In the latest round of bargaining, when company spokesman Stephen J. Macri was telling the Guild - once again - he didn't have proposals to exchange, he looked smugly across the table at union spokesman Bob Townsend and likened the negotiations to a dance.

"It's like we're dancing and nobody wants to lead," Macri, a lawyer with the Fifth Avenue firm of Putney, Twombly, Hall & Hirson, said.

When Townsend described the state of negotiations to the Unit Council, Charlie Dias, shop steward in the Security Processing Department, compared the talks to a boxing match.

"It's like two counter-punchers, nobody wants to lead," he observed.

Only thing is, this isn't a dance and it's not a sparring session. And the Guild hasn't treated it as such. We came into the opening round of negotiations - and the second session - with proposals in hand, ready for a simultaneous exchange.

We were ready to get down to hard bargaining. But Macri danced away, saying the company would have proposals sometime . . . somewhere . . . but they would be nothing more than responses to Guild proposals in economic areas.

Then, out of the blue, Macri threw a roundhouse hook.

He gave us one proposal: Give up getting paid weekly in favor of getting paid twice a month and the Publisher would make some improvements in our 401-k plan.

But you've got to agree to it right away, Macri told the Guild.

When we were negotiating on Monday, November 13, Macri didn't have a single proposal for us. When we were negotiating on Thursday, November 16, he had this one proposal and was pressing for an agreement to it that day. You'd think maybe he could have mentioned it three days earlier.

In rejecting the company proposal, Townsend said we realize twice-a-month paydays is something S&P is truly interested in obtaining and the Guild isn't slamming the door shut on them. (Although it's been a "hot-button issue" in the past and many our members are very concerned about it.) If S&P is going to buy the new pay schedule, he told the company, it's going to have to be with a benefit or benefits that are truly appealing and will be enjoyed by everybody, he said.

The Guild's negotiating committee saw the changes the company proposed in the 401-k as benefiting only certain individuals:

• New employees: The proposal would do away with the year's waiting period before a new employee could participate in the plan.

• Employees at S&P for less than four years: Participants would be fully vested immediately instead of being partially vested for the first three years of participation. (In reality, the only people this would benefit would be those who leave S&P in years two, three or four.)

• Highly compensated employees: Up until now, employees making $80,000 a year or more have been allowed to contribute only 6% of their salary into the 401-k. According to the company proposal, the contribution could go as high as 15% to the maximum of $10,500 a year allowed by law.

STILL, WE WANT THE IMPROVEMENTS

Our Negotiating Committee can see how the improvements in the 401-k proposed by the company would benefit some of our members and could be important to them and we're going to try to secure them. But the company shouldn't have proposed them with a gun to our heads, telling us the proposal had to be accepted that very day. (Later in the session, we were told we could have until Thanksgiving to bite.) And it shouldn't have come with a price tag that would affect every member of our union. And the company shouldn't be dancing or boxing or whatever it's doing at the table. It should be negotiating!

In addition to Townsend and Unit Chairperson Ed Fannon, the Negotiating Committee consists of Brian McGuire of Facilities and Services Management, Marilyn Bissell of Cash Systems, Peter Burke of Ratings Information Services, Leo Larkin of the Analytical Department, John Matis of Data Operations, Dorothy Madison of Subscriber Services - Circulation Fulfillment, and Caheim Murray of Mail Services.

The next meeting is Monday.

# # # # # # #