80% of LAT Guild members are pledged to vote yes
Dear readers,
I’m here with some big news. The journalists of the Los Angeles Times reached a historic milestone this week: 80 percent of us have pledged to vote yes in a strike authorization vote.
To put it bluntly, we’ve reached our limit.
L.A. Times Guild members gather outside the Los Angeles Times building in El Segundo on Thursday after notifying management that 80% of members had pledged to support a strike vote. (Photo by Jason Armond)
We have been negotiating a new contract for almost three years. Our members haven’t had a cost-of-living raise since 2021, despite record inflation and the rising cost of housing and other essentials. We have faced intimidation from management, which resulted in an unfair labor practice charge.
I’m Matt Hamilton, chair of the L.A. Times Guild, and I can tell you that when our union’s leadership schedules a vote — at a date to be announced later — we will have a supermajority of our members behind us.
Some of you might be asking, what took you so long?
First off, The Times had multiple rounds of layoffs and buyouts, each of which pulled us away from our contract talks and into negotiations aimed at protecting our fellow journalists. Our union, which represented more than 450 staffers just two years ago, now hovers just above 200.
Amid these devastating setbacks, our staff provided essential coverage of the Palisades and Eaton wildfires and the aftermath, the ongoing ICE crackdown and the impact on Southern California, the blizzard of policy changes from President Trump and Gov. Gavin Newsom’s campaign to push back.
We have also sought to reassure loyal subscribers, many of whom are angry or anxious over the owner’s refusal to endorse a presidential candidate last year and the botched communication around that decision; the subsequent mass exodus of our Editorial Board; the introduction of a so-called bias meter on our opinion pieces; and the rapid shrinking of our journalistic ranks, with talented reporters and editors fleeing for other, more stable workplaces.
Having worked at The Times for more than a decade, I know the care that goes into what we publish each day. I hear from colleagues who are tired, fed up, taking on second jobs, and struggling to see a future at The Times.
Journalists are a curious breed, a mixture of cautious, skeptical and mission-driven. Amid the upheaval, we have poured ourselves into our work, making the daily demand of newsgathering our priority. But you can push mission-driven people only so far, which is why I and so many others are ready to vote yes.
LAT Guild Unit Chair Matt Hamilton addresses co-workers in the newsroom. (Photo by Jason Armond)
I’m voting yes because I care about:
A cost of living increase: Our staff has gone without a general cost of living increase since October 2021. Rent, health insurance, groceries all cost more while our pay has remained flat.
Seniority: The company is insisting on an extreme contract proposal that would gut the seniority system in place since 2019. That seniority system allows us to report without fear or favor, even if it upsets those in power. It also gives our staff some degree of predictability, allowing workers to make plans about buying a home, having children and more. If we agreed to the company’s current position, it would make it far easier for managers to lay off anyone, regardless of experience.
No intimidation: During three long years of bargaining, the company has attempted to stymie and intimidate members from engaging in collective action. The National Labor Relations Board took up an unfair labor practice charge we filed over these activities, with a hearing scheduled next month.
Guild work by Guild members: The company wants to dramatically expand its use of freelancers, temps and work done by other companies owned by Dr. Soon-Shiong. We’ve seen our non-union counterpart, LA Times Studios, launch a podcast hosted by a registered lobbyist. What next? We want stronger guardrails around this type of content to protect the jobs, ethics and the integrity of the institution.
Finally, let me make it clear: our goal is not to go on strike. What we want is a fair and equitable contract, so we can return to a 100% focus on our journalistic mission. But the stakes here are too important for us to fold.
We appreciate your support and standing with L.A. Times Guild members. We will keep you posted as our fight continues.
Yours,
Matt Hamilton
Chair, L.A. Times Guild