Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 16:37:05 -0400 To: Labor-Rap@csf.colorado.edu From: Christopher Rhomberg Subject: RE: media fellow Awhile back I wrote about an ASA grad student intern who was placed at the Detroit Free Press; here is an update: My email reply below summarizes the information I received. In short, the ASA avoided taking any stand on the placement and just referred my inquiry to the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the administrator of the program. In response to my further questions below, the ASA executive office wrote back on July 25 that they had discussed the issue and were ">going through the ASA archives for relevant documents and ha[ve] been >consulting our attorney about these matters." [!] Today, six weeks after my initial inquiry, the ASA still has not stated its own policy or position, if any, with regard to labor disputes or in the case of the Free Press. The ASA needs to establish a clear policy supporting fair and just labor relations with all the parties with whom it does business. Several persons have raised ideas for possible action, and I invite further discussion here. I will post again with more about this soon, Chris Rhomberg >Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 19:47:30 -0400 >To: Carla Howery , Felice Levine >From: Christopher Rhomberg >Subject: RE: media fellow >In-Reply-To: > >Executive Office >American Sociological Association > >I received by U.S. mail a letter from Carla Howery dated July 9 regarding the Media Fellow at the Detroit Free Press, and thank you for responding to my inquiry. Your letter included attached copies of letters from the AAAS and the Free Press management. The attachments state that the AAAS met with the Free Press' Recruitment and Development Editor and accepted the company's claim that the dispute was over, as stated in the copy of an e-mail from the DFP. > >In a dispute between two parties, it would seem logical, reasonable and fair to hear from both parties in order to determine the facts of the dispute. Yet nowhere in your correspondence do I find reference to any communication, by either the ASA or the AAAS, with the unions involved. This is important, as the interpretation of events provided by the Free Press management is strongly contradicted by the facts presented by the unions. For example, according to the unions, while the strike is over the employers are engaged in a lockout: about 1,200 workers are still illegally displaced from their jobs, and only about 550 employees have been returned to work. Over 180 people have been fired, and the unions have unfair labor practice charges pending in these cases. On June 19, 1997, the National Labor Relations Board ruled that the newspapers were guilty on 10 counts of unfair labor practices which had "caused" and "prolonged" the strike. The newspapers have appealed the charges, and the NLRB has delayed ruling on the case for over a year. Yet even if only one of the unfair labor charges is upheld, the newspapers will be liable for back pay for striking workers from February 1997. By contrast, the newspapers' charges against the unions for alleged racketeering are still pending, and have not been upheld by any judge. The attempt by the Free Press editor to separate newsroom from production employees is also misleading; the Detroit News and the Free Press have a Joint Operating Agreement through their Newspaper Agency, all of the unions have and continue to bargain together with the newspapers, and as yet no new contracts have been signed. > >The scope of these disagreements suggest that the dispute is still very much unsettled and should be taken seriously. As I wrote to you earlier, numerous local city, state and national civic and political leaders have criticized the newspapers' stance, along with tens of thousands of union supporters who have demonstrated in favor of a settlement which has not yet been achieved. While I am disappointed with the actions of the AAAS in this matter, they indicate their willingness to consider additional information in determining their policy. On the other hand, I am even more disappointed by the virtual silence of the ASA in this regard. Your cover letter fails to answer many of my original questions or to address the particulars of this case; instead, it gives only a brief general description of the program and simply refers my inquiry to the AAAS. So that there should be no misunderstanding, let me re-state my questions and ask that you to respond to them with specific answers: > >1) What is the policy, if any, of the ASA with regard to purchase of goods and services, sponsorship of programs, and/or other activities in cooperation with employers involved in strikes, lockouts or unfair labor practices? > >2) What is the position of the ASA with regard to the facts of the case at the Detroit Free Press? Is it to be understood that the ASA endorses the statement provided by the Free Press management? Has the ASA made its own inquiry, independently of the AAAS, into the matter, and has it contacted any of the unions involved in the dispute? > >3) If ASA members believe that their organization has implicitly endorsed or condoned union-busting activities, what means are available for members to express our concerns and/or affect ASA policy? > >Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. I look forward to your reply, > >sincerely, > > >Chris Rhomberg >Department of Sociology >Yale University >New Haven, CT 06520-8265