The union that represents about 500 Providence Journal employees, including reporters, some editors, advertising sales, and business department employees, has been working without a contract since the end of January, in a labor dispute that the union’s administrator says is the worst since the union struck in 1973. Last week, the union, the Providence Newspaper Guild, held informational picketing, staged a by-line strike and talked about contacting the paper’s advertisers to inform them not only of the labor problems, but also of a computer glitch in circulation that Tim Schick, the union administrator, said may have lost the paper 3,000 daily subscribers.
Mark Ryan, senior vice president, legal and administration, who has been identified as directing the company’s personnel activities, replied when asked to comment on the company’s position: “I don’t think we’re really in a position to make a comment.”
Rhode Island's Market Has Changed. Developers, Builders, Investors and Sellers Must Change With It.
By Emilio DiSpirito IV License Partner | Engel & Völkers Oceanside Leader | The DiSpirito…
Learn More
The Providence Journal is owned by A.H. Belo, a Dallas, Texas, based media conglomerate.
The loss in circulation had been rumored and Schick suggested that it was related to computer problems in the Journal’s circulation department that disrupted billing, the ability to stop and start home delivery, and the paper’s delivery to stores and other retail outlets. He said the “massive delivery failures” led to numerous telephone calls to the paper, many people complaining they were left on hold for up to a half hour, and phone calls diverted to other departments, including the newsroom.
“People were livid they couldn’t get through,” Schick said.
The loss in circulation could not play well on the paper, which has experienced a steady decline in circulation over the last decade. According to the Audit Bureau of Circulation (ABC) in Schaumburg, Illinois, paid circulation throughout daily newspapers in New England has been declining fairly steadily. In March 1999, the bureau said the Journal’s circulation was 164,626, down from 185,578 in March 1994, which was down from 199,507 in March 1989.
While not necessarily related to circulation, Belo stock has also suffered, on a steady decline since late last spring. The stock was trading at $13.50 on Feb. 22, slightly above its 12-month low of $13.31 and well off its 12-month high of $24.50.
Schick’s reference to 1973 refers to a particularly turbulent time in Guild-Providence Journal relations, when the union staged what turned out to be a bitter 13-day strike after a contract was all but settled, except that the company refused to pay union employees retroactivity. The union claimed its contract guaranteed payment of retroactivity up to a specific date.
The Providence Journal, in 1973, was an independent company. Today it is owned by Belo, which also publishes the Dallas Morning News and other newspapers, and operates several television stations and Internet related businesses. The newsroom is not unionized in Dallas.
At issue, Schick said, is the union’s desire to get on the Belo benefit package, which provides more favorable conditions than the Guild’s current pension and 401K plans. But Schick said the company has been adamant that the Guild maintain its current package instead. All other Journal employees, including those in the Teamsters’ and Pressmen’s unions, are on the Belo plan, Schick and other Journal employees said.
Schick depicts the union as strongly united, something affirmed by employees in and out of the bargaining unit. The Guild had put the company’s latest proposal to a vote on Feb. 2 and 3 in secret balloting at the union office. The contract was overwhelmingly defeated by 354 to 28, Schick said.
Last week’s informational picketing was part of what Schick said would be the Guild’s “passive-aggressive” effort to put “pressure on the company from the inside. There’s a variety of things going on. There’s going to be a by-line strike Tuesday, Wednesday (last week). We’ll begin communicating with advertisers and let them know what’s going on, not only with the contract, but with the company’s circulation problems.”
While there was no evidence of a by-line strike last Tuesday, Wednesday’s paper contained virtually no local by-lines, with the exception of columnists.
Schick said the company and the Guild last met on Jan. 24, the 14th negotiating session since negotiations began in late October. He said the two sides are waiting for federal mediator Paul Chabot to schedule another session.
The Guild contract actually expired on December 31, but the two sides agreed to a one-month extension to the end of January.
Central to the Guild’s concerns are the issues over the pensions, Schick said. Guild members are the only employees in the company, he said, who do not have overtime, shift differentials, and commission count toward pension benefits. “It can mean considerable money,” he said. Additionally, he said, Guild employees are penalized for leaving the company before retirement. Under the formula if two employees have put identical service, but one leaves at retirement age and the other 10 years earlier, the one who leaves earlier receives a reduced pension, even though they have put in an identical number of years service. Schick said no other Journal employees suffer a penalty for leaving the company before retirement age.
In the 401K plan, Schick said the Belo plan, enjoyed by all other employees, has a larger company match than the plan Guild members have.
Among other outstanding issues, Schick said, are:
The company’s imposition of a less flexible medical insurance program, necessitated apparently by the demise of Harvard Pilgrim Health in Rhode Island. The company, Schick said has limited health care choices to a United HealthCare plan that Schick said has less benefits than the previous plan.
The company has refused to put proposals for employee parking in writing.
The company has refused to pay annual bonuses to Guild members despite profits last year of $178 million.
Schick said that on the table, and apparently not in dispute, is a proposed three year term, with pay raises of 3 percent in each year. He also said the Guild has two unfair labor practice charges pending against the company before the National Labor Relations Board, plus 19 grievances.
