Skip to Content

San Francisco Chronicle staffers asked to sign buyout agreement that likely includes an illegal clause

About five percent of the Chronicle's staff were approved to take a buyout, first offered at the beginning of the month

4:56 PM PDT on October 31, 2024

Eleven employees at the San Francisco Chronicle have requested and have been approved for a buyout, first offered at the beginning of the month, according to a contract viewed by Gazetteer SF. But the paper may have violated federal labor law by including a non-disparagement clause in its severance contracts, according to an expert.

Staffers who requested buyouts have been asked to sign an agreement from Hearst, the Chronicle's parent company, which includes a clause promising “not to do or say anything, verbally or in writing, directly or indirectly, that reflects negatively on or otherwise detrimentally affects any Releasee’s products or services.” If workers do not sign, they will not be eligible for severance, but will still likely lose their jobs, according to the contract, which has been reviewed by Gazetteer SF.

Non-disparagement clauses like this one cannot be included in any severance contract, thanks to a National Labor Relations Board ruling in 2023, said Jason Lohr, a litigation attorney at Lohr Ripamonti & Segarich. 

“I just don’t think that clause could be enforceable,” Lohr, who is unaffiliated with the Chronicle or its union, told Gazetteer after reviewing the section of the buyout offer. “What the NLRB wants to do is to allow workers to communicate with each other about anything in the job site, and by saying you can’t talk about this stuff at work, you’re infringing upon the rights that they’re entitled.”

Workers were not allowed to read the agreement before requesting a buyout. In a memo notifying the paper's 200-some staffers about the buyouts, Chronicle publisher Bill Nagel wrote that employees who decline to sign the agreement will still be “terminated by reason of submitting the program application form as your resignation.” Additionally, Nagel wrote that “the terms offered now will not be offered in the future.”

Lohr emphasized that workers who do sign the agreement will not be bound by the non-disparagement clause under NLRB rules, should they wish to talk about their former employer after taking the buyout. (Anyone who does is welcome to contact this reporter at joshua@gazetteer.co.) 

“These employees can say whatever they want about the Chronicle and the Chronicle cannot enforce that,” he said. 

Nagel did not respond to a request for comment from Gazetteer

Editor’s note: The author was a member of the Chronicle’s union from January 2021 to October 2021. He was a news reporter at SFGATE, which is editorially independent from the Chronicle

Email this article

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Gazetteer SF

Muttville and SF SPCA head to SoCal to take some of the load off rescues overwhelmed by wildfires

The historic fires in Southern California are creating untenable situations for animal shelters

January 15, 2025

Two of the city’s biggest political groups are merging — but it looks more like crisis response than evolution

TogetherSF and Neighbors for a Better SF spent millions on the November election, with little to show for it. Will joining forces get them any more?

January 15, 2025

A humble church cookbook from Stockton defined Cantonese home cooking for a generation

The St. Mark’s cookbook, first published in 1966 to raise funds for a Methodist church in the Central Valley, remains a cult classic across California

January 14, 2025

Meta quietly removed mentions of LGBTQ-affirming care from public benefits page

The company said that they were ‘removed in error’

January 13, 2025

Despite tons of storefronts standing empty across the city, hardly anyone pays the vacant storefront tax

Things may be about to change for non-compliant property owners, who have been getting away scott-free so far

January 10, 2025