New York Times journalists staged a historic 24-hour strike after management and the union representing staffers failed to reach an agreement for a new contract after more than a year and a half of negotiating, CNN reports.
More than 1,100 employees participated.
It is something that has not happened at the newspaper in four decades.
A union strike stopped the reporting process and shut down the newsroom.
The strike comes amid frustrations that bargaining has dragged on since the contract of employees in the NewsGuild union expired in March 2021.
Last week, the union announced that more than 1,1000 employees would stage a 24-hour work stoppage starting just after midnight on Thursday until management struck a deal on the employees’ contracts.
It landed on quite a busy news day as well. It saw the release of Brittney Griner from a Russian penal colony via a prisoner swap, and the passage of a new legislation that protects same-sex marriage.
It was tough for reporters to walk away from the newsroom to pick up the picket line.
The act of protest left many of its major desks depleted of their staff, creating a challenge for the news organization that millions of readers rely on.
Union members said the firm’s performance – and its ability to spend millions on executive compensation, share buybacks and dividends – had informed their demands.
Since the prior contract expired in March 2021, the two sides have been at odds over issues such as starting pay, wage increases, retirement and health care policies and remote work.
In recent negotiations including a 12-hour session earlier this week, the company agreed to higher pay increases than it had offered previously – including 3% guaranteed raises in 2023 and 2024 – and dropped a proposal to scrap pensions, among other changes.
The proposal did not satisfy the union. It said it was pushing to secure a $65,000 starting salary and pay raises of 5.5% in 2023 and 2024, noting that the company’s proposals have not made up for the rising cost of living.
In one breakthrough that both sides called significantly, the company backed off its proposal to replace the existing adjustable pension plan with an enhanced 401(k) retirement plan. The Times offered instead to let the union choose between the two. The company also agreed to expand fertility treatment benefits.
Be the first to comment