A federal judge refused to reinstate a stricken brief from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in its dispute with the publisher of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, ruling that the agency misinterpreted court rules.
On Friday, U.S. District Judge Cathy Bissoon denied NLRB regional administrator Nancy Wilson’s request for reconsideration after the court removed the agency’s brief supporting its proposed findings of fact. The judge clarified that the procedural rules cited by the NLRB applied to non-jury trials, while the case at hand involved a request for an injunction—not a trial.
Union Strike and Labor Dispute
The legal battle stems from a strike by newsroom and production unions, which began more than two years ago after the newspaper stopped paying for their healthcare benefits. The NLRB sued PG Publishing, accusing the company of bargaining in bad faith by proposing changes that undermined basic union protections.
The agency sought an injunction to force the Post-Gazette back to the negotiating table and reinstate healthcare coverage for unionized employees. However, Judge Bissoon ruled that she could not take the NLRB’s administrative record at face value, citing the U.S. Supreme Court’s Starbucks v. McKinney decision.
Post-Gazette’s Defense and Shift to Digital
During hearings, the Post-Gazette’s attorneys argued that their contract proposals were serious, as the company needed flexibility to transition from print to digital. The paper currently prints only twice a week and has sold its printing equipment to Hearst.
