Members of the Dayton Newspaper Guild’s newsroom unit voted Monday, July 30, to ratify a historic contract agreement with Cox Media Group Ohio. The agreement between the Guild and the company breaks one of the longest labor standoffs in the nation. The two last came to terms in 1986, when the Guild was represented by an independent union.

“There are many people who said this dispute would never be settled, but it has been,” said Lou Grieco, president of the Dayton Newspaper Guild. “This contract balances the company’s need for flexibility in a changing media environment against traditional protections our members count on.”

The one-year deal for newsroom workers at the Dayton Daily News comes with union concessions but includes arbitration. For years, the company had resisted agreeing to any meaningful language that would allow terms of a contract to be enforced.

“This is a victory for everyone involved, management and employees alike,” Grieco said. “Because we can finally move forward, put this dispute behind us and work together to continue the innovative journalism that the Dayton Daily News does so well.”

The two sides last negotiated in 2007, when the company declared impasse and posted work rules. The company requested a return to the bargaining table late in 2011. As negotiations continued, Guild members never rested in pursuit of a contract, holding numerous rallies outside the Cox Media Center and silent protests inside. The Guild also leafleted area events and sent letters to the newspaper’s advertisers to gain the public’s support in asking management to keep middle-class jobs in Dayton. The effort gained strength from the many readers and area union proponents who responded with letters and emails to company management in support of the Guild.

Union-represented workers in Cox’s Ohio operation still face a number of challenges. Earlier this month, the Springfield Newspapers Editorial Association merged with the Dayton Newspaper Guild as a separate bargaining unit. The new Springfield Unit is currently in protracted bargaining talks with the company. Also, due to company restructuring, Guild-represented copy editors became a separate unit of the Guild. Those employees are now working under a transitional agreement and will be seeking a first contract within the year. So the difficult work of gaining fair contracts for members continues unabated.

“Many copy editors worked hard to get a contract for those remaining in the traditional bargaining unit,” Grieco said. “We will not rest until those copy editors, and our Springfield brothers and sisters, are under contract.”

The Dayton Newspaper Guild represents more than 100 reporters, photographers, copy editors and editorial assistants who work for the Cox-owned Dayton Daily News and Springfield News Sun. Cox Media Group Ohio also owns WHIO-TV and radio and other newspapers including the Hamilton JournalNews and Middletown Journal.

Janelle Hartman at newsguild.org writes:

Nearly 26 years since negotiating the local’s last contract, the never-say-die Dayton Newspaper Guild has reached a tentative agreement with the Dayton Daily News.

“Wow,” summed it up Tuesday afternoon for local President Lou Grieco as he and his co-negotiators shared a bottle of champagne after the talks wrapped up. “We’ve been close for a week, but it still hasn’t quite sunk in.”

Tuesday night, Grieco presented the proposal to about 14 of the 50-plus members who will soon be asked to vote on it. But first, Grieco wants time to talk with everyone, explaining that it’s not perfect, that there are concessions, but overall it’s a victory – one that the members made possible… Read complete story>

In a May 13 letter to members, Dayton Newspaper Guild President Lou Grieco outlines the extreme positions taken by the company during negotiations.

Last week, Dayton Newspaper Guild President Lou Grieco sent a certified letter to Brett Thurman, Human Resources manager and company counsel. A mailroom employee signed for the letter on Tuesday, so presumably Thurman has received it.

Guild leaders are posting the letter, which speaks for itself. If you have any questions about the letter, please talk to a member of the Guild’s executive board.

Sept. 22, 2008

Mr. Brett Thurman
Counsel
Cox Ohio Publishing
1611 S. Main St.
Dayton, OH 45409

Dear Brett:

On September 3, 2008, you submitted to the Guild a “New Company Proposal” with the intent of re-opening bargaining. As you know, the National Labor Relations Board ruled, in February 2008, over the Guild’s objections, that the company’s December 2007 declaration of impasse and January 2008 implementation of posted terms was lawful. The Board found that wage issues and the content of an arbitration clause were the primary subjects which remained unresolved between the parties.

The Guild does not believe the “New Company Proposal” breaks the impasse, as defined by the Board. Indeed, instead of locating its wage and arbitration proposals somewhere between the parties’ final offers on these subjects, the company is proposing a regressive wage package and vague (or non-existent) arbitration provisions. This is true of both the peculiar “Option #1″ offer and the “Option #2″ offer, as described below:

Option #1

This option allows for the possible reduction of Guild members’ pay
during the terms of the agreement, contains no required annual salary
increase (as in 3.02 of the company’s final offer) and leaves wage increases
wholly at the discretion of management. It further precludes overtime
payments for work over eight hours in a day, a protection contained in the
company’s final offer and includes a severance package of only one weeks
base pay for each year of service, when the company’s final offer provides
one weeks base pay for each six months of service. No seniority rights
ostensibly inhere in Option #1 except insofar as tenure might be used to
break a “tie,” as determined solely by the company. Finally, the offer
regarding arbitration still seems to seriously restrict the arbitrator’s and
a reviewing court’s authority, by limiting its exercise in accord with an
unidentified “Arbitrator Decision” form.

Option #2

In its last contract offer, the company had offered an annual salary
increase of $1,200 in 2009 and 2010 for Level 1, 2 and 3 employees; now it
is offering only $500. Whereas the final contract offer included a
guarantee of an average 2% increase in income for full time employees
earning less than $60,000, the company is now offering only a 1% increase.
Whereas the company’s last offer guaranteed overtime to full-time employees
who work more than eight hours in a day in a five day work week or ten hours
in a day in four day work week, the company’s new offer includes no daily
overtime protection. The new proposal further eliminates the inclusion of
payment for accumulated personal days in employees’ severance package as
well as seniority based training rights and severance rights in favor of
unilateral company power to retain less senior personnel. It reduces
severance packages from one weeks pay per six months of service to one weeks pay per year of service. Finally, it contains no new offer whatsoever on
the pivotal arbitration issue.

In addition, neither option offered by the company makes any mention at all of any effort by the company to provide part-time employees with a reasonable, more affordable health insurance plan, which is still an important issue for the Guild. We understand that movement on this issue is not a prerequisite for breaking impasse, as defined by the Board, but we would be remiss if we did not remind the company of the importance of this issue.

The Guild takes its obligation to bargain very seriously and fully wishes to negotiate a contract that is both fair to its members and sensitive to legitimate company concerns. Given the essentially regressive nature of the “New Company Proposal,” however, particularly with respect to wages and arbitration, the Guild fails to see how the offer breaks the parties’ existing deadlock. Absent a proposal which, as a matter of law, bridges the existing divide between the parties, the Guild intends to exercise its right not to enter into negotiations.

Sincerely,

Lou Grieco
President
Dayton Newspaper Guild