Journalists at Nine Entertainment newspapers set for two-day walkout over pay dispute

Hundreds of journalists across Nine’s flagship mastheads The Sydney Morning Herald, The Age and The Australian Financial Review are set to walk off the job this week.

Nine Entertainment chief executive Mike Sneesby. Picture: Britta Campion

Hundreds of journalists across Nine’s flagship mastheads The Sydney Morning Herald, The Age and The Australian Financial Review are set to walk off the job this week over a protracted pay dispute, threatening to decimate the company’s newspapers during one of the world’s biggest rolling news stories of the past two decades.

The proposed two-day strike, slated for Thursday and Friday, would gut the newspapers of all specialist news reports and analysis in the days leading up to the Queen’s funeral, and would curtail the mastheads’ coverage of the AFL and NRL football finals.

The planned walkout would be the first of its kind since the Nine-Fairfax media merger in 2018.

On Friday evening, Nine management was formally notified by representatives of the Media, Entertainment & Arts Alliance that the company’s journalists were intending to take protected industrial action for 24-48 hours later this week. That followed a staff vote last month, in which 82 per cent of Nine’s newspaper journalists voted in favour of taking industrial action of some kind.

Across the company’s three main mastheads, about 90 per cent of staff are members of the union.

Nine has offered its journalists a 3.5 per cent increase on “graded” rates, and a 3 per cent increase for the newsrooms’ higher-income earners. This is in addition to a 0.5 per cent rise in superannuation, plus a $1750 “recognition bonus” paid to its employees in July.

In May, many Nine staff were surprised to learn that the company had signed a six-month “trial” with AAP – just two years after it had decided to cease funding the wire service after deciding, along with co-owners News Corp (publisher of The Australian), that it was unsustainable.

Nine’s managing director of publishing, James Chessell. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Dylan Coker

Nine’s temporary re-engagement with AAP alerted staff to the likelihood that management was preparing for possible rolling industrial action by journalists throughout the remainder of 2022.

Last week, Nine’s managing director of publishing, James Chessell, confirmed the suspicions of staff.

“I’m not gonna lie, it gives us cover if there is industrial action,” Chessell said of Nine’s deal with AAP.

On Sunday, Chessell declined to respond to questions from The Australian about the looming strike.

In an email to members last week, the MEAA told its members: “Management can be in no doubt that our campaign for a fair agreement from Nine is only going to get bigger.

“After the company reported bumper profits last week, we are demanding a fair pay rise; guaranteed career progression, and minimum standards for contributors.”

Nine chief executive officer Mike Sneesby declined to comment last month when The Australian asked about the industrial unrest.

“Nine is a big organisation, we have over 5000 staff right across the company,” he said.

“My focus and the focus of the executive team is looking after our people and creating a sustainable business.”

Separately, Nine is also continuing its company-wide probe into claims of wage underpayment, amid concerns that staff overtime rates were not properly paid, dating back to 2016.

The outcome of the review could see Nine forced to make significant payments to current and former staff who were not paid overtime rates as per the terms of the wage agreement.

The review covers Nine Publishing staff at the Sydney Morning Herald, The Age, the Australian Financial Review, WA Today and Brisbane Times. A Nine spokeswoman said the company had since changed its scheduling for employees due to the “ambiguous” wording in its enterprise bargaining agreement.

“In the interests of avoiding a dispute we agreed in May to comply with the MEAA’s interpretation shortly after it was raised as an issue,” she said.

“We are currently reviewing work conducted over the past six years to identify if there were any occasions where staff may have been entitled to overtime payments under this revised interpretation.”