Organizing committee member
Pantagraph newspaper
BLOOMINGTON, Ill.— The lady from the union first arrived on our sidewalk on May 1.
Her name is Cathy Schwegmann, and within hours the internal dynamics of the Pantagraph newspaper had changed.
Some employees whispered. Some talked aloud. Ownership immediately began a smear campaign. Is this woman so powerful? I think she will assure you that she is not. But she had become a valve for frustration that has been building since Lee Enterprises began imposing its style of management on the Bloomington-based Pantagraph– a style that emphasizes money and control.
Ms. Schwegmann is an organizer for the St. Louis Newspaper Guild. What surprised her, she later told me, is that so many people talked to her openly about the frustrations at the Pantagraph under two years of ownership by Iowa-based Lee.
In less than two days more than 40 employees answered questions for her survey, a number she thinks is startlingly high, especially when considering that managers could see people talking to her.
I and others from within the paper responded to the opportunity presented by the Guild. We formed an organizing committee and intend to fully unionize the paper. We intend to hold an election with neutral-party monitoring, win it and then press right into contract negations and contract completion. Then, we intend to hold Lee and ourselves accountable to the contract.
Authority and responsibility will become shared, to a certain degree, although ownership remains in control of the operation.
It’s not such a radical notion, but you’d think it is a plot of PURE EVIL based on Lee Enterprises and the Pantagraph publisher, Linda Lindus, reacting with hostility and insult.
Ideally, Lee would at least respect us as we seek to bring bargaining power, cohesion and professional pride through union among a group of roughly 175 people.
Those familiar with McLean County know the tradition: Labor and management work together, both on product and on community projects. They cooperate when they can and resolve issues civilly when possible.
Lee hasn’t understood this in the early going.
Publisher Lindus, the managers directly under her and Lee Enterprises resorted to a tired script. It’s the one that portrays the Guild organizers as outside agitators who only care about dues and who will poison the atmosphere at the Pantagraph.
Lee has proven it cares about money – very, very much – and it especially cares about sending it to stockholders and executives who don’t live in this community. So, the “outsider” play by the company hits with a thud. It has become a joke.
Rather than apologize for or hide our origins, I openly thank our colleagues in St. Louis for helping us. There is no way, logistically, that this building can sprout a union organically – especially when a company is willing to use its power, money and company time to counteract it. And as the atmosphere already was poisoned, I think a little balance and a large dose of speaking truth to power will do us all some good.
They only want your dues? Perhaps it doesn’t occur to the newspaper publisher that we believe in a cause.
But these insults pale compared to informational sessions imposed upon us in June.
In my session, Ms. Lindus presided, along with General Manager Barry Winterland. They showed us what amounts to a poorly produced propaganda film to demonstrate how unions organize.
The organizer was a sleazy outside manipulator who coached dupes from inside the firm.
The employees on the slimebag’s committee were labeled repeatedly by the narrator as “in-house pushers.” These pushers were to lie to, mislead and cajole their co-workers to get them to sign cards seeking union recognition.
If you are unfamiliar with our workplace, I’m sure you won’t be shocked when I now report to you that one of the chief complaints we hear is that Ms. Lindus and Lee ownership don’t respect us.
Complaints are voluminous, and Pantagraph employees from the organizing committee summarized most of them into three themes.
1. Fairness in wages and benefits.
2. Excellence in journalism and business practices.
3. Unity among employees.
Fairness and pay issues
In a June 8 letter mailed home to all employees, Ms. Lindus stated: “TRUTH: No one has had pay reduced.”
I talked to two advertising department sources. Both said the same thing. Lee has such high revenue expectations that the end result is that expert salespeople saw their pay drop. Reduced, definitely, I was told. Others here received meager increases. Others received no pay increases.
In one letter from the publisher, she pointed out that 401(k) contributions rose. True. Just know that our former owner, Pulitzer, was providing a pension, while Lee does not. Whether or not you come out ahead with the contribution vs. pension depends on how soon you die.
It could be coincidental but after Ms. Schwegmann arrived on the scene, Ms. Lindus promised future raises. So, do we take Ms. Lindus at her word and forget all this union business? Personally, I will vote to let her show her sincerity at the bargaining table.
Which is to say that I believe we need to substantially change the dynamics of how the Pantagraph operates.
Under the current model, ownership and management have absolute control. The company decides wages, commissions, benefits and conditions. Management can fire anyone for any reason. Those of us who favor a union want to bargain over wages, benefits and conditions, and we want our jobs protected so that “just cause” is shown before anyone is terminated.
Excellence in business and journalism
The Guild dares to think that an enfranchised, motivated and fairly paid work crew organized under a union will perform better. We suffer under bad morale, and that is no excuse for bad performance. But this I can say for myself: I have felt more enthusiasm for journalism and for the product since I joined this landmark effort to change the work environment.
Further, with the union, there is another voice in the workplace – even though it may not have final authority on most business matters. We can advocate for better product and to an end of the more-with-less approach that has harmed our paper under both Lee and Pulitzer.
Unity sought
Before any of this happens, we must seek unity in purpose among and within departments as we organize and then prevail in an election. We continue to add members to our committee and continue to welcome input. That unity will be crucial in securing and enforcing a contract.
Excluded will be the press operators because they already are unionized. We plan on becoming kin with them.
At this point, we also proceed under the assumption that managers with the power to hire, fire and discipline will be exempt from the union. But they needn’t become adversaries. Under editor Mark Pickering’s leadership, they have worked tirelessly to give the best product under difficult circumstances.
The company, too, doesn’t have to be The Enemy.
I’m hoping for a change from its current course of hostility. The company could embrace a partnership for a better product. That’s an ideal and it will be the best for all: Workers, company, advertisers and readers. Naïve dreams? Perhaps. But it’s no crazier than our Chamber of Commerce recognizing our local Laborers as “small business of the year.”
Lee also could move in a most unwise direction and become still uglier in its approach. But should management retaliate against union proponents, the union will respond with strength.
We will follow the law, and Lee Enterprises and Ms. Lindus are on notice that they will face consequences unless they do likewise.
St. Louis Newspaper Guild business representative Shannon Duffy has officially informed Lee Enterprises and Ms. Lindus that any violation of our lawful rights will be counteracted through all legal means, including litigation and action through the National Labor Relations Board.
I absolutely believe him.
Published Tuesday, July 10, 2007