The Guild has filed a federal lawsuit to compel the Seattle Post-Intelligencer to arbitrate a grievance over a dispute about online work. Here are some questions and answers to help P-I Guild members understand the background on this issue.

Q. The P-I says that the grievance filed over online work is not suitable for arbitration. Is that true?

A. The Guild says no. But even so, when there is a dispute over whether a subject is proper for arbitration, the Guild/P-I contract says, “…in any case where either party contests the arbitrability of the grievance, the arbitrator shall hold a separate proceeding and rule on that issue prior to hearing the matter on the merits (Article 10[C]3).”
In the current case, the P-I refused to mutually select an arbitrator and sent a letter to the American Arbitration Association, telling it to stop processing the Guild’s demand for arbitration. Instead of insisting on an arbitrability hearing, the P-I simply said it wouldn’t participate in the process.

Q. The P-I says the Guild unilaterally terminated the New Media Agreement. When did that happen, and why?

A. The New Media Agreement was a side agreement negotiated in 1997. It had no expiration date, and no language about renewal or renegotiation. The Guild sent the P-I a letter in March 2006 terminating the agreement because it was outdated. In addition, the Guild told the P-I that its current policy is to eliminate side agreements that aren’t part of the contract, whenever possible. These side agreements are invisible to the members and tend to be forgotten. Current Guild leaders believe the members have a right to know what agreements its union has signed, and that the agreements should be readily available to members.

Q. What did the P-I do when the Guild terminated the New Media Agreement?

A. Nothing. Although the P-I acknowledges it received the Guild’s letter, it made no response, either verbal or written. It didn’t protest, or file a grievance, or demand to bargain a new agreement. P-I officials didn’t even make a phone call. The P-I also didn’t propose another New Media Agreement when the Guild contract was negotiated in the summer of 2006. The P-I says now that the Guild’s action was outrageous, but at the time, the P-I didn’t respond at all. It was only after the grievance was filed in July 2007 that the P-I protested.

Q. Why did the Guild file a grievance over the online reporter issue?

A. We all know that in the future, more and more of the content generated by P-I reporters will be used on the Web site and not in the print edition of the newspaper.
The Guild’s contract says, “It is agreed that the Guild has, and shall retain, jurisdiction over all work presently being performed by Guild members in the Editorial, and Business Office, except for those jobs specifically excluded under the Preamble of this agreement.”

As of the time this contract was agreed to, and even more now with the P-I’s “Web first” focus, Guild members blog, write breaking news online, shoot photos, record audio and video and perform other tasks for seattlepi.com. This work clearly falls under the definition of “work presently being performed by Guild members.” Therefore, when the P-I assigned online reporter duties to a new position that wasn’t in the bargaining unit, the union filed a grievance.

Q. Why did the Guild file a federal lawsuit? The P-I just concluded costly litigation with the Times over the JOA. Isn’t there another action the Guild could take?

A. Arbitration is always cheaper and quicker than litigation, which is why union contracts include arbitration to resolve disputes. However, the P-I’s refusal to follow the contract grievance procedure moved this dispute to a different, more serious level. The Guild Local Executive Board voted to proceed with litigation after seeking advice from the union’s attorney and the union’s international. We want the court to tell the P-I it must follow the grievance procedure it agreed to.

Q. Is the Guild willing to negotiate with the P-I over the online issue?

A. Yes, Guild representatives made that clear in a grievance meeting with the employer. However, the P-I wanted the Guild to put the issue on hold and wait until the current contract expires, which at the time was a year away. The Guild is still willing to negotiate, and the P-I has said it is trying to identify suitable dates. But we’re not willing to stand by and do nothing while the P-I refuses to follow the contract grievance procedure. That is egregious and unacceptable. If the P-I can refuse to arbitrate this grievance, it could refuse to arbitrate any grievance.

A copy of the U.S. District Court complaint filed by the union and the exhibits are posted on the site along with this Q and A. We invite members to inspect the documents. If you have further questions, or comments, please talk to one of your workplace leaders or shop stewards. They are:

• P-I Guild Unit Chairwoman Lisa Stiffler.
• P-I Shop Stewards: Gene Achziger, Curt Milton, Kery Murakami, Greg Roberts and Chris West.
• Local 37082 Executive Board members: Gene Achziger, Athima Chansanchai and Kristin Dizon.

Latest posts: