|
UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
FIRST REGION
In the Matter of
PROVIDENCE JOURNAL
COMPANY
And
PROVIDENCE NEWSPAPER GUILD,
TNG-CWA, LOCAL 31041, AFL-CIO
| |
Cases
1-CA-37763
1-CA- 38129
1-CA-38546
1-CA-38627 |
SECOND ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES,
AMENDED CONSOLIDATED
COMPLAINT AND FURTHER NOTICE OF HEARING
Upon a charges and amended charges filed in December
1999 and May, July, and December 2000, by Providence Newspaper Guild,
TNG-CWA, Local 31041, AFL-CIO, herein called the Union, an Order Consolidating
Cases, Consolidated Complaint and Notice of Hearing issued on December
20, 2000 in Cases 1-CA-37763 and 1-CA-38129 against Providence Journal
Company, herein called Respondent, and the Union has charged in Cases
1-CA-38546 and 1-CA-38627 that Respondent has been engaging in unfair
labor practices as set forth in the National Labor Relations Act, 29
U.S.C. Sec. 151 et seq., herein called the Act. Based thereon, and in
order to avoid unnecessary costs and delay, the Acting General Counsel,
by the undersigned, pursuant to Section 102.33 of the Rules and Regulations
of the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board, ORDERS
that these cases be consolidated.
These cases having been consolidated, the Acting General Counsel, by
the undersigned, pursuant to Section 10(b) of the Act and Section 102.15
of the Board's Rules and Regulations, issues this Second Order Consolidating
Cases, Amended Consolidated Complaint and Further Notice of Hearing
and alleges as follows:
1.(a) The charge in Case l-CA-37763 was filed by the Union on December
13, 1999, and a copy was served by certified mail on Respondent on December
14, 1999.
(b)The first amended charge in Case 1-CA-37763 was filed by the Union
on December 27, 1999, and a copy was served by certified mail on Respondent
on December 27, 1999.
(c)The second amended charge in Case 1-CA-37763 was filed by the Union
on December 15, 2000, and a copy was served by certified mail on Respondent
on December 18, 2000.
(d)The charge in Case 1-CA-38l29 was filed by the Union on May 8, 2000,
and a copy was served by certified mail on Respondent on May 9, 2000.
(e)The amended charge in Case l-CA-38129 was filed by the Union on July
25, 2000, and a copy was served by certified mail on Respondent on July
27, 2000.
(f)The charge in Case l-CA-38546 was filed by the Union on October 26,
2000, and a copy was served by certified mail on Respondent on October
30, 2000.
(g)The amended charge in Case 1-CA-38546 was filed by the Union on November
13, 2000, and a copy was served by certified mail on Respondent on November
24, 2000.
(h)The charge in Case l-CA-38627 was filed by the Union on November
29, 2000, and a copy was served by certified mail on Respondent on December
8, 2000.
2. At all material times, Respondent, a corporation
with an office and place of business in Providence, Rhode Island, herein
called Respondent's Providence facility, has been engaged in the publication
of the Providence Journal, a daily newspaper.
3. Annually, in conducting its business operations described
above in paragraph 2, Respondent derives gross revenues in excess of
$200,000, holds membership in or subscribes to interstate news services,
publishes nationally syndicated features, and advertises nationally
sold products.
4. At all material times, Respondent has been an employer
engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(2), (6), and (7)
of the Act.
5. At all material times, the Union has been a labor
organization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.
6. At all material times, the following individuals
held the positions set forth opposite their respective names and have
been supervisors of Respondent within the meaning of Section 2(11) of
the Act and agents of Respondent within the meaning of Section 2(13)
of the Act:
Thomas J. McDonough Human Resources Manager
Peter Phipps Managing Editor
John Kostrzewa Financial Editor
7. About March 22, 2000, Respondent changed the work
assignment of its employee Brian Jones.
8. Respondent engaged in the conduct described above
in paragraph 7 because Brian Jones and other employees of Respondent
formed, joined or assisted the Union and engaged in concerted activities,
and to discourage employees from engaging in those activities.
9.(a)The following employees of Respondent, as set forth
at Article 1, page 1-N of the January 1, 1997 News collective-bargaining
agreement between Respondent and the Union, herein called the News Unit,
constitute a unit appropriate for collective bargaining within the meaning
of Section 9(b) of the Act:
All employees employed in Respondent's News and Editorial Department,
excluding: elected officers of the publisher; executive editor; deputy
executive editor; managing editors; metropolitan managing editor; associate
managing editor; systems editor; news editor; night production editor,
regional news editors, metro edition editor; city editor; assistant
city editor; editor of the editorial pages; chief editorial writer;
editorial columnist; assistant managing editors; sports editor; financial
editor; assistant director-photography and graphics; librarian; editor
for technology and development; confidential secretaries; and, except
as specifically provided in the parties' collective-bargaining agreement,
irregular extras.
(b)Since about 1958 and at all material times, the Union has been the
designated exclusive collective-bargaining representative of the News
Unit, and since then the Union has been recognized as the representative
by Respondent. This recognition has been embodied in a series of collective-bargaining
agreements, the most recent of which was effective from January 1, 1997
through December 31, 1999.
(c)At all times since about 1958, based on Section 9(a) of the Act,
the Union has been the exclusive collective-bargaining representative
of the News Unit.
10.(a) The following employees of Respondent, as set
forth at Article 1, page 1-A of the January 1, 1997 Advertising collective-bargaining
agreement between Respondent and the Union, herein called the Advertising
Unit, constitute a unit appropriate for collective bargaining within
the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act.
All employees employed in Respondent's Advertising Department,
Systems Department, and Janitorial Department, excluding; elected officers
of Respondent; senior sales directors; sales directors; creative director;
manager advertising planning; advertising systems development manager;
secretaries to: vice-president advertising, senior sales director personnel,
senior sales director operations, and manager advertising planning;
director of systems; systems analysts; programmers; research director;
pre-publishing department manager; assistant pre-publishing managers;
promotion director; promotion manager; cleaning manager; and except
as specifically provided in the parties' collective-bargaining agreement,
irregular extras.
(b)Since about 1969, and at all material times, the Union has been the
designated exclusive collective-bargaining representative of the Advertising
Unit, and since then the Union has been recognized as the representative
by Respondent. This recognition has been embodied in a series of collective-bargaining
agreements, the most recent of which was effective from January 1, 1997
through December 31, 1999.
(c)At all times since about 1969, based on Section 9(a) of the Act,
the Union has been the exclusive collective-bargaining representative
of the Advertising Unit.
11. About January 1, 2000, Respondent changed health
and dental insurance plans for employees in the News Unit and the Advertising
Unit.
12. About January 1, 2000, Respondent changed the cap
on employee contributions for medical insurance for employees in the
News Unit and the Advertising Unit.
13. About January 1, 2000, Respondent changed the eligibility
criteria for employee enrollment in medical and dental insurance plans
for employees in the News Unit and the Advertising Unit.
14. About January 1, 2000, Respondent changed parking
and bus pass benefits for employees in the News Unit and the Advertising
Unit.
15. About January 1, 2000, Respondent changed vacation
eligibility and gainsharing benefits, and eliminated one floating holiday,
for employees in the News Unit and the Advertising Unit.
16. About January 1, 2000, Respondent eliminated the
me-too and status quo clauses in the expired collective-bargaining agreements
of the News Unit and the Advertising Unit.
17. About April 26, 2000, Respondent modified the job
description of Editorial Assistant in the News Unit.
18. About June 15, 2000, Respondent subcontracted Advertising
Unit Work in the selling of advertising in a business review page.
19. About June 21, 2000, Respondent instituted a mandatory
training program for on-line sales representatives in the Advertising
Unit, which required out of town travel.
20. About August 1, 2000, the Respondent changed the
Advertising Incentive Program in the Advertising Unit.
21. About September 11, 2000, Respondent changed the
method of payment for the use of taxicabs from a voucher system to a
reimbursement system in the News Unit.
22. About October 19, 2000, Respondent changed the method of providing
information regarding new employees and irregular extras from a weekly
basis to a monthly basis in both the News Unit and the Advertising Unit.
23. The subjects set forth above in paragraphs 11 through
22 relate to wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment
of the News Unit and of the Advertising Unit and are mandatory subjects
for the purposes of collective bargaining.
24. Respondent engaged in the conduct described above
in paragraphs 11 through 22 without prior notice to the Union, and without
affording the Union an opportunity to bargain with Respondent with respect
to this conduct and the effects of this conduct.
25.(a) About September 16, 1999, the Union, by letter
Administrator Timothy F. Schick, requested that furnish the Union with
information regarding 1999 dental insurance elections by employees in
the News Unit and by employees in the Advertising Unit.
(b) From about September 16, 1999 to about October 28, 1999, Respondent,
by Thomas McDonough, unreasonably delayed in furnishing the Union with
the information requested by it as described above in subparagraph 25(a).
26. (a) About October 6, 1999, the Union, by letter from Union Administrator
Timothy F. Schick, requested that Respondent furnish the Union with
the plan descriptions for the health and dental plans offered to Respondent's
employees.
(b) From about October 6, 1999 to about November 24, 1999, Respondent,
by Thomas McDonough, unreasonably delayed in furnishing the Union with
the information requested by it as described above in subparagraph 26(a).
27. (a) About November 19, 1999, the Union, by Union Administrator Timothy
F. Schick, orally requested that Respondent furnish the Union with the
following information regarding the employee parking proposals made
by Respondent during the negotiation for succeeding agreements to the
1997-1999 News Unit collective-bargaining agreement and 1997-1999 Advertising
Unit collective-bargaining agreement:
The maximum number of available parking spaces; the location of the
spaces; the plan for allocating spaces; which employees would be eligible
for the parking benefits; whether the bus passes applied to the Rhode
Island transit system only or included Massachusetts transit as well;
and under what circumstances the proposed policy would change.
(b)From about November 19, 2000 to about December 28, 1999, Respondent,
by Thomas McDonough, unreasonably delayed in furnishing the Union with
the information requested by it as described above in subparagraph 27
(a).
28.(a) Since about December 5, 1999, the Union, by letter from Union
Administrator Timothy F. Schick, has requested that Respondent furnish
the Union with information regarding the health and dental insurance
proposals made by Respondent during the negotiations for preceeding
agreements to the 1997-1999 News Unit collective-bargaining agreement
and the 1997-1999 Advertising Unit collective-bargaining agreement.
(b) Since about December 5, 1999, Respondent, by Thomas McDonough, has
failed and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested
by it, as described above in subparagraph 28(a).
29.(a) Since about January 14, 2000, March 10, 2000, and April 26, 2000,
the Union, by letters from Union Administrator Timothy F. Schick, has
requested that Respondent furnish the Union with information regarding
the transfer of employee Stephen Daigneault to a non-unit position.
(b)Since about January 14, 2000, Respondent, by Thomas McDonough, has
failed and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested
by it, as described above in subparagraph 29(a)
30.(a) Since about February 4, 2000, March 10, 2000, and April 26, 2000,
the Union, by letters from Union Administrator Timothy F. Schick, has
requested that Respondent furnish the Union with information regarding
gainsharing.
(b)Since about February 4, 2000, Respondent, by Thomas McDonough, has
failed and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested
by it, as described above in subparagraph 30(a).
31.(a) Since about March 10, 2000 and April 26, 2000, the Union, by
letters from Union Administrator Timothy F. Schick, has requested that
Respondent furnish the Union with information regarding small grid payments.
(b)Since about March 10, 2000, Respondent, by Thomas McDonough, has
failed and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested
by it, as described above in subparagraph 31(a)
32.(a) Since about March 17, 2000 and March 30, 2000, the Union, by
letters from Union Administrator Timothy F. Schick, has requested that
Respondent furnish the Union with information regarding pension and
401(k) benefits.
(b)Since about March 17, 2000, Respondent, by Thomas McDonough, has
failed and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested
by it, as described above in subparagraph 32(a)
33.(a) Since about April 13, 2000 and April 26, 2000, the Union, by
letters from Union Administrator Timothy F. Schick, has requested that
Respondent furnish the Union with payroll memos.
(b)Since about April 13, 2000, Respondent, by Thomas McDonough, has
failed and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested
by it, as described above in subparagraph 33 (a)
34.(a) Since about June 20, 2000, July 10, 2000, and July 24, 2000,
the Union, by letters from Union Administrator Timothy F. Schick, has
requested that Respondent furnish the Union with information regarding
the suspension of Andrew McKnight.
(b)Since about June 20, 2000, Respondent, by Thomas McDonough, has failed
and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested by it,
as described above in subparagraph 34(a)
35.(a) Since about June 1, 2000 and July 18, 2000, the Union, by letters
from Union Administrator Timothy F. Schick, has requested that Respondent
furnish the Union with information regarding company owned parking lots.
(b)Since about June 1, 2000, Respondent, by Thomas McDonough, has failed
and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested by it,
as described above in subparagraph 35(a)
36.(a) Since about June 1, 2000 and July 18, 2000, the Union, by letters
from Union Administrator Timothy F. Schick, has requested that Respondent
furnish the Union with information regarding digital convergence work.
(b)Since about June 1, 2000, Respondent, by Thomas McDonough, has failed
and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested by it,
as described above in subparagraph 36(a).
37.(a) Since about July 18, 2000, the Union, by letter from Union Administrator
Timothy F. Schick, has requested that Respondent furnish the Union with
information regarding agency temporaries employed in bargaining unit
positions.
(b)Since about July 18, 2000, Respondent, by Thomas McDonough, has failed
and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested by it,
as described above in subparagraph 37(a)
38.(a) Since about September 8, 2000, the Union, by letter from Union
Administrator Timothy F. Schick, has requested that Respondent furnish
the Union with information regarding the Advertising Incentive pay plan.
(b)Since about September 8, 2000, Respondent, by Thomas McDonough, has
failed and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested
by it, as described above in subparagraph 38(a)
39.(a) Since about October 26, 2000 and November 15, 2000, the Union,
by letters from Union Administrator Timothy F. Schick, has requested
that Respondent furnish the Union with information regarding unit employee
401(k) Accounts.
(b)Since about October 26, 2000, Respondent, by Thomas McDonough, has
failed and refused the Union with the information requested by it, as
described above in subparagraph 39(a)
40.(a) Since about October 30, 2000 and November 15, 2000, the Union,
by letters from Union Administrator Timothy F. Schick, has requested
that Respondent furnish the Union with information regarding unit employees
leaves of absence, and information regarding employees' receipt of long
term disability payments.
(b)Since about October 30, 2000, Respondent, by Thomas McDonough, has
failed and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested
by it, as described above in subparagraph 40 (a)
41.(a) Since about November 8, 2000, the Union, by letter from Union
Administrator Timothy F. Schick, has requested that Respondent furnish
the Union with information regarding medical and dental plans being
offered to unit employees.
(b)Since about November 8, 2000, Respondent, by Thomas McDonough, has
failed and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested
by it, as described above in subparagraph 41 (a).
42. The information requested by the Union, as described above in paragraphs
25 through 41 is necessary for, and relevant to, the Union's performance
of its duties as the exclusive collective-bargaining representative
of the Advertising Unit and the News Unit.
43. By the conduct described above in paragraphs 7 and
8, Respondent has been discriminating in regard to the hire or tenure
or terms or conditions of employment of its employees, thereby discouraging
membership in a labor organization in violation of Section 8(a) (3)
and (1) of the Act.
44. By the conduct described above in paragraphs 11
through 22 and 24, and paragraphs 25 through 42, Respondent has been
failing and refusing to bargain collectively and in good faith with
the exclusive collective-bargaining representative of its employees
in violation of Section 8(a) (5) and (1) of the Act.
45. The unfair labor practices of Respondent described above affect
commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that commencing at 11:00
a.m. on the 2nd day of April, 2001, and on consecutive days thereafter
a hearing will be conducted at a location to be determined in Providence,
Rhode Island before an administrative law judge of the Board on the
allegations in this amended consolidated complaint, at which time and
place any party within the meaning of Section 102.8 of the Board's Rules
and Regulations will have the right to appear and present testimony.
Respondent is further notified that, pursuant to Sections 102.20 and
102.21 of the Board's Rules and Regulations, Respondent shall file with
the undersigned an original and four (4) copies of an answer to this
amended consolidated complaint within 14 days from service of it, and
that, unless Respondent does so, all the allegations in the amended
consolidated complaint shall be considered to be admitted to be true
and shall be so found by the Board. Respondent is also notified that
pursuant to the Board's Rules and Regulations, Respondent shall serve
a copy of its answer on each of the other parties.
Form NLRB-4338, Notice, and Form NLRB-4668, Summary of Standard Procedures
in Formal Hearings Held Before the National Labor Relations Board in
Unfair Labor Practice Proceedings Pursuant to Section 10 of the National
Labor Relations Act, As Amended, are attached.
Dated at Boston, Massachusetts this 28th day of February,
2001.
/s/ Rosemary Pye
Rosemary Pye, Regional Director
National Labor Relations Board
First Region
Thomas P. O'Neill, Jr., Federal Building
10 Causeway Street, 6th Floor
Boston, Massachusetts 02222-1072
|