Lewis D'Vorkin and Jim Kirk send a final email before union vote at LA Times

From: Kirk, Jim
Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2018 9:39 AM
To: yyeditall
Subject: Update

All

Over the past several weeks, you’ve heard a lot from both sides on the issue of unionization.

The time to vote is upon us. You have heard a lot of promises from the union organizers. We’ve tried to give you facts instead of hyperbole or emotional arguments.

We understand your frustration on many levels. The last decade has not been easy in any newsroom across the country, and certainly not with all the changes in our company. But a union won’t solve most of the problems endemic to our industry.

Independence has been at the core of the Los Angeles Times. We have been a spirited voice for more than a century. We have stood up to corruption, threats, gangs and violence. We have told incredible stories from across the globe and we have been a vital watchdog for our community. We believe that working together, rather than through a third party, we can build on that heritage and trust with readers.

That starts with greater communication. Since arriving at the company only a few months ago, Ross has said that better communication is a key goal so that we can work together directly. We are building on that objective.

The Los Angeles Times today is a workplace where people are free to do the work they care most about. This company today promotes flexibility in personal schedules that take into account real life issues. With a union, whether that flexibility remains will be determined through the collective bargaining process .

Despite the rhetoric and promises, facts are facts. We’ve done our best to tell you what history and actual agreements have yielded for newsrooms:

Unions can’t guarantee anything. Not better pay. Not better benefits. The only way unions can achieve these things is through an agreement with the company. They can demand and make promises. While things stay the same during negotiations, all terms and conditions of employment are on the table in a new negotiation.

1. The union – not you, as an individual - will be your representative in negotiations for your salary and benefits including time off and the flexibility you enjoy today. Will they represent you, or parity for the union?
2. Union leaders may tell you they can protect against layoffs but they didn’t at The New York Times, Huffington Post, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal.
3. The union will likely request that you pay dues every month.

These are the facts. You can’t just try on a union and easily get rid of it later if it doesn’t live up to the promises. If you don’t vote the union in, however, you always have the right to try again next year.

So, the question to you is do you want to preserve your independence and the independence of the Los Angeles Times or do you want someone else negotiating on your behalf?

Now it is really a choice of every individual in this newsroom. At stake is the culture of an institution that has served this community so well for more than 135 years. Take all the history into account when you make your decision on whether or not you want someone other than yourself representing you with our company.
Either way, the decision you make is important to our future. There is passion on both sides – that passion has fueled the work that has made the Los Angeles Times the spirited and independent voice of its community for more than a century.

We urge you to get out and vote. It counts. To win the election, the Guild must get only a majority of all votes that are cast, not a majority of all eligible voters. We urge you to vote NO and keep the spirit of independence.

Lewis and Jim