Unsettled Grievances
Head to Labor Board

The Buffalo News will soon find itself at the National Labor Relations Board answering two unfair labor practice charges to be filed later this month by the Buffalo Newspaper Guild.

The first charge involves the paper’s refusal to allow an accounting department employee to take unpaid family leave to care for her mother following back surgery. Article 28, Section 2 of the contract allows members up to 6 months unpaid leave to care for a member of their immediate family. In a violation of the contract, The News required the employee to use vacation time for the leave.

“The fabric of the family is changing. Many times today, particularly when parents divorce and don't remarry, children end up responsible for the care of a parent,” said the employee, who asked to remain unnamed. “Business needs to be more in tune with this.”

The News was responsive to this concern in 1990, when it agreed to allow employees to take unpaid leave to care for dependent family members. The Congress of the United States was “in tune” with this need in 1993, when it passed the Family Medical Leave Act, which also allows employees to take leave to care for ill family members.

“The member wanted to take only four days of leave - two while her mom was in the hospital and two when her mom came home following the surgery,” said local service representative Marian Needham. “The law aside, a plain reading of the contract language allows for that time to be unpaid.”

Compounding the irrationality of The News’ stance is the fact that another employee from the same department was allowed to take unpaid leave last year to care for her mother during and following surgery.

“How The News can substantiate refusing unpaid leave to one employee while granting it to another under identical circumstances is a mystery the NLRB will have to solve, as The News has failed to raise any reasonable defense in the grievance procedure,” Needham said. If the NLRB perceives The News’ refusal to allow unpaid leave as a unilateral change in policy, they will issue a complaint against the paper.

The second unfair labor practice charge relates to editorial management’s decision to use an excluded news editor to replace a Guild-covered assistant news editor who was promoted to another job. The news editor, a member of management, is now responsible for doing both jobs.

The union filed a grievance over the assignment of union work to non-union employees, and management has refused to make any adjustment.

“What The News has done is to unilaterally apply their work assignment proposal in the newsroom before reaching agreement at the bargaining table. That’s a per se violation of the National Labor Relations Act,” Needham said.

The company’s work assignment proposal - which has consumed months of bargaining - would allow excluded newsroom employees to perform all bargaining unit work. The proposal has been rejected vehemently by bargaining team members and rank-and-file workers.

“Once again its about our jurisdiction,” said Jerry Sullivan, editorial vice chair. “It’s imperative that if we’re going to be a union we need to protect the work that is ours. Over the years, the failure to do this in the newsroom has created the problems we’ve been forced to take on in these negotiations.”