Without any communication to the Guild, the Times Union has begun walking workers to the door and telling them they are on a 45 day leave that will likely end in their layoff.

The situation is fluid and the Guild is trying to get the company to provide some information. We hope to share details with you later in the day.

If you are one of people summoned to the office of Carole  Hess, follow whatever directive the company gives you. The Guild can only challenge actions after they are taken and we fully intend to do so. We recommend against signing any paperwork. You can feel free to cash or deposit any check you are given. Doing so does not waive any of your legal rights.

Just when you think the Company’s behavior can’t get any worse…

An employee in sports was walked to the door tonight and told he was being placed on 45 days’ paid leave. Sometime during that time period, he was told, he would be informed if that leave would become a layoff, which was “likely.”

Never mind the fact that the union and the Company are in the midst of negotiating layoff criteria. Ignore the fact that the Company’s attorney said in our last session that employees would get 45 days’ notice of any layoff. And of course the Company did this without any communication with the Guild.

And when Guild President Tim O’Brien called Carole Hess to ask how many other employees were being given the same treatment, he was told he would have to speak to Publisher George Hearst. Hearst, of course, did not answer his phone.

The Guild has fired off an e-mail to the Company stating that its actions are improper and illegal, and the union demanded the Company immediately cease and desist.

The Company acknowledged Wednesday its legal obligation to provide 45 days’ notice to employees if they are to be laid off.

Last week, the Company had said the 45-day notice provision began when it started negotiating with the Guild over the implementation of its layoff language. Guild bargainers noted Wednesday that while the Company’s proposal imposed (we believe illegally) new language on layoffs under Section 3(D) of the contract, it did not alter Section 3(C) which clearly states: “In lieu of notice to the employee, forty five (45) days pay shall be given.”

The Company acknowledged that is true. It attorney, Peter Rahbar, said: “We will provide individuals with 45-days’ notice.”

During the session, the Guild gave the Company two information requests. The  first asked for the results of the so-called “test runs” the Company did of its criteria — in other words, the employees’ names that would be on the layoff  list if that criteria was used. We also asked for the number of employees in each job title who would be laid off and for details on what would happen to that work. We asked what employees would be expected to do the work, if any job duties would  change and if the Company will seek to outsource any of the work.

The second request was an extensive review of the Company’s typo-ridden questionnaires in editorial. Many of those questions mentioned “quality standards,” “length standards,” “productivity standards,” etc. In every instance, the Guild asked the Company to provide copies of those standards, when and by whom they were developed, proof that employees had been informed of the standards and evidence that the standards were negotiated with the Guild as the law requires.

The  evaluation forms also made repeated references to employees expressing an interest in learning. We asked the Company to provide evidence that it has indeed tracked every time an employee asks for training.

The forms also asked questions about video and multimedia. Again, the Guild asked for information on what training was done and whether everyone was given an equal opportunity.

The Company said it would take some time to gather the responses, so they ended the days’ talks and the parties set the next meeting for Wednesday, July 8 starting at 10 a.m. As always, employees can attend on their own time.

The Guild also filed charges with the National Labor Relations Board over the illegal declaration of impasse. A board agent contacted the union Wednesday to begin gathering information for an investigation.

“It’s unfortunate we have to go this route but the Company has left us with no choice,” Guild President Tim O’Brien said. “From day one, the Hearst Corp. has refused to modify the core of its two main proposals, giving the Company unfettered discretion to lay off anyone or to outsource any job.”

When the Company imposed an impasse (illegally, we might add) it didn’t just post the most controversial proposals on outsourcing and layoffs. There are other changes it is trying to force on us as well.

For example, some employees have been told to work past 37.5 hours but that they would not get paid overtime until they hit 40 hours. (They would get paid at normal rates instead.) The Guild did not agree to this contractual change and will be legally challenging it.

So what do you do if your boss tells you to work overtime but not to put down for it? First, obey the directive. You can be found insubordinate for refusing to follow orders even if the order itself was later found to be illegal. (Exceptions are rarely made and usually if the employee fears for his or her health or safety.)

Second, keep track of it. Save a record. Because if we are successful in our legal appeals, the Company will be ordered to pay back everyone whose overtime it denied.

The Newspaper Guild has scheduled meetings for people to hear about the Company’s proposed criteria for laying off outside seniority.

The Guild will meet at 12:30 p.m. Friday in the cafeteria with the marketing media specialists. It will meet at the same time Monday in the cafeteria with the advertising artists. (If it’s nice, we can sit outside.)

Since there is a far larger group in editorial, we will hold two meetings Tuesday at the Best Western on Wolf Road. One session will start at noon and the second at 5. (Space at the town library is hard to come by, sadly, now that schools are out and summer programming has begun. We also looked into the meeting room at the Crossings Park, but that was unavailable.)

We want to hear your thoughts on the Company’s proposed criteria for layoffs, which you can find in our earlier post.

Please join us at one of these very important sessions. The information you provide will be useful as we meet with the Company on Wednesday, July 1.

Come join your colleagues and help us figure out what this means: “Does the Editorial Assistant have the appropriate sense of urgency and understand the importance of deadline meet standards?” (Seriously, that’s one of the questions in the newsroom’s performance evaluations.)