The day ended in obnoxious fashion, with the Company handing over a letter cancelling the contract rather than responding to the Guild’s latest comprehensive proposal.

The union altered its contract offer to a four-year agreement. Rather than two payments the first year of $750 each, the Guild altered it to one payment of $1,500 this year, to cover the equivalent of first and second year raises. Employees would get one more $750 payment for 2010 and then a 3 percent raise in the contract’s final year.

The lump-sum payments would not affect the base pay.

The union also altered its proposal on outsourcing, bumping up to allowing the Company to outsource 3 percent of Guild work over the course of a year.

The Company offered one-time payments of $500 this year and next, but did not move at all on either the outsourcing or layoff proposals. While much attention has been paid to the seniority issue, the outsourcing proposal could have far-reaching implications as well.

If the Company was able to lay people off and outsource their work, many departments would be in jeopardy including people who take circulation and classified-ad calls, editorial and advertising artists, people in our business office, features writers and many others.

“This would be a disaster for the newspaper, its readers and advertisers,” Guild President Tim O’Brien said. “Customer service would sharply decline. Advertisers would face more billing problems. We’ve seen the problems Classified Plus has caused, and this would be greatly multiplied.”

The Guild already has experience with what happens when we agree to outsource jobs. The union agreed to allow drivers’ work to be outsourced, and the number of drivers has declined from 49 to five.

Even the Company’s lawyers acknowledged today that journalists who are members of the Newspaper Guild have a right to speak out publicly in support of the union.

Their comments came after Editor Rex Smith sent out a memo right before the Company canceled the contract that implied journalists should think twice about speaking publicly.

“If you find yourself in a position where you can’t keep your opinions to yourself, and you think that may limit your ability to do your job with the independence good journalism demands, we will try to find you an assignment that will not be affected by your conflict of interest,” Smith wrote. “But we place the burden on you to let your supervisor know before a conflict arises.”

Guild bargainers asked the Company if they were claiming that journalists who want to speak on behalf of the Guild had to get Smith’s permission. The Company said that was not the case.

“Guild members have every legal right to speak out on behalf of their union, to walk picket lines, to participate in boycotts, to talk to leaders of other unions and to talk to elected officials or anyone else willing to help us get a fair contract,” Guild President Tim O’Brien. “As a person who believes in free speech, Rex should not be implying that journalists forfeit their rights.”

The issue arose after Guild members who live in Albany spoke to the Albany Common Council Monday in support of legislation backing the Guild.

Smith himself once scoffed on his radio program at the Guild’s initial wage offer during contract negotiations with the Associated Press. He had no hesitation to make his opinion known in that incident, and obviously did not feel the need to reassign himself away from his role as editor overseeing coverage of labor issues or to send a memo to staff implying he had done something wrong.

The parties had a productive day in bargaining Wednesday, with the Guild proposing a 5-year pact that would offer $750 bonuses for the first three years instead of raises.

In the fourth year, when we hope the economy has recovered, we proposed a 2.5 percent raise. In the final year, we proposed a 2.75 percent pay hike.

“Unlike percentage raises, the bonuses would be a one-time payment that would not increase base pay,” Guild President Tim O’Brien said. “It would enable workers to get some extra money. The Company has made clear it was not interested in our proposal to cut wages to save jobs, so we believe the workers who remain and will likely see a heavier workload should at least get some extra money.”

The Company did not respond to the wage offer, but praised the Guild committee for its creative approach. A response will likely come during Thursday’s negotiations, which begin at 10:30 a.m. in the Executive Conference Room.

At day’s end, the Company said it has not decided whether to cancel the contract Thursday as it had threatened to do. Instead, company lawyers said they would leave that issue hovering over negotiations. The Guild is ready to implement an action plan should that occur.

The parties did make progress on a number of issues:

• We are near to finalizing an agreement that would enable members to donate three days a year of sick time to any seriously ill colleague who’d used up their own sick leave.

• The Company agreed to move the currently exempt position of director of research into the Guild. Initially, that employee oversaw two librarians but those employees retired and were not replaced. The union argued successfully the job was no longer supervisory. The parties also agreed that the former director of security, who has been doing the mail clerk’s duties, will move into the Guild as well.

• The Guild expressed a willingness to agree to the Company’s demand that people whose spouses work at the Times Union not be eligible for the health-insurance buyout. In return, the Guild said any increase in health care share should occur at the same rate as in the Teamsters’ contract. That means it would rise from the current 16 percent to 18 percent Dec. 1 this year; 20 percent on Dec. 1, 2010; 22 percent on Dec. 1, 2011; 23 percent on Dec. 1, 2012; and 25 percent on Dec. 1, 2013. (The Company would have the share increase to 22 percent on Jan. 1, 2010 and 25 percent on Jan. 1, 2011.)

The parties also had a thorough discussion about the six advertising sales positions spread out over four different pay classifications. Three of those titles have no one in them. There also was discussion about giving employees more input on commissions.

Increasing the contribution to the pension fund was also discussed. The contribution has remained at 85 cents an hour for more than 20 years. With the stock market woes, the Guild argued for more money to help prevent benefit cuts. The Company opposed any increase.

Wow. Check out this story.

Brightly colored signs covered every inch of a series of conference tables in an upstairs meeting room at the Albany Labor Temple tonight.

Times Union employees showed their artistic sides as they stood side by side, drawing inspiration for a possible picket this Thursday if the newspaper follows through on its threat to cancel our contract.

The signs all contain different messages: “A Local Newspaper Needs Local Employees,” “Where’s the Loyalty?”, “Keep Jobs Local,” “Honk to Save Local Jobs” etc. Thanks to all who took time out of their busy lives to show how creative they are.

The Company made the unprecedented decision to cancel our contract this Thursday, a fight we did not ask for and have been working to prevent. Unless the Times Union management changes their minds in the next 24 hours, a very public battle will be launched as this week ends.

One member of Albany’s Common Council sent Publisher George Hearst an e-mail Tuesday afternoon. President Pro Tempore Richard Conti noted a resolution in support of the Guild has strong support but the council  set it aside until April 20 to give Hearst a chance to be heard.

“I would urge in a similar act of good faith that the Times-Union not cancel the Guild’s contract this Thursday,” he concluded.

We hope the Times Union heeds his advice. But if not, our signs are ready and so are we.