1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Boston Globe rejects cuts

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by KP, Jun 8, 2009.

  1. suburbia

    suburbia Active Member

    Wouldn't that then be true for every union in the country, newspaper or otherwise? If management can void contracts and cut pay whenever they want, what's the point of unions?

    Of course, as others have posted here, even if the guild wins the case, it could still lose even worse. If the guild wins, what is to stop NY Times Co. from just shutting the place down?
     
  2. I Digress

    I Digress Guest

    Nothing. Doesn't change the fact that this is a landmark case, which could change what it means to a laborer.
     
  3. jimmydangles

    jimmydangles Member

    Know that many producer folks on the Boston.com side are making much less than that of the longtime reporters...think <$40,000. Take 23 percent from that, and a solid wage becomes nearly unlivable. And the strongest asset in the company dramatically weakens.
     
  4. suburbia

    suburbia Active Member

    $40,000 is barely livable in Boston, especially if you have a spouse and kids.
     
  5. Joe Williams

    Joe Williams Well-Known Member

    Guessing they didn't get any of those cool lifetime job guarantees, either.

    Welcome to new media!
     
  6. Herbert Anchovy

    Herbert Anchovy Active Member

    $40K should not be an acceptable living wage anywhere, any time, for anyone who has worked enough and put in all the other bullshit in order to be remunerated properly. Many of the suits would have you think you'd be living like the Pied Fucking Piper on that chickenfeed, which shows how hopelessly out of touch they are with the real-world needs of their "people."

    There are few greater feelings of high anxiety than working a decent job that you are duly qualified for, and have angled for your entire adult life, and yet at the same time being functionally piss-poor in a New York, Seattle, Boston, Los Angeles, and on down the line.
     
  7. slappy4428

    slappy4428 Active Member

    http://www.startribune.com/nation/48963831.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUUsZ

    Boston Globe, largest union reach tentative agreement; Guild members must still vote to OK it

    Associated Press

    BOSTON - The Boston Globe and its largest union have reached a tentative agreement that will save the newspaper $10 million through salary and benefit cuts.

    The Globe and the Boston Newspaper Guild issued separate e-mail statements late Tuesday announcing the agreement. The deal is scheduled to come to a vote before Guild membership — made up of 700 editorial, advertising and business employees — on July 20.
     
  8. Joe Williams

    Joe Williams Well-Known Member

    So now we know the real value of "lifetime job guarantees":

    They're worth the difference between a 5.94 percent wage cut and a 23 percent wage cut.

    The next union that takes a proposal of "lifetime" anything back to its membership should immediately be shot.
     
  9. SF_Express

    SF_Express Active Member

    Well, Joe, not to be simplistic about it, but the odds of "lifetime" anything ever being offered to anybody again are, simply, none. Not even worth mentioning slim.
     
  10. WriteThinking

    WriteThinking Well-Known Member

    And, these days, no one would ever expect it.
     
  11. Joe Williams

    Joe Williams Well-Known Member

    That's my point, though. It was silly to even negotiate "lifetime" this or that when tough times and the next round of contract talks could swat it away. Especially when those voting aren't the ones necessarily the ones with the "lifetime" whatevers.

    Guess part of me thinks a union that negotiates "lifetime" this or that for its members needs to throw itself on that grenade in all future talks. I know that's completely unrealistic, but "lifetime" ought to be excised from people's vocabulary if neither side is going to back it up. Just plain silly.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page