Proposed Seniority List

Seniority is the cornerstone of the Union and our Seniority Number is an important aspect of our employment. It dictates what shift we work, which also determines our days off and when we take our vacation.

Thats why there were so many complaints when a combined 3 plant seniority list was created in 2005. Many of the placement decisions made by management were deemed incorrect by our peers. Management made several revisions based on employee input, finalized the list, and proceeded with the closure of Northridge.

There were many who still felt that their seniority number was left unresolved. The company stated that the list is of little importance to them so we took the resonsibility of making the corrections that were left unresolved.

A combined L.A./O.C. Pressroom Proposed Seniority List was given to Management on October 7th after months of work collecting information and verifying dates. The committee feels this list is as accurate as possible based on the various ways management assigned start dates for pressroom employees. Our intent was to address only the alledged errors that were a result of the consolidation of our shops. This list will be considered the "OFFICIAL" seniority list and will be set in stone if agreed to by management. At this point it is only a proposed Seniority list and requires managements acceptance.

This was done in the name of fairness and it was well understood that not everyone will agree with this list either but it is our belief that it is considerably more accurate than previously.

In the event that we were not able to verify someones claims, no changes were made.

To view or download a copy of the proposed Seniority List, Click here.

In Solidarity!

Negotiation Update

Your Negotiation Committee is again pleased to report that negotiations were very, very productive. Tentative agreements were reached in Articles pertaining to Discretionary Leave, Military leave, FMLA, and Miscellaneous Articles such as Parking, Drug and Alcohol Testing Program, Security Cameras, Uniforms and Protective Equipment, Security Time and Record Cards. (No time clocks are involved in security time and record cards)

Both sides have exhibited mutual interest in keeping the negotiations moving forward and we have now moved much closer to negotiating the economics of our contract. The negotiations are now moving at a very progressive pace considering first time contracts require much more work than re-negotiating an expiring contract. At this pace, in my opinion, we have the potential to complete a contract to present to the bargaining unit for ratication before years end.

Since the beginning of our negotiations we have spent a considerable amount of time addressing what we refer to at the table as "housekeeping issues" These issues have been very diverse in their subject matter and the majority of these issues have emanated from the Los Angeles shop.
Some of these issues will remain to be of concern to the bargaining committee as they involve what we view to be questionable leadership and questionable working conditions of our peers in L.A. The most compelling evidence that there will continue to be problems in L.A. is the overwhelming differences in the way our two shops are operated and especially how employees are supervised.

We have successfully resolved many of our concerns either at the table, by filing (U)nfair (L)abor (P)ractices with the NLRB and on a couple of occassions by talking directly with Russ Newton. Going forward we have agreed to address any in house issues immediately with Russ and reserve our time at the table to negotiate the collective bargaining agreement. We have also, in the interest of continued progress, agreed to withdraw the ULP that was filed concerning an event that took place in L.A. on September 18th. This incident would be viewed as a management right by the NLRB based on managements explanation of why a crew was held back (not held over) to clean pipes .

The committee is asking that any issues that require assistance from the committee be documented on an incident report and submitted to Keith Denson or myself. On a couple of occasions at the table, I have presented information disclosed to me which was either incomplete in detail, vague and on one occassion, completely inaccurate. For that reason the committee will no longer present any issues to management without written, factual information from the individual(s) seeking assistance.

It should be no surprise to any one that by willfully disregarding safety procedures you are jeopardizing your health and future with the company by not taking safes and speed washing. Consistently transposing plates is another spotlight you place upon yourself. These practices are the main ways to appear on management's radar and should not be happening . Knowing that these are areas that supervision monitors and documents (NTF), diligence and safety must be a priority at all times.

(REVISION) Negotiations resume today October 7th & 8th and again next week on the 14th and 15th.

Targeted for Discipline

I have spent the weekend listening to stories from our brothers and sisters in Los Angeles describing the way Walker and Supervision are on a mission to find any reason to write people up. This has resulted in NTF's (note to file) which have again become an issue. Why is it that supervision can stick notes in your file and not discuss the content of these notes with the employees. These are put in your file without your knowledge denying you the opportunity to respond and challenge if wrongly accused.

When discussed with Management, it was stated that we are supposed to be notified that we were observed breaking a rule, what that rule was, and that it was going to be noted and inserted into our file. This procedure appears to not happen as many discovered when they asked to see their files or when receiving their evaluation.

These NTF's are used when preparing evaluations and in most of the stories I listened to, individuals were told they would not receive a wage increase. Is that the true reason, to save a buck and deny a raise or because they are concerned about procedures and safety? At this rate no one in Los Angeles will ever get a raise or maintain employment for that matter.

Two Operators have recently been pulled from their crews for alleged poor performance, again being held responsible for what are most likely mechanical or electrical problems with the equipment. There are so many variables when problems occur and I believe the percentage that are a result of human error are far lower than all others, but that don't matter because they can't write up and discipline the presses. For the longest time operators have argued that smaller runs result in higher waste percentages and some goals they are expected to meet are unrealistic, yet they are accountable for the waste.

The one resounding message that came from the conversations I had with our brothers and sisters in L.A. was that Walker creates a hostile environment in their shop. They feel like they are being harassed by supervision at the hand of Walker. I have been told that even his supervisors question his leadership, but they don't dare cross him or they will be subject to his disciplinary tactics as well. His tactics aren't new, they are reminiscent of his behavior at the San Diego Tribune. When at a rally in San Diego I had the opportunity to speak to some of our brothers in the pressroom and they said they were sorry that we ended up with "STUMPY" His style of management still leaves a bad taste in their mouths just talking about him, they said.

The issues I was made aware of this weekend have been forwarded to our Representatives and we will seek answers and where necessary, resolution. Until then all of you have to be diligent and work as though your job depends on it, because it does!

SIGN THIS!

Employers have made "Union Busters" DISGUSTINGLY RICH by retaining their services to rob employees from ever being able to make a decision free from Propaganda, Lies, Fear, Intimidation, and Captive Audience Anti-Union Meetings in the workplace. Union organizers cannot force the same employees to come to Union Organizing Meetings. Employers pay you to listen obviously because they're always held during work hours. Secret Ballot Elections for Union Representation give Employers time to let the Union Busters get in and do their dirty work by coaching Management on how to defeat the Union organizing effort by their employees. Many times in doing so, their tactics teeters on the law. The Employee Free Choice Act will allow employees to organize an Union in their workplace simply by signing an Authorization Card for Union Representation instead of for an Election. So if a majority of employees signs cards authorizing Union Representation, then the next step would be certification and then, negotiations. That's where we are today, and this video has some hilarious similarities to what we've heard and seen here over the years, and what it could become or worst without Representation. So if you have this uncontrolable urge to sign something,
SIGN THIS PETITION, NOT THE OTHER ONE!

Selfish Opportunists

I know that the knuckleheads that are trying to bring union representation to a halt are only doing so to protect their own personal interests.

Someone who steals money from the company by manipulating the office enabling himself to pick up overtime shifts at his whim should be more concerned about senior management finding out about this fact (and so should be the supervisors that are aware of it). Earn your money fairly and honestly first, then tell us what is good for the rest of us. I was told only last week by a couple of confidential sources that he removed a trainer's name from an overtime shift as an operator, replacing it with his own name, only to have a supervisor later remove it and return the trainer's name. No big deal, he was given an overtime shift the following afternoon. I'm curious, did anyone sign up for overtime that afternoon with less overtime? Most likely. So he not only steals from the company, he tried to take money out of the pocket of a fellow pressroom employee.

Don't listen to his bullshit or succumb to his threats, he is ONLY doing this to maintain the sweetheart deal that he has enjoyed for way too long. Practically everyone in the Orange County pressroom has stated that he should have been terminated or put at the bottom in seniority when he cried to be let out of the office, only after crying to get in there. Why didn't he stay in the office? That's where he is all the time anyway! Why the company allows this is still a mystery. He told me over the phone, that he had an ORAL agreement, (the rest of us usually refer to that as a VERBAL agreement). Does any one besides him in the bargaining unit have expressed agreements with management? Didn't think so. With whom is this so called oral agreement? Kurtich? He's gone, and besides, Kurtich wouldn't have had the authority to make any such deal according to the company's "At Will employment policy, which states that any agreements between employees and management must be in writing and signed by the Publisher.

Now for the rat, I mean snitch, I mean other knucklehead. This one said "as long as Walker is in charge in L.A. I won't sign a de-certification petition" As far as I know, Walker is still in L.A.

I knew it was crap when it came out of his head. I have never trusted this one and was warned not to trust him (among others) the day I arrived in O.C. I have had painful conversations with him and I'm convinced he doesn't have a clue, and also thinks only about himself.

The machine shop wants him to stay the hell out of there and quit taking people off the press to sign your petition when they're supposed to be working, by the way, so are you.

Essentially you have an individual who couldn't handle it behind the desk, and the other that can't stay out from under it asking you to risk everything, when they themselves will benefit for their participation in this petition circulation.

Since coming to Orange County, I have NEVER heard a good thing said about either of these people and would not trust them for shit, and neither should any of you. Did everybody in O.C. forget how pissed off all of you were when one of these two knuckleheads was allowed to return to the floor with ALL of his seniority after being in management for approximately two years? I have the letters and petitions that were signed by many of you at that time, and I hope that if your name was on that petition, it won't be on this petition.

He didn't give a shit about what you thought or felt then, and he sure as hell don't give a shit about what you think now! Don't do their bidding, and don't sign the petition!

September 17th & 18th Negotiations Update

Negotiations resumed on September 17th and 18th at which time many more tentative agreements were reached. This is extremely satisfying considering the rough road we were on early in negotiations. We reached tentative agreements regarding Hours of work and Overtime. We addressed some of the miscellaneous provisions from the company's proposals including uniforms, safety shoes, parking and security cameras as well.

The Economics of our contract will be negotiated very soon. Those negotiations will deal with wages, benefits and retirement. At this time, bargaining unit employee raises will be covered and we intend to negotiate a wage package that will provide the financial stability we need to continue to provide for our families.

This round of negotiations, as well as our previous round of negotiations proved to be extremely fruitful and much was accomplished. We on the committee feel that we made up for lost time and are on schedule to complete this process in the anticipated time frame. Negotiations began less than a year ago and we are right where we expected to be in negotiations. For the record, first time contracts are known to take longer than other negotiations, so the elapsed time is not unusual for where we currently are. For this reason, it is foolish to even consider tampering with the progress made in contract negotiations.

We on the committee and our Representatives are very aware of the fact that raises are a priority for our bargaining unit. What kind of a raise should also be a priority, and it is with your elected committee, we want a raise too! We want to be sure it will be an increase that we will actually be able to benefit from financially.

Past raises under Tribune have done absolutely nothing to enhance our spending power, especially when they take it right back in the form of benefit cost increases. They give it with one hand, and take it back with the other. Merit Raises are not in our best interest as proven by the favoritism that is exhibited by supervision and management. All the Suck asses get the higher percentages, and do nothing extra to deserve it, at least not in the form of work.

The evaluation process which determines whether you get one or not, is rife with favoritism as well as discrimination, plus, your wages depend on the same supervisors (and a certain superintendent) (that can, and do target employees for discipline) to prepare your evaluation.

How many of you got a shitty evaluation this time around? Is that because your work habits changed, or the person doing your evaluation changed. I wish some of these supervisors that came from our ranks would remember where they came from and the type of workers they were when they were in our boots. I'm surprised some supervisors are actually in those positions considering their performance as pressmen (I use the term loosely), yet they are given the responsibility of judging our work performance. Ask anyone in L.A. about the evaluations they just received and also ask if they disagree with this process.

A "General Raise" across the board if the FAIREST way to receive a wage increase. Don't let these two numb skulls talk you into signing the petition because as I said, they will be rewarded for screwing everyone (if they succeed) and everyone is as Sam would say "FUCKED"

Please be patient, as I said, we intend to negotiate a raises that will be both fair and financially beneficial. The committee needs your support to be successful in this endeavor and ask that you allow us to complete our mission to negotiate a fair collective bargaining agreement for all of us.

Remember, everyone will have the right to vote on the tentative agreements reached in contract negotiations and if less than a majority agrees to ratify it, we will go back to the table. If a majority approves, then it will be ratified. Representation has cost us not a penny and won't until we agree on a contract. At least wait to see the contract. The negotiating committee has your's and your families best interest at heart and will continue to work hard to achieve success.

Don't sign the petition, or have your name removed if you have.

Ex-Times reporters sue Zell

Kevin Roderick

I'm told that lawyers representing current and former Los Angeles Times newsroom staffers are filing a class-action federal lawsuit against Sam Zell and Tribune this morning in Los Angeles, alleging breaches of fiduciary duty, conflicts of interest and other violations of ERISA, the law that safeguards the proper handling of retirement benefits like pensions and trusts. The plaintiffs include several familiar bylines and at least one current Times star. A team has been looking into Zell's leveraged takeover of Tribune almost since he used employee money to get the company.

Details to come.

(Click here for full story)

Don't Sign The Petition!

(Originally Posted) Friday, September 22, 2006

"Employment at will" While it is hoped that your employment with the Company will be mutually rewarding, your employment relationship with the Company is at-will.This means that either you or the company may terminate this relationship at any time, for reason, with or without cause or notice. At-will employment also means that the Company may make decisions regarding other terms and conditions of employment at any time with or without cause or notice including but not limited to demotion, discipline, promotion, transfer, compensation, benefits, duties and location of work. Any agreement for employment for any specified period of time or for any promises or commitments contrary to the foregoing can only be made by a company officer. Any such agreement that changes your at-will employment status must be explicit, in writing, and signed by both you and the Publisher of the Company to be enforceable.
Source: Los Angeles Times Employee Handbook

This is why you need to sign a card and vote yes!

(end of post)
__________________________________________________

I hope you read the language in green closely, it explicitly describes a collective bargaining agreement. We negotiate everything else in blue.

As "At Will" employees, the company has the right to change our wages, benefits and working conditions....AT WILL! We have earned the right to negotiate those areas of our employment and have successfully managed to maintain essentially "status quo" losing nothing, costing us nothing. We have already seen the many benefits of having representation thus far and the results of an actual true voice. Ask our brothers and sisters in L.A. how many times Walker has attempted to make unilateral changes to their shop, and those changes ceased. we have filed Unfair Labor Practices that resulted in a settlement between the company and the N.L.R.B. which had conditions reversed, allowing us to leave when we complete our assigned work and also prevented management from assigning additional clean-up work at the end of the runs. Don't forget the meal tickets, and for those of you who talked shit, you took and used the ones you were given, and continue to accept them. None of you have spent a single penny and won't spend a penny unless a majority of us ratifies a contract. Don't sign the petition!

Let's see what the contract looks like before we screw ourselves out of the opportunity of negotiating one. We have never been in a position like this before and we must seize this opportunity to claim some control over our wages, benefits and working conditions.

Don't sign the petition!

The Teamsters are the strongest union in the nation and we can rest assured that they will continue to stand steadfast by our side to see to it that we get a fair collective bargaining agreement. All of us need to do the same.

Don't sign the petition!

As I stated in the previous post, we made great progress in the negotiations reaching agreements in very important areas of our contract. This is very promising going forward and certainly is not the time for them to interfere with the progress and impede the process.

Don't sign the petition!

The question to ask the individuals circulating a de-certification petition for signatures is, Why? What are their reasons for wanting to de-certify our election? I have heard they can't even give an intelligent reason for their actions and they're not going to tell you the truth behind their motives anyway. I acknowledge that they have a right to do this, but are their intentions for the good of everyone in the pressroom, or for their own selfish reasons? It should be totally obvious to everyone (because of who they are) that these individuals don't care about any one in the pressroom and are willing to jeopardize all the hard work that has been done in negotiations for their own benefit.

Don't sign the petition!

Back on Track!

I am pleased to say that negotiations appear to be back on track and were very productive. TA's (Tentative Agreements) were reached on language pertaining to management rights, union security, dues checkoff and seniority. We have previously reached agreements on grievance and arbitration as well as union recognition. These topics are considered pillars of a union contract and the committee is very happy that we were able to move forward this round. The company displayed considerable movement, as did we, and we created proposals that addressed both of our concerns. This progress will enable us to get closer to the economics of our contract which will be understandably more difficult to negotiate considering the industry as a whole.

Raises
The company's written response to our request for information regarding raises given to non-union production employees is still in the capable hands of our attorney in Washington and we await his determination as to how to proceed.

Walking in webs at end of shift (L.A.)
The new practice of walking in the webs after washing blankets to replace washed out webs will no longer continue. Management agreed to stop this practice and stated this was done due to an increase in the number of webs being washed out. They went on to say that if it webs continue to be washed out they will consider this practice again. I presented the argument that we would prefer to wash our own blankets after lining up and the benefits of doing so. We will continue to discuss this topic and hopefully we can return to washing blankets based on what we know, not what they think.

Seniority list
Management has expressed little concern over the seniority list but recognizes that we need an acurate seniority list. They were willing to leave it as is and take the heat, or I can submit another list and take the heat. My view is that if we can correct the obvious errors, there should be no heat to take. Any one who feels they are out of position based on the most recent seniority list needs to, once again provide the details in writing so that a formal proposal to make those changes can be prepared and delivered to the company at the next negotiations in September. That gives us approximately one month to receive written requests from anyone currently out of position. ONLY THE INDIVIDUALS WHO PROVIDE WRITTEN DETAILS WILL HAVE THEIR CONCERNS ADDRESSED.
If you would like a current copy of the seniority list, contact Keith Denson or myself.
E-mail your written details to admin@saveourtrade.com to have your seniority reviewed and considered for revision. Management will make the actual decisions to modify an individuals seniority based on the employee provided written details and employment records on file.
Let's put this one to bed once and for all, so get me your written details quickly so I can draft the proposal asking management make the necessary corrections.

In closing, I would ask that each of you step up your game and do your job to the best of your ability. It is our job to leave our shops clean at the end of our shift. Cleaning is part of our job and should be done, not only because we get paid to do so, but rather out of courtesy to our brothers or sisters that follow us on the next shift. This is your shop and a little pride will go a long way. Sweeping our pits, picking up and emptying the trash and mopping up oil is not only part of our job, it makes our shops much safer for everyone.

Vacation Over, Back to the Table

Vacation over and I'm another year older, I won't bore you with what I did. Calls from L.A. brothers about a change in our practices at the end of the shift came to me last week involving a new practice in L.A.'s. pressroom. Leads now have to be walked in after washing blankets to deter washing out the webs. Does management actually give a crap, when we, not them, have to pick them up. This is another way for supervision to police our work and will give management another way to pit us against one another. How will the individuals that wash out webs be viewed by the rest of the crew when the leads have to be put back in before going home? Now add a couple of bars.

It's obvious a complaint was lodged with the office that previous shifts are washing out webs. This is part of the job and happens on every shift and no one should feel compelled to complain when it happens to them. Blankets can be washed without washing them out, if they are done right, but how many of us actually washes the blankets right knowing that we go home as soon as we're done? It is part of our job and we should be washing them thoroughly for quality purposes, but does not justify the change without collective bargaining.

The appropriate, and only solution would be to go back to washing before the run. This would ensure that washing will be done properly and give supervision the opportunity to inspect the blankets if they chose to. If the blankets need further cleaning that can be addressed while the employee assigned to that particular unit is still there. If a lead is washed out, you pick up your own leads, not leads washed out by the previous crew because they were anxious to bolt out of there as quickly as possible. Washing before the run as we used to do has been suggested many times to management and is considered by Russ as only a way to get a bigger bust-out. This was the standard prior to Walker changing the washing process back in 2003 and should be reversed at this time because it hasn't seemed to slow anyone down and it will guarantee clean blankets everyday, every run. We have proposed this in our overall contract proposal and will pursue this change further today.

We will have more information pertaining to the company's written response to our request for information regarding the recent raises given to non-union production employees as soon as the committee meets with our representative Sonny Shannon today. The written response was being reviewed by our attorney in Washington and President Tedeschi. We on the committee are just as anxious as are all of you to learn what our options are in this matter.

I personally hope that the company comes to the table today with a willingness to salvage the progress we felt we had made right up until the closing hour of our last negotiations. As I stated in a previous post, we had expressed a willingness to show some flexibility and it was not fully reciprocated in their latest proposal regarding seniority. Flexibility has been their number one request, yet they have shown none. We are expected to respond to their latest package proposal and will pick up where we left off.

News from this round of negotiations will be posted after we conclude on Wednesday.

Is the new Publisher a Union Guy?

Olympics on Saveourtrade

I thought this was a cool widget to allow SOT visitors to catch up on the Olympics. Enjoy.

Exclusive Summer Olympics news & widgets at NBC Olympics.com!

"No Go" tiations!

First, I apologize for the delay in getting this information posted, so let's get started. The latest negotiations which took place on Wednesday July 30th and Thursday July 31st were expected to be very productive on our part, considering where we left off previously. We had essentially felt that a positive dialog had begun and presumed that we would both negotiate from a "mutual interest" point of view.

We began at the table Wednesday morning by receiving the company's reponse to our information request pertaining to the recent "Hybrid" merit raises given to non-union production employees. The legal jargon we've been given in response to previous requests was again being recycled in this response as if it is memorized and put on a rubber stamp for convienience. That being said, our Legal Representatives will review their written response and instruct our Rep's Sonny and Mike as to how we should proceed on this subject. Any wage increase we propose will include that it be retroactive to raises currently being given.

We have expressed an opposition to merit based wage increases from the very beginning because of the evaluation process that is used to determine the eligibilty of an employee to recieive an increase, and the amount of an individual's potential increase based on his or her evaluation. We believe everyone will agree that this process has proven to cater to favortism and also believe you would agree that a "general" wage increase across the board is the only fair method of implementing a wage increase.

As we had previously discussed at the table, and agreed to, Sonny and I, along with the company's representives, Tim Fair and Russ met in "side bar" off the record, thus I cannot devulge the actual conversations that took place during this procedure. Without giving any details of the conversation, Sonny and I listened to items the company considered "deal breakers" and they simply would not consider agreeing to. We listened closely to their concerns and feel that we were willing give some ground to move the negotiations forward and show good faith. This procedure took the better part of Wednesday, and Sonny and I both left the side bar feeling that it was extremely productive and looked forward to getting back to the table, and back on record.

Thursday's negotiations began early with much anticipation. Seniority was an issue we discussed in previous negotiations and felt we were getting close to an agreement at that time. In the final hour, the company decided they would propose to classify each position and in the event of staffing reductions, the lowest seniority pressperson in a specific classification would be laid off first. We said we would agree to that concept if they would agree to "bumping rights" which would allow a senior pressperson who's job classification experiences a reduction in staffing to bump someone with less seniority outside of that classification, thus resulting in the last man in, first man out. Their pat answer of "we're not interested" and their unwillingness to agree to reverse seniority without classification caused this subject to be set aside.

Sonny felt that this topic (seniority) was a good place to begin on Thursday morning and would also be used to gauge the company's movement in the negotiations in general, simply because this issue does not have an economic impact on the company one way or another.
We have stood fast on the principle of reverse seniority in the event of staffing reductions. The company representatives have sought to layoff and recall according to skills and ability.
The problem with their approach, like merit raises, allows for favortism. Another concern of our's with this concept is, who will be responsible for determining one's skills and abilities?
Management? Supervision? Sam Zell? Again favortism surfaces.

We prepared and presented a "package proposal" giving the company the "management rights" they sought with the inclusion of language that would prevent their mgt. rights from superceeding the agreements contained in the contract. In exchange we were asking for seniority language which included reverse seniority in the event of staffing reductions, union security, which requires union membership to work in our shops, and dues check off, requiring the company to deduct union dues from members payroll and forward those dues to the local.
Remember, all union dues are tax deductable and we don't pay dues until we ratify a contract.

Our package proposal was rejected, and the company presented a counter proposal in which they sought to protect up to 15 individuals they deemed "high performers" they would like to retain in the event of layoffs. This number amounted to 6% of the 248 workforce employed in the pressrooms. Our first reaction was, again, favortism will flourish under this concept. Sonny challenged their number of 15 and used a hypothetical layoff of 20 individuals and illustrated that if they could protect 15 of the 20, they would actually receive 75% protection for their favorites from being laid off. There was no way we would even consider this and counter proposed, for the purpose of moving forward, a 1 in 20 ratio that would allow them to protect 1 in 20 if a layoff were to occur. So in order for them to save 1 of their high perfomers, a minimum of 20 individuals would have to be targeted for layoff. If 39 positions are being eliminated, they would still only be able to protect 1 high performer.

Another section of their proposal contained new language which would essentially strip the union of it's "jurisdiction" and allow the company to bring in any one they choose to run our presses without them having to join the Teamsters. The extreme danger of this language would also allow the company to send our work outside the buliding to other workers without recourse. This language was introduced, once again, in the final hour mucking up the progress we had felt we were making. Sonny became very irate with the company representatives for attempting to introduce this language knowing that this would be highly scrutinized and rejected by our side of the table. The company came with another counter proposal eliminating the protections for high performers, and gave us reverse seniority, but was not interested in removing the language that trampled on the unions jurisdiction. This package proposal by the company was made with the stipulation that if rejected, it would be retracted. Sonny accused them of intentionally throwing a wrench in the process by doing so and broke off negotiations for the day.

Sonny, Mike, President Tedeschi and our Legal Team in Washington will review our last proposal and the company's as well, and determine how to proceed. I trust they will hammer out a plan that will put our negotiations on the track it needs to be on to achieve our goal of negotiating a "fair" collective bargaining agreement. Stand fast and be patient, we'll can get there together, in solidarity!

Close, but no cigar!

After hearing so much about the unclaimed lotto ticket that expired today I decided to check a ticket my wife and I bought on the anniversary of our certification, June 11th. As I looked at the ticket, I first checked to see if the mega number was there, and it was,15. The next number I checked for was number 14, it too was there! I continued to read and the third and fourth numbers were also there, 30 and 39. Am I seeing right? The next number 42 had to be there, and it was! The final number we needed.............. 31, .........too bad, we have 41. Close but no cigar. $11,000,000.00 was one number away, ten to be exact. No one hit all the numbers in this drawing and it rolled over. I consider this a great omen because of the day the ticket was purchased and hope that luck comes to all that read this.

NUFF SAID!

http://laist.com/2008/07/25/la_times_employees_bite_back.php
http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlLA/zell_watch/zellotry_at_the_la_times_90134.asp
http://www.tellzell.com/2008/07/dispatch-from-trenches.html

The First Annual Save Our Trade "BIG CAJONES" award goes to................?

Editorial Meeting with the Teamsters

Our colleagues in Editorial have taken the first step in having an actual voice in their newsrooms. On Tuesday July 22nd, a group of Editorial employees met with the Guild, this evening, at their request, a group met with our Teamster Representatives. This was the bold first step it takes to determine what they will do next.

I would describe this afternoon's meeting as a great start. I was reminded of our early organizing meetings, and where we are today. I have no doubt, another negotiating table is already waiting!

Our Organizer Marty Keegan opened the meeting explaining what role the Teamsters would play in organizing our Editorial department employees and the role the employees must play in order to successfully protect their interests.

Wrongfully terminated, Santa Barbara Newspress Writer, and former Los Angeles Times Writer, Dawn Hobbs attended this evening's meeting to address the attendees and give her personal account of what has taken place in Santa Barbara and the role the Teamsters have played during their ordeal. A video was shown highlighting their struggle against Owner Wendy McCaw and the numerous actions taken on behalf of the writers. Along with the Teamsters and Attorney, Ira Gottlieb, the writers have won in the NLRB and in Federal Court, numerous ULP'S (unfair labor practices) and Court rulings, including the decision ordering Wendy McCaw to reinstate these terminated writers with full back pay, benefits, and contributions to their retirements. "We knew the Teamsters were the right Union to represent us, and there was no other choice" Dawn Said.

I was very pleased to meet everyone who attended this evening and look forward to meeting many more of our colleagues from editorial very soon. This meeting is one that I have looked forward to in anticipation for quite some time now. I was invited by Marty to share our experiences in organizing our pressrooms and also gave a brief summary of negotiations.
A point I clearly made was that together, with Teamster representatives, we can both increase our ability to negotiate fair collective bargaining agreements, and effectively support each other during negotiations. I also pledged our assistance and support to get their organizing campaign off the ground and to help"immunize" them from the union busting tactics the company used on us, and will most likely begin to force on them.

I again used Newsday as the model for what we can, and should seek to accomplish here at the Times in order to deliver Sam the fight he deserves. The Teamsters represent the pressroom, editorial, machinists, mailers and drivers at Newsday. This is our goal, unfortunately minus the drivers. Best of luck and prayers for all of them and their families, we consider them family first, longtime friends and Teamster brothers and sisters.

The meeting closed with the understanding that a decision has to be made as to who will represent their interests at the table, and a future meeting soon once that decision is made, should that decision be Teamsters. The attendees will be communicating with their colleagues to arrange a meeting amongst themselves to reach their decision.

As many of you already know, The L.A. Times failed to re-new their contract with Ryder, again affecting the men and women formerly employed by the Times to deliver our newspaper. That decision left us wondering, was this purely economics or the company's way of reducing Teamster presence at the paper? Sam Zell doesn't want you to organize, and he certainly don't want you to organize with the Teamsters.

As reporters and writers, you are the Los Angeles Times, it all begins in the newsroom.

Thanks to the InkstainedRetch for making the meeting information available online and for encouraging this movement. I acknowledge that the Retch is neutral, and also acknowledge the contribution Tell Zell has provided to all of us.

Fraternally,
Ronnie Pineda