For the second time, the Company violated the law in announcing its proposed newsroom changes Tuesday.

Guild bargainers were shocked to get the memo sent to the staff, announcing promotions to titles that don’t exist and that long-standing Guild positions were suddenly exempt. The upshot of the Company’s proposal to “streamline” the newsroom was to add 4 more managers to supervise 9 fewer Guild people.

The Guild immediately informed the Company that the union had no choice but  to file an unfair labor practice charge with the National Labor Relations Board. “These matters are a topic of ongoing negotiations that have not led to an agreement,” Guild bargainers Tim O’Brien and Mary Fultz wrote.

In fact, the parties had met on Thursday. At the time, O’Brien informed Company negotiators that the Guild was almost done preparing its proposal. Questions were asked specifically about the proposed Team Leader position, and the company leaders said they could not say how many of those exempt titles they were proposing until the results of the buyout were known. Three business days later, the memo was sent to staff with no further discussion.

The Company proposal would eliminate every single occupied Class A position except the editorial cartoonist. It then attempts to convert some of those positions (the so-called “deputy directors” and the assistant city editors) into management jobs. It seeks to downgrade other Guild jobs from Class A to Class B.

After the Guild sent its e-mail, Editor Rex Smith called O’Brien to say he had been misled to believe an agreement had been reached, and he said the Company might have to rescind part of its announcement. The parties are to meet later today.

The Company and the Guild reached tentative agreement Friday on a few minor items.

The Company agreed to provide the Guild with a statement of cause when employees are discharged, and they supported striking language that refers to the past practice of allowing 1 out of 10 hires not to pay dues while receiving full benefits. (That practice was ended last time, but some language remained.)

The parties also agreed to update language on the Section 125 plan that enables employees to set aside money pre-tax for health expenses. The language said the Company would establish such a plan, and we’ve now updated the contract to say the Company will continue to offer the plan. The Company’s attorney said Hearst is testing giving people debit-like cards to pay out of their accounts. Currently, employees must save their receipts and submit them, but they get a tax savings for doing so. The debit-card idea would be a great way to increase involvement in the plans, which is a tax savings to employee and Company alike.

In return, the Guild agreed to a Company proposal that will have a minor impact every few years. The Company now deducts money from paychecks 52 weeks a year to pay for the employees’ share of the health-insurance premium. In years with 53 Fridays, the Company has to re-program its system to not make a deduction that extra week. The parties agreed that in years when there are 53 Fridays, the Company can divide what employees owe by 53. Guild members won’t pay any more. It is not a change we expect anyone to notice.

The parties also spent some  time talking about how to monitor employee performance during probation. The union noted the Company has asked to extend some workers’ probation, and the Guild then finds  supervisors have not been discussing performance with the employees every 30 days as the contract requires. The union’s proposal would require sharing that information with the union so it would not first learn of issues right before an extension request is made. The Guild also proposed that a union steward be able to attend the sessions, not to argue but to hear what concerns may arise.

The parties set four other bargaining dates: July 15, July 24, July 29 and July 31.

Many Guild members have asked what they can do to let the Company know how strongly they feel about some of its proposals. Be assured: Plans to mobilize are well underway. Stay tuned. And if you have an ideas, feel free to send us an e-mail at office@albanyguild.org. 

Fourteen people covered by the Guild will receive buyouts, and three people who applied were denied. The Company said it received sufficient numbers to avoid layoffs at this time, though of course managers reserved their right to lay off staff if financial conditions worsen.

The numbers include six people in advertising, four people in editorial, three people in circulation and one person in IS&S. (We were told 12 exempt employees also got the buyout. Five workers in the press room were laid off when no one there accepted the buyout offer.)

The three Guild members who were denied the buyout all work in advertising.

Company officials said they do not intend to replace the 14 who leave. The three people were denied because the Company felt it would have to replace those people, managers said.

“We’re glad no one faces a possible layoff at this time,” said Guild President Tim O’Brien. “We’re sorry to see so many of our colleagues go, but glad they could do so with extra money and extended health insurance. We have always opposed layoffs, and we’re glad we have strong layoff language that encourages the Company to offer buyouts instead. The current proposal by Times Union management to weaken that language would hurt employees if future layoffs are ever considered.”

The  employees take with them a wealth of knowledge and expertise. All together, the Company is losing 394.3 years of experience — or an average of more than 28 years per person.

At an afternoon session Thursday, the talk focused on the union’s proposal setting guidelines for interns and on how many people forfeited vacation time under the “use it or lose it” clause.

Both parties agreed on the importance of giving young people a chance to experience what it’s like to work at a newspaper in the hopes they’d like to make a career here. (Hopefully, the interns didn’t read the bargaining bulletin on the Company initial’s proposal.) Guild bargainers said that interns should be paid and, given the reduction in staffing, the numbers should be limited.

Company officials said they get more requests for internships than they can fill because they require so much time to manage. So far this summer, there does not seem to be the large number of interns, especially in editorial, we have seen in past years.

The two sides also discussed the Guild’s proposal to eliminate the “use it or lose it” clause that requires people to take vacations within a year or lose the time. In 2007, 49 people  lost a total of 1,286.75 hours. One employee lost 142.5 hours — a day shy of four weeks — while another lost 112.5. One photographer lost 97.5 hours and another forfeited  90 hours.

The Guild will talk to some of the individuals who have lost a considerable amount of time to see if they had trouble getting time off from their managers. The contract says if an employee cannot schedule any or all of his or her vacation time due to work schedule conflicts, that time can be carried over. It also says that if the Company decides not to grant an employee’s third, fourth or fifth week of vacation, the employee shall receive up to three weeks of additional pay.

Employees are entitled to at least two consecutive weeks of vacation between May 15 and September 30.

If you are denied vacation time, let the Guild know especially if the year is near its end and you fear you may “lose it.” If your boss refuses to give you time off, you’re entitled to carry it over or cash it out.

Both sides agreed Tuesday to extend the contract through at least Sept. 30. The agreement would continue in place after that date unless either party gave 30 days’ notice.

“This enables us to continue to work with all our wages and benefits intact,” Guild President Tim O’Brien said. “Without that guarantee, it would be much more contentious, and we’d have no choice but to start exploring boycotts and other such job actions.”

The parties also reached a tentative agreement on the items that neither side was proposing to change. Those items included language barring discrimination, outlining the grievance process, allowing merit raises and continuing dues checkoff.

A good deal of discussion focused on the Company’s proposal to stop paying severance if an employee is fired “for cause.” The Guild noted that language painted a broad brush. With the Company recently handing out “performance improvement plans” that threaten discipline up to and including dismissal, the Guild noted that the language change would mean employees could be let go with no money.

The Company said it was inappropriate to have to pay if an employee was fired for, to use its example, a rape in a bathroom. The Guild suggested the Company rewrite its proposal to focus on “gross misconduct’’ on duty.

As expected, management bargainers argued the Guild’s proposal contained too many contractual changes. The Guild replied that the management list was far shorter but much more onerous in its demands.

If you wish to comment on this or any other blog posting, scroll down to the bottom of a blog post and clicking where it lists the number of comments. You can sign up quickly and post under a pseudonym. Just stick to the rules.

The two sides will meet again at 2 p.m. Thursday and on Friday in the Executive Conference Room. As always, members can attend on their own time.