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!

Poynter: Philly Inquirer & Daily News to reduce newsroom by 37

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by Gonna Buy me a Dog, Feb 15, 2012.

  1. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    Those thousands of lives are already being affected, and those owners are collecting the big bucks to find the different solution.

    Open the books, let the union look at them, and if they are as bad as the the owners say they are, then the union should be prepared to make concessions. And if they don't, then it's on them.

    But to do that, the owners need to establish some trust and show their workers the books.
     
  2. boundforboston

    boundforboston Well-Known Member

    The papers wouldn't necessarily have to be sold together, though, right?
     
  3. Drip

    Drip Active Member

    That's the problem Baron. The owners aren't opening the books.
     
  4. Drip

    Drip Active Member

    Good question. I can see it going either way.
     
  5. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    Which is why the union should call their bluff.

    The owners just bought the papers. Either they bought them already planning to shut them down, or bought them planning on trying to screw the union over. Or both. Either way, the union doesn't win by it.

    If they are truly telling the truth about how poorly the papers are doing, then they wouldn't have a problem showing the books to the union. By refusing, it looks like they're just lying to the union.
     
  6. Drip

    Drip Active Member

    Lots of lies Baron. And to be honest, I'm not exactly sold that the Guild has been totally honest. Plenty of political spinning going around on both sides.
     
  7. Drip

    Drip Active Member

    Here's a kick in the groin, Guild presiden Dan Gross took a buyout. Ugggh!!!!!
    http://www.philly.com/philly/business/20130117_Philadelphia_Daily_News_staffer_quits_as_Newspaper_Guild_president.html
     
  8. Drip

    Drip Active Member

    More news. The guild will bargain with parent company.
    http://www.philly.com/philly/business/homepage/20130117_Newspaper_Guild_agrees_to_early_talks_on_contract.html
     
  9. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    Sucks for those employees. First thing union should demand is to see the books. If the contract needs to be negotiated nine months early, then the company either must be on shaky ground to begin with or the new owners are just total assholes who want to steal every penny they can get.
     
  10. Drip

    Drip Active Member

    Baron, it's a FUBAR situation on many levels. The truth is that the Guild doesn't have the power it once had. There's no bargaining leverage and with Gross stepping down and out, to say that morale is at low is an understatement. Yet every Guild post ends with "Yours in Solidarity." Should change that to "Yours in diarrhea."
     
  11. Joe Williams

    Joe Williams Well-Known Member

    Bakers union sure showed 'em at Hostess. Know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em.
     
  12. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    They would have lost even if they had folded them Hostess wanted them to take about 35 percent paycut, which would have left them at around $11 an hour. Yeah, yeah, I know, it's better than nothing. At that rate, the bakers might as well find a different career anyways.

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/11/18/1162786/-Inside-the-Hostess-Bankery

    The ship is already sinking, why bother wasting the last few moments of your life helping the executives into the lifeboats?
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page