Members will vote this Friday on the proposed switch to the MVP health-care plan, and the union is recommending a yes vote to approve the change.

The decision came after negotiations Friday. Executive Board members met briefly at 5 p.m. and voted 5-2 to send the proposal to a membership vote. Voting will be between 11 a.m. and 1 p.m. and from 4:30 p.m. to 5:15 p.m. Friday. The results will be counted at the end of voting.

Both sides retained their positions: The union maintains that the MVP plan is not comparable to our existing one and therefore a membership ratification vote is required. The Company maintains that the plans are comparable and it can make the change without membership approval. However, the Company has agreed to allow us to use the cafeteria for the vote Friday.

If the membership were to vote the proposal down, the Company claims it can impose the agreement anyway. The Guild says it would take a grievance to arbitration if the Company were to attempt any such step, and an independent arbitrator would rule as to whether the two plans are comparible.

The Company agreed that it would cover all but $750 of the deductible in 2009 and if the parties retain the same plan in 2010. The Guild did not waive its right to bargain any future changes in the employee’s share of the deductible, and we continue to maintain the contractual language that the Company can only switch to a different plan if it is comparable.

Employees will be able to set up health savings plans through Berkshire Bank. In 2009, the Company will provide upfront payment up to $750 in the case of hardship if an employee requests it. The employee will then have to sign a written authorization to withhold salary to repay the Company. Employees will not be asked to provide proof of financial hardship.

“This plan will save money for most if not all employees as long as the employee share of the deductible remains where it is,” Guild President Tim O’Brien said. “While we do have concerns about what could happen in the future, we retain our right to bargain those changes. We also know that this switch will be a considerable cost savings to the Company. While we agreed to separate out our health insurance from other contractual issues, we believe the Company should reflect the savings we are now enabling them to enjoy elsewhere in their contractual proposal.”

During negotiations Monday, the Guild and the Times Union management discussed the proposed switch to the MVP plan.

The union had proposed last week that employees’ contribution to the deductible be capped at $750. George Hearst had said last week that if the Company tried to raise the deductible substantially, it would render the plan not “comparable” to the current plan.

(Under our contract, the Company can offer the current Blue Shield plan or a comparable one. The Guild continues to maintain that MVP’s high-deductible plan is not comparable to the more traditional insurance we now enjoy, so the Company cannot switch out of it without members’ consent.)

On Monday, Hearst said the Times Union would not raise the employees’ share of the deductible in 2009 and 2010. He argued that no one could predict what would happen with health insurance in subsequent years.

The Guild’s bargainers have said that the Company’s paying most of the deductible is what makes this plan a cost savings for most employees. Without a guarantee that the deductible share won’t increase, the plan could become expensive in future years.

“It is our intention to hold the $750 through 2010. You have our word that would be the case,” Hearst said.

The Company did agree it would pay for one annual eye exam for every employee and each of their dependents, even if MVP did not offer that coverage as a rider to the policy.

Hearst also balked at the Guild’s proposal to limit the employee’s percentage share to the current 16 percent next year. He said the percentage discussion should be part of ongoing contract negotiations.

He also clarified another issue members have asked about: what happens if an employee is hit with a substantial medical bill early in the year, before being able to set money aside in a health savings account. The Company had said it would provide the money upfront if employees experienced a “hardship.”

Guild leaders questioned employees having to provide evidence of financial trouble in order to get an advance payment on medical bills. Hearst said that would not be necessary, and the Company would assist employees who asked. The employees, in turn, would have to sign a repayment agreement.

The parties also continued off-the-record discussions on the entire contract. Negotiations resume at 10 a.m. Tuesday. A bargaining session is also set for this Thursday.

Guild members elected Dan Roesser of Marketing to a seat on the Executive Board at Monday’s membership meeting.

Dan replaces Renee Bernard, who resigned due to health concerns in her family. The Guild expressed graditude to Renee for her service. We know she will remain a committed member and will continue to be a positive voice for the union in the workplace.

Dan, 29, joined the Times Union in 2006 as an advertising artist. He now works as a marketing media specialist. He brings a welcome injection of youth onto the Executive Board at a time when the Guild’s International has made attracting the “Next Generation” of union leaders a top priority.

Dan will finish the one year remaining in Renee Bernard’s term. All the Executive Board positions, which carry two-year terms, will be up for re-election in fall 2009.

Guild members packed a ballroom at the Desmond Monday to discuss contract negotiations and the proposed switch to a different health care plan next year.

Workers at the Desmond kept having to set up more chairs and tables and bring out more food because the number attending the meeting vastly exceeded the Guild’s expectations. One hundred members strong showed up, and the message was resounding.

Members said over and over — as they had at the Company’s health care discussions — that they wanted protection against the Company jacking up the deductible in future years. While the Company has said it will cover all but $750 of the deductible in 2009, members worried that they could take a hit in future years or be faced with both the percentage of the health insurance they pay and their share of the deductible being raised.

Members also said that since the Company would save money next year, it made no sense to increase the percentage employees pay next year.

Guild bargainers brought that viewpoint to the negotiating table that afternoon. They presented a proposal, which you can read here, that locks in the deductible at $750 for the four years of a contract. It also says that for 2009, the percentage share would remain at 16 percent. The parties would negotiate the percentage in subsequent years in bargaining.

The Guild also called for the Company to continue to pay for routine eye exams, whether through a rider provided by MVP or directly if that is not available. (We work in a business where many of us stare at computer screens all day, after all.)

The union also said the Company should drop its effort to eliminate the cap on how much health insurance could increase in one year. The current language says that the health-care hike could not increase more than half the amount of the raise in the top scale of the lowest pay classification. Under the current contract, that raise is $17.35 a week, meaning the employee’s weekly share of health-care costs could not rise more than $8.67. That is a more than reasonable limitation.

The Guild decided to bargain health care separately from the contract because January 1 is fast approaching. However, our contract requires that any plan offered by the Times Union be “comparable” to the one we have now. MVP’s high-deductible plan is not, so an agreement must be reached with the union and ratified by the membership for the switch to take place.

Should the Company attempt to switch everyone without such an agreement, it would certainly face the filing of a grievance that would be taken to arbitration. We believe it is in both parties’ interest to negotiate a settlement instead, provided it is a reasonable one.

The Company is expected to respond at the next bargaining session at 10 a.m. Monday, Dec. 1. Members may attend on their own time.

Members asked if the union would be giving up leverage in contract talks by negotiating the health insurance separately. “What other leverage would the union have?” Guild leaders were asked.

Guild President Tim O’Brien gestured at the packed ballroom. “The leverage that we have,” he said, “is all of you.”

Contract negotiations ended abruptly Monday when Company negotiator George Hearst showed up two hours after talks were originally scheduled to begin. Guild negotiators told Hearst his perpetual lateness is disrespectful and needs to stop, then they left.

It is not the first, or second, or third time that Hearst has been an hour or more late for a bargaining session. Usually, he just shows up late. This time, he had his administrative assistant call to say the session would start at 11 a.m. instead of 10 as the parties had agreed. Monday morning, she called shortly before 10 a.m. to say talks would begin at 11:30 a.m.

A couple of minutes after noon, Hearst and Company attorney Peter Rahbar finally walked in the door.

Guild President Tim O’Brien pointed out that under the Company’s proposal, an employee could be fired for “just cause” without getting dismissal pay. O’Brien asked if an employee who consistently made appointments and then showed up more than an hour late for them would be given dismissal pay under the Company’s proposal.

Hearst tried to treat the matter as a joke, but Guild bargainers weren’t laughing. They are tired of the Company wasting the team’s time and the money members pay bargainers when they are negotiating,

“It’s disrespectful, and it has to stop,” O’Brien said. Afterwards, bargaining committee members — who had come prepared with a comprehensive off-the-record proposal to make — discussed among themselves that it might be time to bring in federal mediators.

The parties are scheduled to resume negotiations at 10 a.m. next Monday, Nov. 24. This time, if Hearst does not keep to the schedule, the bargainers won’t wait long.