 2001 The Providence Newspaper Guild
TNG/CWA Local 31041
270 Westmister St., Providence, Rhode Island 02903
401-421-9466 | Fax: 401-421-9495

Privacy Policy