Exclusive: Chris Hayes attends secret union meeting with unhappy NBC workers

[Omaha Steve]

Source: Salon.com

Workers urge MSNBC's top hosts to end silence about alleged fear campaign on their home turf. Ed Schultz demurs

Josh Eidelson

Amid workers alleging union-busting by an NBC Universal-owned company, MSNBC’s prime-time host Chris Hayes recently met privately with a group of them to hear their concerns, according to several people present at the meeting.

Hayes is one of five prime-time MSNBC hosts – along with Rachel Maddow, Al Sharpton, Lawrence O’Donnell and Ed Schultz – whose support the Writers Guild of America–East is seeking in an ugly labor struggle with Peacock Productions, which is owned by NBC Universal and has produced programming for MSNBC. A petition posted by the AFL-CIO and hosted by MoveOn.org Civic Action asks the five hosts to “Please meet with these workers and take a public stand to support their right to organize” at Peacock Productions. None of the five has so far publicly addressed the issue.

Hayes, Maddow, Sharpton and O’Donnell did not comment in response to Monday inquiries (sent to MSNBC or personal email addresses, to Sharpton’s National Action Network, and to Random House, which published Maddow’s book; Random House referred the inquiry to MSNBC).

But, asked about the campaign, Schultz emailed Salon, “Moveon.org has never been an ally of Ed Schultz, why should I help you with a story? Give me a reason.” A follow-up email was not answered. (The email came from a personal address provided to Salon by people who have been in touch with him there; following a series of inquiries, an MSNBC spokesperson said, “I can’t confirm that e-mail address,” but declined to dispute that it belonged to Schultz.)

FULL story at link.


Read more: http://www.salon.com/2013/12/12/exclusive_chris_hayes_attends_secret_nbc_union_meeting/

---

Chris Hayes (Credit: AP/Virginia Sherwood/Reuters/Lucas Jackson)

[loudsue]

1. I would hate to see these five people take a stand that would get them fired.

We are living in a war zone. Goddamn the corporate masters!

[diabeticman]

2. Sometimes taking a stand is the right thing to do regardless of what happens.

[merrily]

5. If we are living in a war zone, and I believe we are, you are suggesting surrender.

[loudsue]

26. Keeping a job -- a really good job where you do a lot of good every day -- isn't exactly

surrender. It's more like ..... SMART.

[merrily]

27. Working for a union busting employer to save yourself

is not about doing good for others.

It's about keeping your own job, period. Your own job, where you pretend to care about workers, to think union busting is awful when a Republican does it, but not when your corporate boss does it.

And, yes, in the battle against corporatism, it is surrender.

As well as hypocrisy.

If you don't get that, you can't know much about unionizing. Solidarity is what unionizing depends on.

[loudsue]

32. You are the one that doesn't know much about moving forward.

Too bad.

[merrily]

43. Moving forward? More like about 100 years backward.

Last edited Mon Dec 16, 2013, 04:11 AM - Edit history (1)

Scabdom and union-busting is not forward.

You're making John D. Rockefeller, the quintessential Republican, smile in his grave.

[Le Taz Hot]

36. Criminee!

So much for solidarity. The name of the game is, "Save Your Own Ass?" In what alternate universe is this considered progressive ideology?

"Goddamn the corporate master!" They just COOPERATED with their corporate masters.

[loudsue]

37. That's bullshit.

Why do you want to be rid of these liberal VOICES? Why do you want to do away with the BEST liberal voices on the corporate owned media???

That's REAL fuckin' smart. NOT.

[Le Taz Hot]

38. The SUBJECT was whether or not these anchors,

who have declared they are liberal, are in solidarity with the workers, which would correlate with liberal ideology. Staying silent tells me they are LINOs and more interested in collecting a fat paycheck. That's the subject. Please try to stay focused here.

[loudsue]

39. Where is your brain??? WHY would you GUESS that we aren't hearing them all swing from the rafters

singing the song you want to hear???? Do you REALLY think they haven't thought this through? Are you that much smarter or more dedicated than RACHEL MADDOW???

Give me a BREAK!!!

[Le Taz Hot]

40. You seem to want to make this about me

and are unwilling or incapable of debating the actual SUBJECT so at that, I bid you a good day.

[merrily]

44. No, MSNBC will have (allegedly) liberal voices for so long as MSNBC believes

that is MSNBC's ticket to the best ratings it can possibly get.

Ratings = sponsors and sponsors = profits and that is all the network is about, not ideology.

MSNBC has already switched from completely RW because it could not compete with FOX for ratings with a totally RW line up. If MSNBC still thinks that way, you will still get allegedly liberal voices.

BTW, they are not liberal voices. They are pro-Establishment voices. MSNBC gets rid of liberal voices that dare question the status quo.

Part One

Part Two

Huffpo story: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/21/cenk-uygur-msnbc-leaving_n_905415.html

And, of course, Olberman criticized Obama a few times and he's out, too. However, he also has prima donna issues that I do not believe Cenk had.

[hopemountain]

3. msnbc union workers can stand for themselves

and speak for themselves.

i totally agree with ed schultz on this - regarding moveon. also, ed has stood for other workers and their right to be represented by a union and has done more than his share of using his position to speak power to unions and workers.

in reality, every person who believes they should be able to be represented by a union can speak for her or his self.

what people need is empowerment - and not learned dependence on others to speak for them. workers are their own experts and can embrace a new paradigm of empowerment.

[Omaha Steve]

4. They are not unionized, MSNBC has been fighting it for a year

http://nonfictionunited.org/

Twitter Campaign: Stand With Peacock Producers and APs!

10/28/2013: MSNBC hosts like Ed Schultz, Rachel Maddow, Chris Hayes and Al Sharpton have been vocal supporters of the right to organize unions in America.

Producers and associate producers at Peacock Productions, NBC’s nonfiction and reality unit at 30 Rockefeller Center, have been organizing and fighting against unionbusting at NBC for over a year now.



Please tweet at the MSNBC hosts and ask them to meet with the producers at Peacock Productions.

Here are some sample tweets:

To tweet at Rachel Maddow:

.@maddow - producers/APs at @peacocknbc need your help to stop unionbusting. Stand with them! http://thndr.it/1eoJIqx #1u #maddow

To tweet at Ed Schultz:

.@wegoted, thanks for fighting for workers everyday. Can I count on your to support @peacocknbc workers too? http://thndr.it/1eoJIqx #edshow

To tweet at Al Sharpton:

We need your help @thereval. Can you stand with @peacocknbc producers/APs fighting unionbusting? http://thndr.it/1eoJIqx #TeamRev #1u

To tweet at Chris Hayes:

.@peaccocknbc producers/APs need your support more than ever @chrislhayes. Help them fight unionbusting! http://thndr.it/1eoJIqx #inners

To tweet at Tamron Hall:

Producers/APs at @peacocknbc need your help to stop unionbusting @tamronhall. You in? http://thndr.it/1eoJIqx #deadlinecrime #p2

To tweet at Lawrence O'Donnell:

.@lawrence - producers/APs at @peacocknbc need your help to stop unionbusting. Stand with them! http://thndr.it/1eoJIqx #1u #lastword

Producers and associate producers at Peacock Productions, NBC’s nonfiction and reality unit at 30 Rockefeller Center, have been organizing and fighting against just those kind of tactics at NBC for over a year now. They produce shows that are sold to other networks, but also produce shows hosted by MSNBC hosts like Chris Hayes and Tamron Hall as well.

These producers and APs have had enough of NBC’s attempts to stop their organizing drive. They are asking MSNBC hosts to do one simple thing: sit down with them and hear their stories.

Lend your voice to theirs and help them ask these pro-labor, progressive icons to meet with them to learn about NBC’s anti-union campaign. Tweet at them and let them know you stand with Peacock producers and APs!

Rachel Maddow, "Rachel Maddow Show," @maddow

Ed Schultz, “The Ed Show” @wegoted

Tamron Hall, “NewsNation” @tamronhall

Al Sharpton, “PoliticsNation” @thereval

Chris Hayes, “All In with Chris” @chrislhayes

Lawrence O’Donnell, “The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell” @lawrence

Peacock Productions @peacocknbc


- See more at: http://nonfictionunited.org/#sthash.169iOIwU.dpuf

[merrily]

20. O'Donnell claims to be a socialist and the Rev has picketed for a lot less.

[2banon]

28. O'Donnell claims to be a Socialist? Really? As in factually?

pardon me while I scrape my jaw from the floor.. somehow I'm having a hard time hearing him say that about himself... interesting.. hmm...

[dgibby]

29. I've heard him say it several times on his program. n/t

[2banon]

30. I don't do cable or satellite anymore

I used to watch his shows along with the rest of the line up during the Bush bot years, and I know I never heard him identify himself in that way. perhaps liberal or even progressive, but not socialist.

Perhaps he's evolved since those days.. good to know.

[kathysart_decoration]

34. Absolutely said

I want to vouch for the fact that Lawrence O'Donnell has absolutely said on his program that he is a socialist. Whether he is registered as such is another issue. What he was saying is that this country is not purely capitalist and socialism is clearly expressed in many of our institutions. But, yes, he did say he was a socialist.

[merrily]

6. What happened to solidarity?

Standing up to union-busting is nice. However, if you do it only when your own employer is not involved, only when you have nothing to lose, I'm not impressed. Then it seems more like show business than solidarity.

[ForgoTheConsequence]

12. Solidarity?

My favorite multi millionaire "left wing" talking heads need someone to stand up for them too.


In 2013 watching msnbc makes you a good progressive. We live in a pathetic state of affairs when people pick sides based on reality television political talking heads.


Msnbc is a business
Comcast is a business
Rachel Maddow and Ed Schultz are entertainers.

[merrily]

13. I know, but entertainers can have principles. Apparently, not those on MSNBC, though.

I am glad their hypocrisy is being exposed.

PS During the writers' strike in L.A. several years ago, quite a few actors joined them on the picket line.

And they were conventional actors, not those purporting to speak truth about politics to the people of America.

[ForgoTheConsequence]

14. I'm not sure they do have principles.

And if they do, they end when it directly impacts their bottom line.


Msnbc and fox are reality programming.




You're right, a few good ones supported the writers. Meanwhile "liberals" like John Stewart stayed on the air.

[merrily]

17. I am not talking about MSNBC, the network, but about the individuals.

When we're talking union-busting, I don't expect the employer to have principles.

Nor, frankly, do I expect Maddow et al. to have principles, but not because they are entertainers. Some of the strongest union people have been entertainers. As I said, as to Maddow, O'Donnell, Schultz, et al., I'm glad their hypocrisy is being exposed.

Please don't condescend. I know very well what MSNBC and Fox are.

And Stewart is either a centrist or a Democratic loyalist, not a liberal.

BTW, my comment about solidarity was address to hopemountain. I was questioning where hopemountain's solidarity was.

[7962]

22. Schultz gets a ton of money from unions too

I havent trusted his "I'm just a regular guy" shtick for awhile.

http://kcerds.dol-esa.gov/query/getPayerPayeeResult.do

[merrily]

23. He started as a Republican. According to him that was

"because I wanted to make a bunch of money."

But, of course, we are not supposed to wonder if that was his reason for becoming a Democrat, too.

In my book, this a huge "tell" as to the whole lot of them. And not only the weeknight prime time hosts, either.

When my sister was a teen, she had a school girl crush on some Republican and asked my mother to vote for him.

My mother said, "Vote for a Republican? Social Security and unions. No, we don't vote Republican."

And, for me, those are still the two things Democrats consider almost holy.

New Democrats, on the other hand, are very different from Democrats.

[Omaha Steve]

33. John Steward got his crew unionized ('Daily Show' ratifies contract with stage employees union)

John pushed for this hard! There has been ONE disgruntled former writer that said John was against his writers organizing.

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/aug/01/entertainment/la-et-ct-iatse-20120801

'Daily Show' ratifies contract with stage employees union

August 01, 2012|By Richard Verrie

Jon Stewart's "The Daily Show" is now yukking it up with the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees.

IATSE, the union representing crew members who worked behind the scenes on film and TV shows, said Wednesday that technical employees of “The Daily Show” have unanimously ratified their first collective bargaining agreement.

The contract is the culmination of negotiations between IATSE and the producers of the hit made-for-basic-cable series after voluntary recognition of the union by the employer, IATSE said.

The new agreement provides health and retirement benefits to various technical workers, including camera operators, video technicians, costume designers, teleprompter operators, and makeup artists.

FULL story at link.

[mike_c]

7. anyone who claims to be liberal but doesn't stand up for labor is immediately suspect....

That's what solidarity means, dammit.

[merrily]

24. Anyone who claims to be a Democrat but does not stand up for labor is

immediately suspect.

[AlbertCat]

8. SECRET MEETING!!!!!

If it was secret.... then how do we all know about it?

It may have been "private".... but that's not "secret"

Who is writing headlines these days? It's deliberately made to sound conspiratorial. OOOoooOOOoooo....

[merrily]

25. "A meeting no one but invitees was supposed to find out about" is too long for a headline.

You knew what was meant, didn't you?

[AlbertCat]

42. You knew what was meant, didn't you?

No.

Because nowhere in the article about the meeting did it mention no one was supposed to know about it. There was no indication that the folks who called for the meeting wanted no one to know about it. No one seemed to be sneaking around.

[LovingA2andMI]

9. WTH?

But, asked about the campaign, Schultz emailed Salon, “Moveon.org has never been an ally of Ed Schultz, why should I help you with a story? Give me a reason.” A follow-up email was not answered. (The email came from a personal address provided to Salon by people who have been in touch with him there; following a series of inquiries, an MSNBC spokesperson said, “I can’t confirm that e-mail address."

Really ED SCHULTZ? And what about Maddow, Shapton and O'Donnell. SILENCE IS NOT GOLDEN!

Another reason WHY folks need to REALIZE CORPORATE MEDIA is CORPORATE FREAKING MEDIA no matter what they said or claim to aspire on TV.

Anytime folks want to support INDEPENDENT MEDIA.....Feel free to do so.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, this story is hot! K/R

[jtuck004]

10. "Ed Schultz demurs". No surprise there. n/t

[Jesus Malverde]

11. I saw this and didn't understand the drama, does someone have a cheat sheet?..nt

[merrily]

15. You're okay with the hypocrisy? Cool.

[Jesus Malverde]

16. I don't understand who is hating on who...nt

[merrily]

18. Sorry, I don't do well with disingenousness.

[Jesus Malverde]

19. I don't have a TV if that helps.

I still have no idea, thanks for illuminating the situation.

[merrily]

21. You don't know who Rachael Maddow and Al Sharpton are?

This isn't being played out on TV.

Read the thread.

[Le Taz Hot]

35. Good for Chris Hayes for not tucking tail and running the other way.

As for the other four, I've lost all respect. There are key moments in your life in which you have to take a stand, regardless of consequences. It shows what you're made of. Chris Hayes proved himself by taking this meeting. The other four: talking heads who talk the talk but won't walk the walk. I hope they sleep well at night with their fat salaries. I'm sure the Owners thank them for their cooperation.

[Omaha Steve]

41. Chris has the lowest ratings and the most to lose.

I hope that MSNBC doesn't retaliate!

[merrily]

45. We can show solidarity, too.

We can stop watching a union busting network, right now.

Or we can stop watching any show except Hayes's show--and make a point of watching his.

And/or, we can stop watching every show, if they retaliate against Hayes.

People near the studio can join the picket line, tweet support

We can email and mail MSNBC.