Tag Archives: Honolulu Star-Bulletin

List of local directors dropped from “Views & Voices”

13 Replies

Here’s an interesting comment from a reader:

An interesting comment by “Abcde” in your blog not long ago referred to David Black’s local investors.

” …According to previous news reports, Black’s local investors include Jeffrey and Lynn Watanabe, Duane Kurisu, Larry and Claire Johnson, Island Holdings Inc., Dan Case and C.S. Wo & Sons Ltd., all very familiar names, very local, and in most cases (no pun intended) all very Democrat.

Is it fair to apply any amount of public or private pressure to these local investors? Can they continue in good faith to donate to Democratic causes and look the other way while severance packages are being held up and hourly wage employees are laid-off with barely a goodbye and thank you for all their hard work? It would be nice to hear from these local investors if they truly believe their newspaper is being a good community stakeholder. Or is it just a pure business investment void of any social conscious? … (sic)”

After examining newest print edition and web version of SA, I see no mention of local investors and their names.

Does this mean that Black and Co. no longer have local investors as previously published, or does this mean that the new S-A has decided that for whatever reason, no mention of local investors is going to be standard business/publishing policy?

Before the Bulletin/Advertiser merger, local investors of Black Co. were prominently published on the Editorial section of the Star-Bulletin in small and fine print if I’m not mistaken.

Now there is no mention of Black’s local investors in print or online. Is this a newsworthy item?

I just pulled two newspapers out of our recycling stack, a Star-Bulletin and a Star-Advertiser.

Both papers have a “Views & Voices” spread with editorials and letters. On the left hand side, the old Star-Bulletin had a list of its publisher/editors followed by a list of the board of directors, which included the local investors. The Star-Advertiser inherited the same layout, but there’s just blank space where the directors’ list used to be.

To the reader, it looked like those were directors of the Honolulu Star-Bulletin. Not so. “Honolulu Star-Bulletin” and “Honolulu Star-Advertiser” are just trade names registered by Oahu Publications, and they were Oahu Publications’ directors.

Does the removal of the directors signify anything? State business registration records show they continue to serve as directors, at least at their last official filing. It’s hard to say what else this might mean, if anything.

Former newspaper employees in 60-day limbo

14 Replies

The Star-Bulletin and Advertiser may be history, and hundreds of former employees now out of work, but those who didn’t get 60 days notice of their terminations apparently can’t just get on with their lives.

Federal law, the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act, requires a large employer like Oahu Publications to give employees 60 days notice if they are going to lose their jobs. Many, perhaps most, employees didn’t get the full 60 days. Maybe nobody did, for all I know.

But instead of just cutting them loose and making the required payments, Oahu Publications has apparently told employees they are considered “on call” for unspecified duties for the 60 days. And what this means is that they can’t take other jobs without forfeiting the pay and benefits they’re due.

The worst part seems to be the uncertainty and continued lack of clear information from the company.

According to an email circulating among those who distributed the Advertiser:

We have not been able to pin HA down on the guidelines of this “On Call” scenario. No agreement on at least 1, 6, 12, 24 or 48 hr notice, no agreement on what would happen if you do not answer their phone call or are unable to work due to a previously planned event or your other job schedule. You could be fired and forfeit WARN for any or all of these circumstances. HA says that they will deal with them as they happen. In other words, they will be the judge, jury and executioner.

Below is the full email circulating among non-newsroom employees, but I’m told folks in the newsroom got the same information.

from HA spokesman Cliff Jamile last night, no one has yet been terminated. We are all call till end of the 60 day WARN pay period (60 day notice or 60 days pay). We may be called to do some currently undetermined work that should be unrelated to your past job(i.e. district managers should not be delivering papers, spotting, recruiting, soliciting etc.). Working ANY NEW JOB that replaces the job you had at the advertiser will be in essence informing HA that you have RESIGNED FROM YOUR POSITION AT HA and have therefore relinquished your right to the full 60 day warn payment that the fed government requires HA to pay.

ILWU spokesperson Dave Mori: “Until HA can clarify this situation, we are going to tell our DM’s (district managers) not to take outside work unless they wish to resign (from HA and forfeit warn). Furthermore, Full time DM’s who accepted independent agencies have resigned and thus will not get full warn pay and medical. This is our interpretation, if it is wrong, please let us know before it gets out.”

Twice there was no response to this statement from spokesperson Jamile.

SOME IMPORTANT EXAMPLES OF WHAT WOULD TRIGGER THIS SECENARIO

District Managers who have chosen to take independent agencies have in essence resigned from their position at HA and therefore will NOT BE GETTING THE FULL 60 DAY WARN PAY AND MEDICAL.

Any cash work done for by p/t single copy dms to put Star Advertiser racks out before the roll out of the new paper will be telling HA they have resigned and have therefore FORFEITED THE FULL 60 DAY WARN PAY.

Any work done by any HA employee for past or newly created independent Home Delivery Agents will be telling HA that you have resigned and you WILL NOT BE GETTING THE FULL 60 DAY WARN PAY.

As mentioned previously, this on call work should be unrelated to your past job duties. BUT, if ordered to do something, you should just do it. Saying no could be judged to be insubordination and you could be fired, forfeiting your warn pay.

We have not been able to pin HA down on the guidelines of this “On Call” scenario. No agreement on at least 1, 6, 12, 24 or 48 hr notice, no agreement on what would happen if you do not answer their phone call or are unable to work due to a previously planned event or your other job schedule. You could be fired and forfeit WARN for any or all of these circumstances. HA says that they will deal with them as they happen. In other words, they will be the judge, jury and executioner. This is how things are when you are “at will” or “non-union” situation.

If you find any meaningful employment that could possibly pay you LESS then the amount you would get under the 60 day warn notice, you should ask your new employer if you can delay starting your new job until the HA 60 day warn period is over.

Through it all HA has continued to REFUSE to release us from this “on call” status so that we may go on with out lives. And has refused to answer any questions about why they are doing this.

Welcome to another one-newspaper city

24 Replies

And now it begins. The monopoly is here.

Clients that formerly had printing done by the old MidWeek presses are now hearing what their new rates will be after the Star-Advertiser consolidation.

I’m told Honolulu Weekly, which has been printed by Oahu Publications, was told that its rates would be going up somewhere in the neighborhood of 20%, and that it would have to be reduced to the size of Advertiser’s TGIF weekend section (which I measure as 10-1/2 x 11 inches). Smaller size, less space for advertising, less income.

And others have gotten worse news. One local classifieds publication, a competitor to the Advertiser’s Pennysaver, reportedly was quoted a rate almost double what they previously paid.

I understand that Honolulu Weekly has responded by taking their printing to the Maui News, complete with a new schedule set by Young Brothers for delivery to Honolulu.

Former Star-Bulletin advertisers are probably also going to be facing similar increases, but I’m sure we’ll be hearing about those soon enough.

And back at the Star-Bulletin newsroom, soon to be the Star-Advertiser, at least one staffer has been removing items posted by friends on their Facebook wall, worried about management surveillance.

“Our social media activity is being watched more carefully these days,” the staffer commented to a friend.

Sam Slom, writing in Hawaii Reporters yesterday, described plans to increase the HR footprint.

Watch for new features, more investigative reporting, emphasis on Neighbor Island news and some familiar names soon as we attempt to rescue some good reporters who were laid off by the new paper. Go to our website, http://www.savehawaiinews.com and if you have an idea, a comment, or suggestions, sign up and join the community advisory board.

We are also negotiating for a web press and a commercial site for an expanded media center. There will be a printed side-by-side edition (weekly initially) to the online Reporter, and greater use of technology and local reporters’ talents.

More interesting are Slom’s description of conditions of the unsuccessful “sale” of the Star-Bulletin.

According to Slom, no inventory of equipment was available, the press was offered without maintenance/repair records, the sale included only the starbulletin.com domain but not its archive or web site, audited financials were not available, etc., etc. Very interesting.

I also flagged this item about the Advertiser closing from the Seattle Weekly, and another from the Reality Bites Back blog.

There’s a message from Dayton Morinaga urging paddlers to contact the Star-Advertiser to urge coverage of ocean sports.

My fear now is that coverage of ocean sports will be downsized at this new newspaper.

While I respect my colleagues at the Star-Bulletin, their coverage of ocean sports has been inconsistent. They have not had a full-time reporter write stories on ocean sports for several years now and are currently covering it with “freelancers.”

Hawaii’s state sports truly deserve better.

And so it goes.

Advertiser public bloggers still waiting to hear from new owners

6 Replies

Bloggers who produce the long list of “public blogs” for the Honolulu Advertiser were told yesterday that they should learn in the next week whether their blogs will be invited to continue in the new Honolulu Star-Advertiser, the newspaper that will be a combination of the Star-Bulletin and Advertiser.

This is the message sent by Sandee Oshiro, the Advertiser’s managing editor for digital and multimedia.

Folks, just a heads up: we were told today that the Star-Bulletin will be sending e-mailed letters to the non-staff bloggers regarding whether their blogs will be picked up for its new site, staradvertiser.com.

None of these would be paid blogs. Please expect a message in the next week or so.

We expect to be here until June 6, but if we don’t have a chance to chat, thank you again for all of your hard work on the blogs. It was my honor to work with all of you.

Mahalo,
Sandee Oshiro