Union members at a weekly newspaper have voted for strike action after claims the Father of Chapel was ‘targeted’ for compulsory redundancy.
The National Union of Journalists said that Rotherham Advertiser reporter Phil Turner, who has worked there for more than 30 years, was deliberately selected for redundancy because he is the FoC – a claim described by the company as ‘absolute nonsense’.
The union said a ballot for strike action was backed unanimously by members of the Advertiser chapel and a disruptive compulsory chapel meeting is taking place from 11am this morning.
Phil’s redundancy came about after the newspaper, which was owned by the Garnett Dickinson Group, was sold in March to Nick Alexander, a former group chief executive.
The union said that in March, a redundancy selection process was organised for the 14 editorial staff, which resulted in Phil being chosen – a decision the NUJ is appealing against.
Phil, who has been the FoC for most of his time at the newspaper, was presented with a letter giving him notice of dismissal yesterday and his notice will run until August.
NUJ general secretary Michelle Stanistreet said: “It couldn’t be clearer – to Phil, his colleagues, and to the rest of the NUJ – that a longstanding, effective and well-respected rep who has consistently stuck up for his chapel and their collective principles has been deliberately targeted through this redundancy exercise.
“NUJ members at the Rotherham Advertiser aren’t prepared to sit back and allow Phil to be picked off in this way, which is why they’re taking industrial action – to support and stand by their rep.
“It’s a dispute that will have resonance throughout the local community, where Phil and the work of the paper is well known, and throughout the broader union, so I hope the new owner takes stock and works to resolve this dispute before more damage is wrought.”
Chris Morley, NUJ Northern and Midlands organiser, said: “The company has made a grave error in selecting Phil for dismissal in such a transparent attempt to reduce the effectiveness of the chapel at the Rotherham Advertiser.
“Even when required savings were found elsewhere, the new management of the company still insisted that a compulsory redundancy had to be made in editorial and that it just happened to be the FoC.”
A statement from the Advertiser chapel added: “Phil Turner, our FoC rep for nearly 30 years, has been sacked after the company was taken over and hit with redundancies.
“This is clearly an attack on the NUJ and trade unionism. We are calling for solidarity in our fight to defend jobs and quality journalism.”
A company spokesperson said: “The accusation that the union rep at the Rotherham Advertiser was deliberately targeted is absolute nonsense. The union is looking for conspiracy where there is none.
“The skills matrix was agreed with the union, who suggested and agreed to amendments in its make-up and whose members were involve throughout the consultation process.
“As HoldtheFrontPage, as a web-only publication will know, digital skills are becoming more important in the sustainability of a media business and the skills matrix reflected that and our desire to move forward, in common with every other newspaper, on a multi-platform level.”
The spokesperson added that the decision was subject to an appeal, so it would be inappropriate to comment directly on an individual case.
Sign up for our free daily email bulletin
Follow HTFP on Twitter
Got a story? Email the Editor at
I don’t see why a veteran NUJ ‘father of chapel’ should be immune from redundancy. In any case, the knee-jerk reaction to his alleged ‘targeting’ shows exactly why a new owner would want rid of him.
Report this comment
Would the NUJ have reacted with such alacrity for anyone else? This is not a leading question, just a genuine inquiry to which I seek a genuine answer.
Report this comment
I think Phil is lucky to have had the same job on the same paper for so long in this day and age. It never ceases to amaze me how static journalists are. People in other professions move around all over the place, and not just in the UK.
if I was on the Advertiser and didn’t like it, I would be in the union but then if things didn’t improve I would have said “sod it, I’m off!” long ago.
Report this comment
Can’t believe the comments on this thread.
‘First they came for the trade unionists’
Maybe he stayed at the same paper because he liked it? I’ve worked at a daily and done paid freelance at a national, and my weekly days were by far the most fun I’ve ever had, I’d still be there now if Trinity Mirror hadn’t takena cuts flamethrower to the place.
Good look with the industrial action folks, the Tory social engineering masterplan really has been a resounding success if even journalists now bemoan people standing up for their rights.
Report this comment
@ Time to stay and a time to go
I do see your point about local/regional journalists staying at the same workplace for incredibly long time periods. I guess it is unusual compared to many other workplaces today. But I think there is a lot to be said for people who feel genuinely happy with a particular office and choose to remain there for many years. Nothing wrong with that.
Plus it’s a huge advantage in this type of job to have someone who knows a news patch inside out because they’ve lived and worked there for 20 plus years.
One could also argue it’s particularly difficult for local/regional journalists to move around much because their pay is so pathetic. Moving house every few years isn’t cheap.
Report this comment
It is entirely false for the company to publicly state that the redundancy skills matrix was “agreed with the union”. The chapel has been inplacably opposed to both need for the redundancy and the selection skills matrix at all stages. Various points were raised by the chapel during consultation and the company adopted them or not as they saw fit – but certainly not with any agreement. Why would our members agree to anything they knew would be making one of them compulsory redundant?
Report this comment
Time to stay… it would also be true to say that these days dead wood would not last long anywhere. You only have to check out the biogs on LinkedIn to see what a merry go round most industries are now. It is not unusual to see a professional (of any kind) notch up a string of 18 month spells in some very serious positions. Many of which will have been the result of top level recruitment exercises, headhunting, selection processes, induction, training and even relocation assistance.
Ducking and diving now seems to be the way rather than gaining experience, building local knowledge, business relationships and – dare I say it – showing loyalty?
Report this comment
Good luck with action for what sounds a shabby miserable deal.
Report this comment
Of course an FOC is not ‘immune’ from being selected for redundancy. But does anyone honestly believe that the chapel would be fighting the selection of their FOC – knowing that one of them could then be chosen instead – if they didn’t feel this was a direct attack on the chapel and union? Show some respect for the decision of the people on the ground who clearly know more about what’s going on than any of us reading this.
Report this comment
I’m not a journalist, nor am I a trade unionist, however, the decision does seem a curious one. If it’s purely a cost cutting exercise, then the economics of this decision don’t really make sense. A redundancy package for a journalist of 30 years service surely has to be significantly more than, for example, a journalist of 12 months experience… not that I’m condoning that either but I suspect there’s more to this than meets the eye.
Over the past twenty years or so, the Rotherham Advertiser (and Barnsley Chronicle for that matter) have stood out in the local news field because they’re not part of the Johnstone or Mirror group stable and served the local communities well. As we’ve seen the tragic decline of newspapers like the Sheffield Telegraph, Star, Doncaster Free Press and South Yorkshire Times, the Advertiser has proved that there is a future for well managed, well run newspapers.
Whilst I don’t dispute for one minute that change is inevitable this does seem like a bit of a strange, cynical move.
I sincerely hope the advertiser doesn’t get caught in the vicious cycle that a lot of other local newspapers are in where editorial gets compromised as a result of quick profit.
Report this comment