UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
FIRST REGION

FOURTH ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES, SECOND AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT AND FURTHER NOTICE OF HEARING

These cases having been consolidated, the 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 Fourth Order Consolidating Cases, Third Amended Consolidated Complaint and Further Notice of Hearing and alleges as follows:

1.

(a) The charge in Case 1-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 l-CA-38129 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 1-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 l-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.

(i) The charge in Case 1-CA-38743 was filed by the Union on January 18, 2001, and a copy was served by certified mail on Respondent on January 23, 2001.

(j) The charge in Case 1-CA-38888 was filed by the Union on March 13, 2001, and a copy was served by certified mail on Respondent on March 22, 2001.

(k) The charge in Case 1-CA-39123 was filed by the Union on June 5, 2001, and a copy was served by certified mail on Respondent on June 7, 2001.

(1) The amended charge in Case 1-CA-39123 was filed by the Union on August 24, 2001, a copy was served by certified mail on Respondent on August 30, 2001.

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:

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 re-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 in the News Unit from a voucher system to a reimbursement system.

22. About October 12, 2000, Respondent changed the standard by which employees were permitted to take excused absences for union business in both the News Unit and the Advertising Unit.

23. 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.

24. About December 2000, Respondent instituted a policy by which it garnished employees' wages to compensate for incorrect vacation entitlements in the Advertising unit.

25. About January 2001, Respondent modified the payment of overtime and scheduling of hours for Sports Department Copy Editors in the News Unit in connection with a scheduled mandatory meeting held on January 31, 2001.

26. About April 2001, Respondent refused to recognize the Union as the representative of its employees by failing and refusing to apply the terms and conditions of employment set forth in both the Advertising and News collective-bargaining agreements to certain employees performing bargaining unit work.

27. About May 2001, Respondent, by Thomas McDonough, engaged in direct dealing with News Unit employee Karen Ziner regarding accommodations for her medical disability.

28. About May 2001, Respondent modified the job duties of porters in the Advertising Unit.

29. About May 2001 and continuing to date, Respondent has refused to bargain over the modification of the job duties of porters in the Advertising Unit, or the effects of the modification.

30. About May 2001, Respondent modified the conditions of employment provided for Advertising and News Unit employees in the Fountain Street Facility by removing the 24-hour security guard stationed at that location.

31. About May 2001, Respondent discontinued the payment of a wage differential for working in a higher classification (small grid) for certain employees employed in the News Unit.

32. About June 2001, Respondent violated the parties' June , 1999 interim agreement regarding the use of Minority Interns in both the Advertising and the News Units.

33. About June 2001 and continuing to date, Respondent has refused to bargain over the accommodations for News Unit employee, Karen Ziner, regarding her medical disability.

34. The subjects set forth above in paragraphs 11 through 3 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.

35. Respondent engaged in the conduct described above in paragraphs 11 through 33 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.

36.

(a) About September 16, 1999, the Union, by letter from Union Administrator Timothy F. Schick, requested that Respondent furnish the Union with information regarding 1999 health and dental insurance elections by employees in the News Unit and by employees in the Advertising Unit.

(b) From about September 16, 1999 to about October28, 1999, Respondent, by Human Resources Manager Thomas McDonough, unreasonably delayed in furnishing the Union with the information requested by it as described above in subparagraph 6(a)

37.

(a) About October 6, 1999, the Union, by letter from 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 McDonough, unreasonably delayed in furnishing the Union with the information requested by it as described above in subparagraph 37 (a)

38. (a) About November 19, 1999, the Union, by 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, 1999 to about December 28, 1999, Respondent, by McDonough, unreasonably delayed in furnishing the Union with the information requested by it as described above in subparagraph 38 (a).

39.

(a) Since about December 5, 1999, the Union, by letter from Schick, has requested that Respondent furnish the Union with information regarding the health and dental insurance proposals made by Respondent during the negotiations for succeeding 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 McDonough, has failed and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested by it, as described above in subparagraph 39(a).

40.

(a) Since about January 14, 2000, March 10, 2000, and April 26, 2000, the Union, by letters from 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 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 February 4, 2000, March 10, 2000, and April 26, 2000, the Union, by letters from Schick, has requested that Respondent furnish the Union with information regarding gainsharing.

(b) Since about February 4, 2000, Respondent, by McDonough, has failed and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested by it, as described above in subparagraph 41(a).

42.

(a) Since about March 10, 2000 and April 26, 2000, the Union, by letters from Schick, has requested that Respondent furnish the Union with information regarding small grid payments.

(b) Since about March 10, 2000, Respondent, by McDonough, has failed and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested by it, as described above in subparagraph 42(a).

43.

(a) Since about March 17, 2000 and March 30, 2000, the Union, by letters from Schick, has requested that Respondent furnish the Union with information regarding pension and 401(k) benefits.

(b) Since about March 17, 2000, Respondent, by McDonough, has failed and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested by it, as described above in subparagraph 43(a).

44.

(a) Since about April 13, 2000 and April 26, 2000, the Union, by letters from Schick, has requested that Respondent furnish the Union with payroll memos.

(b) Since about April 13, 2000, Respondent, by McDonough, has failed and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested by it, as described above in subparagraph 44 (a).

45.

(a) Since about June 20, 2000, July 10, 2000, and July 24, 2000, the Union, by letters from Schick, has requested that Respondent furnish the Union with information regarding the suspension of Andrew McKnight.

(b) Since about June 20, 2000, Respondent, by McDonough, has failed and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested by it, as described above in subparagraph 45(a).

46.

(a) Since about June 1, 2000 and July 18, 2000, the Union, by letters from Schick, has requested that Respondent furnish the Union with information regarding company owned parking lots.

(b) Since about June 1, 2000, Respondent, by McDonough, has failed and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested by it, as described above in subparagraph 46(a).

47.

(a) Since about June 1, 2000 and July 18, 2000, the Union, by letters from Schick, has requested that Respondent furnish the Union with information regarding digital convergence work.

(b) Since about June 1, 2000, Respondent, by McDonough, has failed and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested by it, as described above in subparagraph 47(a).

48.

(a) Since about July 18, 2000, the Union, by letter from 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 McDonough, has failed and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested by it, as described above in subparagraph 48(a).

49.

(a) Since about September 8, 2000, the Union, by letter from Schick, has requested that Respondent furnish the Union with information regarding the Advertising Incentive pay plan.

(b) Since about September 8, 2000, Respondent, by McDonough, has failed and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested by it, as described above in subparagraph 49(a).

50.

(a) Since about October 26, 2000 and November 15, 2000, the Union, by letters from Schick, has requested that Respondent furnish the Union with information regarding unit employee 401(k) Accounts.

(b) Since about October 26, 2000, Respondent, by McDonough, has failed and refused the Union with the information requested by it, as described above in subparagraph 50(a).

51.

(a) Since about October 30, 2000 and November 15, 2000, the Union, by letters from 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 McDonough, has failed and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested by it, as described above in subparagraph 51(a).

52.

(a) Since about November 8, 2000, the Union, by letter from 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 McDonough, has failed and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested by it, as described above in subparagraph 52(a).

53.

(a) About December 7, 2000, the Union, by letter from Schick, requested that Respondent furnish the Union with the job descriptions for the classifications of Inside Telephone Sales and the Classification of Display Counter Salesperson.

(b) From about December 7, 2000 to about April 16, 2001 Respondent, by McDonough, unreasonably delayed in furnishing the Union with the information requested by it as described above in subparagraph 53 (a).

54.

(a) Since about January 25, 2001, the Union, by letter from Schick, has requested that Respondent furnish the Union with the information relating to pay incentives in the Advertising Unit.

(b) Since about January 25, 2001, Respondent, by McDonough, has failed and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested by it, as described above in subparagraph 54(a).

55.

(a) Since about February 25, 2001, the Union, by letter from Schick, has requested that Respondent furnish the Union with the information relating to the Profit Performance Bonus (PPB) Plan.

(b) Since about February 25, 2001, Respondent, by McDonough has failed and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested by it, as described above in subparagraph 55(a).

56.The information requested by the Union, as described above in paragraphs 36 through 55 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.

57. About January 15, 2001, Respondent, by Howard G. Sutton, threatened its Advertising and News Unit employees that it would make a regressive proposal in collective bargaining because its employees engaged in protected concerted activities, i.e., a consumer boycott.

58. About February 2, 2001, Respondent, by Thomas McDonough, made a regressive proposal in collective bargaining because its Advertising and News Unit employees engaged in protected concerted activities, i.e., a consumer boycott.

59. Since about February 14, 2001, Respondent, by McDonough, has failed and refused to bargain for succeeding collective-bargaining agreements for the News Unit and the Advertising Unit with the Union as the exclusive collective-bargaining representative of the News Unit and the Advertising Unit.

60. By the conduct described above in paragraph 57, Respondent has been interfering with, restraining and coercing employees in the exercise of their rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act in violation of Section 8(a) (1) of the Act.

61. 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.

62. By the conduct described above in paragraphs 11 through 33, paragraphs 36 through 55, and paragraphs 58 and 59, 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.

63. 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 25th day of February, 2002, and on consecutive days thereafter a hearing will be conducted at the Federal Building, 380 Westminster Street, Third Floor, Social Security's Conference Room, Providence, Rhode Island 02903 before an administrative law judge of the Board on the allegations in this third 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 third amended consolidated complaint within 14 days from service of it, and that, unless Respondent does so, all the allegations in the third 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 September, 2001.