Sketches by Gail Hartnett-Rodriguez Judge William G. Kocol and Journal city editor Susan Areson. Enlarge

Day 6 - Final edition

By Felice J. Freyer

3.05.02 • 12:38 p.m.
PAWTUCKET, R.I. -- Two high-ranking Providence Journal editors appeared to contradict each other yesterday -- each asserting that the other was responsible for a change in policy -- on the sixth day of the Journal's trial on nearly four dozen charges of violating federal labor law.

The trial is expected to end today, three days earlier than scheduled, because the Journal is offering only one day of testimony. Journal lawyer Richard A. Perras said that the company's defense would instead rely heavily on documents.

The Journal presented eight witnesses yesterday.

Patricia A. Welker, Journal managing editor for administration, on the stand. Enlarge

Susan Areson, the city editor, testified that she started disallowing "small grid" differentials for people who did certain copy editing jobs, in response to a directive from Patricia A. Welker, managing editor for administration.

But when Welker took the witness stand later, she said that the change in small-grid payments was Areson's decision.

Under questioning by Elizabeth Vorro, lawyer for the National Labor Relations Board, both Areson and Welker acknowledged that payments made in 1999 stopped in 2000 -- and that the Guild was not notified or involved.

The "small grid" differentials are additional payments that employees received when they worked in positions with higher pay than their job titles. The elimination of small-grid payments is one of several instances in which the National Labor Relations Board, the federal agency responsible for enforcing labor law, alleges that the Journal made changes in working conditions that were illegal because they were unilateral.

The issue of small grid

Journal lawyer Lincoln D. Almond showed Areson two time sheets in which an editor had written "wire slot" to indicate having worked in a higher classification. One on sheet, from 2000, "wire slot" was crossed out; on another, from 1999, it was left standing.

(The "slot" person does the final check on copy before publication. A "wire slot" handles reports from the wire services.)

Almond asked Areson why "wire slot" had been crossed out. "We don't have a position on the copy desk for a slot person,'' she replied.

He then asked her why it had not been crossed on the earlier time sheet. "For the first year I was in the job, I wasn't policing time cards as accurately as I should have,'' she said. "Pat Welker said we needed to review all cases where people were putting in for small grid…."

A work schedule that Almond entered into evidence listed no "slot" positions.

Under questioning by Vorro, Areson affirmed that in 1998 and 1999, people who indicated on their time sheets that they had worked "wire slot" were paid a differential.

"Did you learn," Vorro continued, "there would no longer be small grid for people who had received small grid in the past?"

"Yes," Areson replied.

Adminstrative Law Judge William G. Kocol asked Areson, "Was it your decision?"

Areson said: "Pat Welker said that we would only pay small grid when small grid was justified." She further explained that the night copy desk now has only copy editors and section editors, plus a management-level news editor. "There are no levels of editors in between, above and below," she said.

"Is the work of the wire slot person still being done?" Vorro then asked.

"Yes," Areson replied.

Welker testifies

In her testimony, Welker said that she was merely holding managers to the standards for small grid in the contract. She said she told them in meetings, "You must certify that what's on the time sheet is correct."

Vorro asked her: "Whose decision was it to stop paying small grid to copy editors…?"

"That would be their supervisor, Sue Areson," she said.

Welker also responded to the NLRB's complaint that the Journal rewrote editorial assistant Doreen Tracey's job description to avoid paying her a differential for preparing graduation lists. Welker said that in April 2000 she updated the job descriptions of many assistants. "I asked what each particular assistant did and I and put the specific duties on the job description,'' she said.

Tracey's duties included preparing graduation lists each spring, but before 2000 she has received a "small grid" differential for it.

Perras entered into evidence a time sheet of Tracey's from September 1998. Welker testified that Tracey had indicated on this time sheet that she worked as "city editor" and so was entitled to small-grid payment.

"That assignment is impossible,'' Welker said. "An editorial assistant would never be asked to fill in as city editor." Welker said she then spoke with Tracey's supervisor: "I said I did not want to see this inappropriate use again."

Reached at home last night, Tracey expressed astonishment about Welker's testimony and denied that she ever misrepresented her work on a time sheet. "I would never do that, not in a million years,'' she said, noting that it would be absurd for her to pretend to have held such a high-ranking position as city editor.

Tracey said she did not have a copy of the time sheet in question and so could not ascertain whether the "city editor" notation was in her handwriting. But she said she could not recall a supervisor ever mentioning any problems with her time sheets.

Other testimony

Most of the testimony yesterday focused on the charges of unilateral changes in working conditions.

Areson testified about a training program that required sports editors to come into work two hours early. The editors had sought two hours of overtime pay, but received pay for only one hour. Areson said she believed the editors were to leave after nine hours of work. Under questioning by Administrative Law Judge William G. Kocol, she said she wasn't there to witness when they left, nor did she learn afterwards that they had worked 10 hours.

Company attorney Richard A. Perras questions Providence Journal advertising director Maura P. Brodeur. Enlarge

Maura P. Brodeur, advertising director, testified in response to the NLRB's allegation that the Journal subcontracted work that should be done by Guild members when it hired an agency to sell ads for a special business review page. Brodeur said that the Journal frequently accepts ads from agencies, and that the special section was no different.

Jack Simeone, special projects manager who oversees security, said that few changes to security occurred in May 2001, despite the NLRB's allegation that the Journal had discontinued 24-hour security at Fountain Street at that time. He said that well before 2001, the company had stopped keeping a guard in the lobby between 9 p.m. and midnight. The only change that happened in May 2001, he said, was that between 4:30 and 9 p.m., the guard had "roving" duties and wasn't always at the front desk.

Shannon Dunnigan, site manager for projo.com, the Journal's Web site, and Steven O. Romanello, the site's sales marketing manager, testified about an advertising-training program that online advertising-sales representatives were asked to attend in the summer and fall of 2000. The program, held in Dallas, spanned three to four days every other week for eight weeks. The NLRB alleged that this program, which it described as mandatory, constituted a unilateral change in working conditions.

According to Dunnigan and Romanello, one salesperson, Lisa Gerard, told her supervisors that the travel requirement would be burdensome because she is a single parent. Dunnigan and Romanello both testified that the company exempted Girard from attending all the sessions, and that she went to only two.

Dunnigan testified that when she worked as an advertising sales representative, the job description (which has not changed) specified that she must have the "ability to travel as business requires" and that she attended a conference in Western Massachusetts and visited a customer in New York.

Romanello and Dunnigan, under questioning by Vorro, acknowledged that they did not inform or consult the Guild about the training program.

Douglas Fredericks, the assistant properties manager, talked about the Journal's decision to require porters to care for plants in April of last year, a change in duties that is also the subject of an NLRB complaint. Fredericks said that he bought watering cans for porters to take with them once a week while dusting and cleaning. (The executive suite plants got watered twice a week). He estimated that the plant-watering took about 15 minutes a week. He testified that porters' hours did not change, that none was required to work overtime, and that no one was disciplined in connection with plant-care work.

Fredericks also testified that porters' duties had been augmented in the past, when paper recycling started and when the fitness center opened.

Thomas McDonough, human resources manager, began testimony about the Guild's requests for information. The NLRB has alleged that the company failed to provide, or delayed unreasonably in providing, information that the union needed and had a right to receive. McDonough's testimony will continue today.

Earlier in the day, Brian Jones, a longtime Guild activist who retired from the Journal last November, testified that the company changed its policy on taxi vouchers in September 2000, allowing vouchers only for trips within Providence. He also testified that reporter Karen Ziner had asked him to accompany her to a meeting with McDonough, but that she told him that McDonough would not allow it.

The Journal's lawyers did not cross-examine Jones.

Two important developments

There were two other developments yesterday:

The NLRB withdrew its complaint that the Journal unilaterally changed the incentive program for advertising salespeople, reducing the charges against the Journal to 45. The withdrawal came because the Journal's response to its subpoena showed the incentive program had not changed significantly, said Guild Administrator Tim Schick. The information, long sought by the union, arrived two weeks before the trial. The board is maintaining its complaint that the Journal failed to provide information about the plan to the union.

In a victory for the union, the judge allowed the NLRB to amend its complaint, changing the date on which the elimination of small grid payments occurred to January 2000. The complaint had said that the company stopped paying the differentials in May 2001, but in fact the change started in January 2000. This amendment would affect the remedy if the complaint is upheld: Back pay, if awarded, will now accrue back to Janauary 2000.

What happens next

Perras said he expected McDonough to testify until about mid-morning today.

The NRLB can cross-examine him and also may introduce rebuttal witnesses. After that, the trial will be over. There will be no closing arguments. Instead, both sides will summarize their positions in briefs to Judge Kocol, who will probably rule in two or three months.

Daily reports on the trial will be posted here on www.journalontrial.org. The Web site also has directions and a map to Pawtucket City Hall, 137 Roosevelt Ave. The trial starts at 11 a.m. on Monday and at 9 a.m. on the other days. Here's how to get there:

From Providence and points south: Take Rte. 95 north to School Street exit. Turn left at bottom of ramp onto School Street. Pass Apex on the left and go through one light (one-way right) to next light, bearing left. Go to light at Slater Mill and Visitors Center, making a right onto Roosevelt Avenue. City Hall will be on your right, with parking on left. Trial is on third floor.

From Boston and points north: Take Rte. 95 south into Rhode Island. Take exit 29, Downtown Pawtucket. At end of ramp, merge onto Broadway. Go about two-tenths of a mile and turn right onto Exchange Street. Turn left on Roosevelt Avenue. City Hall will be on your left, with parking on the right. Trial is on the third floor.

Felice J. Freyer is the Providence Journal's award-winning medical writer. She joined the paper in 1982 and was assigned to the medical beat in 1989. A member of the Guild's Executive Committee since 1994, she has taken a leave from the newspaper to cover the trial.

There is much more information about the dispute at the Guild's main website, www.riguild.org. E-mail the Guild at png@riguild.org. The union's mailing address is: The Providence Newspaper Guild, 270 Westminster St., Providence, RI 02903. Telephone: (401) 421-9466. FAX: (401) 421-9495.