Two weeks ago I wrote about the multi-million dollar bonuses being paid by The New York Times Company to Arthur “Pinch” Sulzberger and Janet Robinson while the company has cajoled its union workers in Boston (the company owns the Boston Globe as well as The New York Times) to take pay cuts and has laid off workers in New York. In Liberal Hypocrisy on Display at the Failing New York Times Company, I said:
So, we have a failing company being looted by the executives while the rank and file are either laid off or take pay cuts. The Times editorial page has been raising hell about this sort of thing for years, but I predict we will see no mention of the Pinch-Robinson caper in their pages.
It’s a shining example of sanctimonious liberals not following the moral precepts they seek to enforce upon everyone else,…
Predictably, Union members who agreed to take substantial pay cuts have not been silent. The New York Post reports today,
The Boston Newspaper Guild, which absorbed more than $10 million in pay and benefit cuts to members last year in order to save The Boston Globe, has lashed out at the Sulzberger and Robinson 2009 bonuses and are demanding their lost wages and benefits be restored.
Here is the letter the Union sent to Sulzberger and Robinson:
“We were astonished to learn that the two of you received more than $10 million in stock awards and options in 2009,” the Guild wrote in an open letter urging its members to send to Sulzberger and Robinson. “During the year for which you were so richly rewarded, the 600 members of the Boston Newspaper Guild gave back almost the same amount in pay and benefit reductions — $10 million to be exact — after you threatened to close our newspaper, lay off hundreds of people, and strip Massachusetts of its largest newspaper.”
“Now that the Times has shown it can afford to lavish so much on a few top executives, we expect our pay and benefit cuts will be restored in the coming months.”
It’s not whether Sulzberger and Robinson have been forthright with their workers that interests me. These unions are powerful institutions and they can take care of themselves. It’s the liberal cant on display that is the real story here.
No reaction from the New York Times. Of course not.