The Company is again proposing a switch in health-care plans, this time to an MVP plan.

While the Company wants to quickly move the health insurance change — which could save it hundreds of thousands of dollars at a minimum — Guild bargainers said any agreement should be part of a full package on a contract. Guild bargainers are preparing a full settlement offer they hope to make to the Company Tuesday.

The health insurance proposal comes after Blue Shield initially proposed a 36.45 percent increase in health-care costs. Through negotiation, that hike was cut down to 27.98 percent. The Company then asked its brokers, Rowlands and Barranca, to look for alternatives.

The plan the Company is now proposing would require a smaller amount out of employee’s weekly paychecks, but it also would require a deductible of $1,500 for individuals and $3,000 for families. The Company said employees will have to pay $750 of the deductible in either case, and it will cover the rest.

Currently, people in the Blue Shield plan that covers most members pay $34.32 a week or $1,784.64 a year. Next year, that would go up to $43.93 a week, or $2,284.08 a year if we kept the same plan.

Under the Company’s proposed switch to MVP, the cost would drop to $22.20 a week or $1,154.04 a year. Employees who use their health care or get prescriptions would see an added cost of up to $750 for the deductible. However, during the period when the Company is covering the deductible (between $750 and $1,500 for individuals and $750 to $3,000 for families) employees would not pay any charge for prescriptions.

For most employees, that could mean a savings.

It gets more complicated for those who get a lot of prescriptions or whose families get a lot of prescriptions. Once the employee’s health care cost outpaced the deductible (again, $1,500 for individuals or $3,000 for families) employees would have to pay $10 for generic drugs, $30 for name-brand drugs and $50 for certain “nonformulary” drugs. You’d have to do that until you reached the plan’s out of pocket maximums, which are $2,500 for individuals and $5,000 for families. (That could mean up to $1,000 more for individuals and $2,000 more for families.)

Neither the Company nor its broker could say Monday how many people might be affected that way.

The Guild was first provided this information late Thursday, and members of the Bargaining Committee and Executive Board met Monday with the Company and its brokers to ask further questions. Some information, like the list of doctors and covered medications, is still to be provided.

“The Company wants us to separate this discussion from contract negotiations, so it can quickly implement this change,” said Guild President Tim O’Brien. “If we did that, it would still require a vote of the membership before any change can be implemented. However, we believe that it is not in our members’ best interest to separate out a giant cost-saver for the Company while it has not moved off a single of the givebacks it is demanding. We believe the parties should look at a total package that settles the entire contract.”

O’Brien called the insurance switch “a great motivator” for both sides to find common ground on a complete contractual agreement.

Bargaining resumes at 1 p.m. Tuesday in the Executive Conference Room. Members can attend on their own time.

As promised earlier in these negotiations, the Guild on Tuesday presented a comprehensive proposal on exempt titles. The union agreed to a number of title changes the Company sought, but it also eliminated all vacant management positions and proposed to move 11 exempt jobs into the union.

The union also asked questions about 13 other positions that are currently classified as exempt. After the discussion, the union agreed to place three of those titles — the customer care manager in circulation, the consumer marketing manager in circulation and the executive producer online — into exempt ranks.

The Company came to the table Tuesday with workflow charts for each department, which was helpful in focusing the discussion.

As the union noted back in July, the Company literally has one manager for every 2.5 workers. With our ranks thinned through buyouts and attrition, it made sense to revisit whether those positions are all properly classified. For example, the director of research oversaw two librarians who took a buyout and are not being replaced. With no staff reporting to that position, it did not appear that it should continue being classified as supervisory.

The union also noted that in marketing, there is literally a supervisor for every Guild-covered worker. Guild bargainers sought to add several of those positions to the Guild to correct the imbalance.

You can read the Guild’s proposal here. (This version removes the three titles we agreed after questioning could stay exempt.) The first sheet shows the titles we proposed to eliminate, those we proposed to move to the Guild, and those we still have questions about. The second and third pages reflect the way titles appear in the contract and include titles that have been changed.

Bargaining resumes at 2 p.m. Wednesday. Members are free to attend on their own time.

Negotiations resumed Monday with a contentious discussion: Guild bargainers strongly objected to the Company’s decision to discipline bargainer Stacy Wood for not meeting some ad sales goals while bargaining.

Even though Stacy hit more than 100 percent of her total goal last month, the Company cited her for not selling what they viewed as enough online ads and new business. Stacy noted to the Company that she had been in bargaining many days during the period, and she was told, in essence, too bad. Despite the fact that she was on leave from work, Stacy was told, she’d still be disciplined.

Guild President Tim O’Brien said no other bargaining committee member is expected to do their jobs and bargain at the same time. “When I am bargaining, I am not expected to write stories and Mary Fultz is not expected to edit them,” O’Brien said. “John DeMania, a district manager, is not expected to oversee delivery of newspapers at the same time he is negotiating the contract. Stacy should not be held to a different standard.”

O’Brien warned the Company that its stance could have a chilling effect on negotiations. In order to protect its member, he said, the union might be forced to limit the  number of sessions it could hold in any one week or could insist on bargaining on nights and weekends.

“We’ve always had a member or two from advertising on the bargaining team,” O’Brien said. “They work hard to continue to sell ads and bring in revenue, and Stacy is not an exception in that regard. But we’ve never had a bargaining committee member disciplined while we negotiate because they didn’t sell ads while they bargained. It is completely unreasonable. The Company’s recent treatment of advertising employees has been awful, and it has driven many good sales people to leave.”

The Company tried to get O’Brien to back off on his assertion that the discipline was inappropriate and potentially illegal, but he refused. The union will explore all of its legal options on how to respond.

Bargaining resumed Monday for the first time in more than three weeks.

The Company finally produced a list of existing exempt titles. While you might think that would be easy to track, the Company adds and changes titles so often it can be hard to know who does what. When the Company started the day saying their list was “99.9 percent complete,” Guild leaders asked if it included changes announced in a Sept. 19 e-mail in advertising. That caused the Company to go into a caucus for more than an hour.

When they emerged, they produced a list that included 31 exempt titles that are not in the current contract and 20 exempt positions that are vacant. Guild bargainers asked to be provided with departmental flow charts that show how many people each supervisor oversees. In a workplace where there is a ratio of one manager for every two workers, the union intends to address those positions that are listed as exempt but are in fact doing union work.

Do you know of any exempt supervisors you think should be re-classified as Guild-covered employees? If so, let us know by phone at 482-9218 or by e-mail at office@albanyguild.org

Bargainers left the confines of the conference room and walked around the building to discuss health and safety issues today.

Beforehand, the union and company negotiators discussed concerns about air quality and the dangers of simply walking across the parking lot in rainy or icy weather.

Terry Brown of Editorial discussed how the air in the building aggravated his system, already sensitive from his service in the first Gulf War. “I can tell when there is mold in the room,” he said. “In the course of a year, there are some days when the system takes in pollutants you can see, feel and even taste.”

The tour stopped at Terry’s desk, where the vent over his desk was thick with dirt and dust.

Guild bargainers also talked about the hazards of the parking lot. Stacy Wood noted several pregnant women have fallen in icy weather.  “I kind of had a hard time finding people who hadn’t taken a spill in the parking lot,” she said, noting it’s a real potential liability for the Company if someone is injured.

Associate Publisher George Hearst said the Company has to install a storm drainage system to handle runoff as part of building a new press.

The walking tour started with a view of the carpeting in advertising. After looking at a spot a former employee just left, you could see the clear difference between the space where a former plastic mat had been and the filthy carpet next to it.

Next stop was advertising art, where employees talked about the often frigid temperatures in the former computer room and the fact there is only one exit from the room during an emergency.

After making sure the room was clear, the parties then stepped into the area in the downstairs women’s rest room that is supposed to be available for nursing mothers. In our last contract, the Company agreed to provide a room for nursing mothers. A sink was installed that was meant to be used only by mothers, but no sign was ever installed instructing employees not to use that sink for other purposes. A chair for the mothers was not bought, either.

To his credit, George Hearst has asked for signs to be placed in the room and he has arranged to get a refrigerator in the room for the sole use of mothers. Anyone who places food in there will find it immediately discarded. A sign will make that clear.

The area for mothers is only sectioned off by a curtain, while ideally it would be best to have a separate room. The completion of the nursing mothers’ area took on new life after four women in editorial became pregnant. (Congratulations, Jennifer Gish, on your newborn twins!)

The Company said it would look at all the issues raised and respond to the Guild. If there are any health and safety concerns you would like addressed, please contact a bargaining committee member or contact the union by phone at 482-9218 or by e-mail at office@albanyguild.org.