Taking It to the Overpass: News-Press staff protest

Take it to the freeways! Go get 'em, people! The wrath of the NLRB will eventually be felt full force by Wendy, and she will be compelled to Obey the Law!

Why don't you start your own newspaper if you're such professionals, and stop protesting the right of the News Press to hire and fire whomever it chooses.

The "right" to hire and fire whomever the newspaper chooses might be true if the employees were in in a labor union with 100 years of legal precedent about how illegal such wrongful termination would be.

Wanna try again, Agnes?

It takes courage to hang a banner over the highway to protest the injustices, pettiness and vindictiveness of Wendy McCaw and her minions.
Keep up the good work, people!

To anon 8:53,

The "illegal" behavior mentioned by Matt is actually by those that would hang a banner over a freeway. Nice. . . but not safe or smart, and how about the sun in the eyes of those in the southbound lanes. Remember the Jake Boysel tragedy? I'm sure CalTrans would like to prosecute all of these people for endangering the lives of the drivers below. This was stupid, dangerous, and illegal.

Bit of a stretch comparing Jake and the News Press guys, Dan. The guy who killed Jake is being prosecuted for vehicular manslaughter. Nobody died in this little protest. As for "endangering the lives of the drivers below," are you suggesting that this sign is somehow more dangerous than all the other signage and crap out there? Not even close.

To the protesters, I would like to put it a bit more positive.

I support you 100%, I think this was just a poor choice of locations.

anonymous 1:12, take a hike, sugar. No employer has the absolute right to hire and fire whomever it chooses. The federal labor law forbidding firings of union supporters has been on the books for over 70 years, and McCaw has violated it at least twice, not to mention her other serious violations. There are civil rights laws, on the books for over 40 years, saying employers cannot discriminate. Why does the News-Press have to behave like the cliche bull in the china shop, regaling all with its "cease and desist" moat around the castle mentality? All of the News-Press' charges against the union have been dismissed; the NLRB is going to get more aggressive unless the News-Press shows signs of curtailing its "rights" to conform to the law.

Keep it up. People in S.B. must be reminded that a free press can't be bought with a divorce settlement.

KSBY TV news had a short one that evening. Here is the video with a high-tech method:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=...

Mr. Seibert... seems like just about nobody made the observation you make when American flags went up on thousands of overpasses after 9/11.

Nonetheless, the anti-News-Press signs would be better at the end of offramps, and in congested and slow intersections, like Carrillo and 101 at rush hour.

I take note of the continued employment of Dawn Hobbs, prominent in pro-union activities, and Thomas Schultz, who testified at the NLRB hearing that he started the SavetheNewsPress.com website, by the News-Press.

Could this mean that those who have been terminated by the paper have actually been let go for cause, unrelated to the employees' attempt to unionize?

Ah, Michelle, for someone who has written like a lawyer, in your posts here about First Amendment rights not long ago, you should understand the foolishness of trying to prove something with a negative. Rather lazy thinking, I dare say. Even a first-year law student would know that such an argument is silly and fatally flawed.

But then, I note that there is no record, based on a cursory Google search, of a "Michelle DuNoire" beyond the poster here. Given your logic, I submit that it proves that you are a fraud and paid shill of Ms. McCaw.

Michelle, your logic would mean that the only way the News-Press could be guilty of illegally firing union supporters is if it fired all of them at once. The News-Press would like to avoid having the NLRB come down on it like the proverbial ton of bricks, and firing all union supporters -- and the NP admitted it counted heads just before the election -- would be a surefire way of making that happen. That is not the law, however, and so far, as blockheaded as the News-Press has been, it hasn't gone completely nuts (in this area). It is smart enough to set up individual targets and try to come up with pretexts, as any not completely incompetent union-busting employer will do. No outlaw employer who wants to intimidate its employees admits it was discriminatory or anti-union when it does its thing, but somehow the message gets across, in ways subtle and dramatic. Firing is not the only method in play here by the insidious News-Press management dissemblers. But inferences go far to prove the illegality, and so do patterns.

What actually happens in the real world is that the reasons given by management for the firings are closely examined, and the ones given to justify Burns' firing (and cancelling Roshell's column) haven't measured up, and I don't think those given for firing Davison or Guiliano are going to pass muster either. And, the more frequently the NP violates the law, the lower its credibility is going to be when it takes its next harsh management action.

Actually, Mr. Moreno, every third year law student knows you can prove a negative, or, more accurately, introduce evidence that something never happened, in an attempt to do so, under at least two exceptions to the hearsay rule.

Mr./Ms. Yer Joking, Right? Did I miss something, or have there been no decisions, other than in the court of public opinion, as to legality of the firing of Ms. Burns and the termination of Ms. Roshell's column?

Michelle, the NLRB has decided after its investigation, taking evidence from both sides, to prosecute the News-Press for firing Burns, cancelling Roshell's column, and threatening a dozen reporters with suspensions. That is more than a mere "court of public opinion", though it is not yet an adjudication. Any labor law practitioner will tell you that a prosecutorial decision by the NLRB's General Counsel is a big deal, and that office has about an 85% success rate. It is not unlike a decision by the DA to prosecute a criminal; the DA usually wins, and doesn't decide to prosecute unless he/she's damn sure he will. There is a very good chance that further prosecution decisions against the NP will soon follow, and perhaps even more aggressive NLRB law enforcement action after that. And, all of the unfair labor practice charges the NP filed against the union have been dismissed by the NLRB. All of them.

I notice you have backed off your sad defense that since some union supporters remain employed, the News-Press must be innocent of any wrongdoing. Glad to see you recognize that evil can (and these days often does) sometimes act in not absolute ways.

Anyone notice that in today's News-Press, they listed all of the SBIFF awards except for the Audience Choice Award? Wanna know why? Because the SB Indy sponsored the award, so the News-Press simply ignored it, even though it's the most important award in the festival. Pretty immature. What's more shameful is that the award went to Darius Goes West, an inspirational story of a kid with MD who's friends take him on a cross-country tour. Shame on the N-P once again.

Hey, 10:58 a.m.

The Audience Choice Award DID make the News-Press. It's near the beginning of the main story that starts on Page 1.

Oops. I guess you're right. I had only looked at the article where they listed awards, and found it missing from there. Thanks to Ted Mills for including it. It must have sneaked past the editors...

An FYI to I-Rules: Even though I would not put that sort of slight past the editors of the News Press I do have to explain a quirk in this year’s Audience Choice Award. My wife was the one in charge of counting the ballots and this year was a very close race. “Living with Lew” was in an almost dead heat with “Darius Goes West” going into the final day of the Festival with the second Living with Lew” showing at 1pm yesterday (Sunday) and we did not get the final ballots until after the Q&A at around 3:30. There was a press deadline of noon and it was decided by the SBIFF management and the Independent that the results would have to wait for the final tabulation – fair is fair after all. In the end, “Darius” was ahead of “Lew” by the smallest of margins. Both were great films and this years Fest was possibly the best ever.

"I take note of the continued employment of Dawn Hobbs, prominent in pro-union activities...
Could this mean that those who have been terminated by the paper have actually been let go for cause, unrelated to the employees' attempt to unionize?
Posted by Michelle DuNoire | February 4, 2007 05:42 PM

OOPS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So I was prescient.

As my family's coat of arms has it (roughly translated), "Rarely right, but never in doubt."

Does this mean Mr. Flynn reads this blog, as opposed to Blogabarbara?

People have an absolute right to protest. But businesses also have a right to fire current employees who try to financially damage them. See the federal decision about this. I'd fire any employee who took my paycheck, then tried to decimate my business. The people who were already fired and their supporters should have hung the signs.