'Boston Globe' union rejects pay cuts

BOSTON -- The Boston Globe's largest union rejected a new contract Monday, refusing to accept $10 million in annual pay and benefit cuts despite threats of even deeper wage cuts or the possible closure of the 137-year-old newspaper.

The Boston Newspaper Guild, which represents 700 editorial, advertising and business employees, voted 277-265 against the new contract negotiated after the Globe's parent company, The New York Times Co., said it needed $20 million in annual savings from Globe unions — half from the Guild — to avoid shutting down the newspaper.

About 80% of union members voted, officials said.

The contract included an 8.3% wage cut, five-day unpaid furloughs and cuts in health care benefits, 401(k) contributions and pensions. It also would have eliminated lifetime job guarantees for 190 Guild workers. Most got those promises in exchange for other concessions in a contract ratified in 1994, shortly after the Times Co. bought the Globe for $1.1 billion.

The Times Co. had said that if the Guild rejected the proposal, it would try to impose a 23% wage cut. It also could follow through on an earlier threat to close the newspaper, which would require giving 60 days notice to employees and the state.

Donovan Slack, the newspaper's city hall bureau chief, said earlier Monday that she had voted to approve the contract.

"I was up most of the night for the last few weeks, just really conflicted about this decision," said Slack, a six-year veteran at the Globe. "On the one hand, it seems like a really unfair deal and a lot of people voting 'no' made me waver. But then when it really came down to it, I don't have room to gamble with a quarter of my pay and I have no doubt that the New York Times Co. will institute that pay cut immediately."

Shirley Goh, a copy editor who has worked at the Globe for four years, said she also feared a 23% wage cut, but didn't want that to sway her vote either way.

"It's definitely a possibility, and of course I'm worried," said Goh, who was against the new contract. "But I didn't want that to be the main reason I voted. I looked at the proposal and all the provisions, that's basically what I voted on."