It’ll be several more weeks before Ramsey County judge David Higgs hands down a decision in the matter of whether Star Tribune publisher Par Ridder’s actions upon leaving the Pioneer Press are grievous enough to warrant throwing him out of his new office in Minneapolis. One line of thought in the legal community is that Judge Higgs would be thrilled if the combatants in the case, Dean Singleton’s MediaNews and Ridder’s current employers, Avista Capital Partners reached an out-of-court settlement and spared him forcing anyone to do anything.
But considering the avidity with which Singleton has pursued full, public prosecution of his case against Ridder, it doesn’t seem likely he’ll settle for anything less than young Par’s impeccably groomed head on a pike. With that in mind, along with all the details of the case — not the least of which is Par conceding virtually every point of Singleton’s complaint — the Star Tribune Guild this Wednesday will take up the question of whether to put a “no confidence” vote on Par before its membership.
Says Strib Guild officer, Chris Serres, “We are definitely going to consider it at our stewards meeting Wednesday.” There are about 20 Guild stewards at the Strib.
“It has been bandied about quite a bit recently, in the light both of what he’s been accused of and what has he has said. So we’re going to discuss it, and if there’s enough interest among the stewards we’ll bring it before the membership.”
Serres says he hasn’t “personally decided” which way he’d go. And he says that as much as he and others are “obviously bothered by the stealing of the information, if that’s what he did, Guild members are more focused on the firings of valuable personnel, the loss of one out five newsroom jobs and the elimination of 30 pages of news space per week, 14 out of sports, than we are on [Ridder’s] problems.”
Serres’ fellow officer, Pat Doyle, confessed to being “a little out of the loop” working at the State Capitol as he does. He hadn’t yet heard of “no confidence” being on the agenda for Wednesday’s meeting. But he did remind me that the Guild had asked weeks ago for Chris Harte, Avista’s lone newspaper person (as far as anyone knows), to explain and essentially justify Ridder’s behavior. Predictably, Harte replied that he would have to wait until the legal action had played out.
“I’m not sure what [a vote of “no confidence”] would accomplish,” said Doyle, “but I don’t have a sense right now that the Guild has much confidence in either Par or ownership.” He added, as many Stribbers do in this context, that the fact they have so little idea who all is represented by Avista, is a handicap when it comes to judging how aggressive to get in the face of a situation as unique as Le Affair Par.
In normal times a “no confidence” vote against a key manager would be weighed with a cautious eye toward how much it might antagonize ownership, usually in the context of the next contraction negotiation. But at this moment, with the very high likelihood that Avista will seek game-changing Draconian, Dean Singleton-like cuts and concessions in its next contract with the Guild, (due up next summer), does a principled stand against a top manager who is either guilty as charged of serious improprieties … or stunningly incompetent carry as much or any real risk?
At some point isn’t it like impeachment talk regarding George W. Bush? If the offense is serious enough — and again, the appearance of either A: gross impropriety, or B: gross incompetence would seem to qualify as sufficiently serious — aren’t you required, at some level, to pursue a conclusive public judgment? Or … if you don’t see the current situation as laden with serious
reflections on your own ethics and/or professional credibility … well then there’s really no point in having a “no confidence” option on the books, is there?
Leave a Reply Cancel reply