Did WaPo Break The Law When It Disciplined A Writer For This Negative Article On Jeff Bezos?

We've recently found ourselves frequently noting a rather bizarre new trend in which the mainstream media and liberal Washington D.C. establishment has turned its back on the Silicon Valley elites.  Just last week, even Hillary Clinton called out Facebook for allowing someone who may have been Russian buy a staggering $50,000 worth of political ads on their site...hopefully we don't have to explain the irony of that statement given that Facebook execs gave millions to Hillary's campaign.

But, just a word to the wise, if you're a writer and have intentions of joining in on the recent wave of tech titan bashing, you may want to first make sure your paper isn't owned by the same tech titan who has wandered into your crosshairs.  Unfortunately, Fredrick Kunkle of the Washington Post didn't heed that advice when he published a scathing op-ed about Jeff Bezos in the Huffington Post.  Here's a taste of what he had to say:

One of the wealthiest men in the world is thinking of ways to give back. But he’s still taking from the very people who helped him build his fortune.


But as Bezos, whose worth now exceeds $80 billion, loosens his pockets, it’s important to put his charitable giving — and the philanthropy of the super-rich — into perspective: Many people worked hard for Bezos to help make him so rich, and he has a record of treating them poorly.


Amazon’s history of dodging taxes, its mistreatment of workers, and its ruthlessness toward even the smallest competitors have been well documented. It put ambulances outside distribution centers rather than install adequate air conditioning. It broke up a union organizing effort by closing the call center and dismissing everyone who worked there. The New York Times documented its punishing work environment in a front-page exposé. The company’s actions, as Forbes put it, hark back to an earlier time when workers were treated as “replaceable cogs in the machine.”


Everyone at the Post wants it to succeed and prosper. But we want our employees to succeed and prosper, too.


Two years ago, however, Bezos slashed retirement benefits. For reasons that remain unclear, he froze a pension plan that was awash in so much money that neither he nor the company would possibly have faced additional liabilities. He also spurned the sort of compromise plan The New York Times Co. had pioneered ? an adjustable pension plan that would have ensured the Post would never encounter a problem funding it. In essence, this innovative approach, developed by the financial services firm Cheiron, would have mitigated the company’s risks by sharing them with employees and continued to grow their annual retirement benefit.


Bezos’ decision on retirement benefits had nothing to do with the balance sheet and, arguably, everything to do with ideology. And it almost overshadowed Bezos’ demand for the right to cancel everyone’s health insurance and his push to take it away from part-time employees.



Not surprisingly, Kunkle's efforts earned him this sternly-worded warning from Wapo's Director of Labor Relations for his "willful and intentional violation of
The Washington Post’s standards and ethics policy."  Of course, we wouldn't be surprised if this letter turns out to be just a prelude to Kunkle's eventual dismissal...somehow we suspect his 'performance reviews' are about to become a bit more critical.


But, as it turns out, punishing writers for "publicizing a dispute with management" might just violate union rules and has earned Wapo an unfair labor practice charge with the National Labor Relations Board. 

In response to the Post’s warning, the Washington-Baltimore News Guild, which represents the paper’s editorial staff, filed on Tuesday what is known as an unfair labor practice charge with the National Labor Relations Board, accusing the Post of violating Kunkle’s legally protected right to engage in “concerted activities” to further the union’s interests. The National Labor Relations Act bars employers from interfering in worker activities that advance their welfare, which typically include a worker’s right to publicly criticize an employer about a work-related matter.


“If you’re a Guild officer and Freddy is, he has a legal right to publicize a dispute with management,” said Rick Ehrmann, the Guild representative for the Post newsroom. “It doesn’t matter what the outlet is.”


Kunkle, who writes the Post’s “Tripping” blog about transportation in the Washington, D.C. area, pitched the Post’s opinion section at the end of August on an op-ed challenging Bezos’ rollback of employee retirement benefits and planned overhaul of the company’s severance policy, according to his account of events.


When the newspaper rejected it, in his telling, Kunkle decided to publish it at HuffPost, informing Washington Post Editor-in-Chief Marty Baron of his plans. (In the interest of full disclosure, I am a member of the labor-management committee at HuffPost, which is represented by the Writer’s Guild of America, East.)

That said, while Kunkle's NLRB filing is 'cute', somehow we suspect it's only a matter of time before he learns the true cost of defying a mainstream media outlet's official list of pre-approved narratives.


Rapunzal Dickguzinya Mon, 09/18/2017 - 13:01 Permalink

No corporations and banks own the law, the politicians and all the money in the world. Why would we even question anything they do ? Even if it's a mistake it's correct afterall ? Wait until we build monuments for those infallible suckers and the sheeple whoreship them. Why just because they got conditioned since pre K, with the knowledge the elite deemed ok for us.

In reply to by Dickguzinya

Chupacabra-322 Mon, 09/18/2017 - 12:58 Permalink

God forbid someone criticize the Borg Gas Lighting False Narrative Dystopian reality these Pure Evil Criminal Psychopathic "Intelligence" / PysOp Agencies are predictively programming the assimilated minds with.

kbohip Mon, 09/18/2017 - 13:02 Permalink

Bezos is smart enough to know how to keep the liberals off his back.  Buy a paper and turn it into a Trump witch hunt/liberal mouthpiece for the forseeable future.  See, he's just like one of them.  Just like the rich Hollywood elite and celebrities, lol.

I am a Man I a… Mon, 09/18/2017 - 13:09 Permalink

Geez, is everyone in a union that's in the media business?  No wonder they all sound like a bunch of commies.  I have lots of issues with Bezos and WaPo, but them not allowing those they employ to write bad about the owner is not one of them.

JedClampIt Mon, 09/18/2017 - 13:14 Permalink

I boycott Amazon for this simple reason: they are doing to middle America exactly what Wal-Mart did. Come to town and destroy all the mom and pop's. There's no difference between these two. Join me. Don't buy from Amazon.

Insurrector JedClampIt Mon, 09/18/2017 - 13:34 Permalink

There is one difference though.  Wal-mart killed the Mom and Pops shops, and then when the economy tanked they closed 269 store, leaving many small communities without the Mom and Pop shops and without Wal-marts (or Sams or Amigos).  Many of them were in Alabama, Texas, Mississippi, North Carolina, Louisiana, Georgia, Arkansas, Alabam and Florida in presumably lower income areas.Amazon either swallows you or you need to setup shop on Amazon and give them a cut.CVS, Walgreens, Rite Aid did the same to small pharmacies.  Next time check out the prices at the big drug stores for non-prescriptions - I can buy many items at the local grocery stores for up to 50% less.

In reply to by JedClampIt

Uncoy JedClampIt Wed, 09/20/2017 - 01:28 Permalink

It's a good thought but in the area where I'm buying (fiddly audio-visual/technical gear), Amazon's prices are about half what a specialty store would charge and their availability is about 70% vs about 25%. It would be twice as much money and triple the effort to shop somewhere else.That said, buying groceries or clothes from Amazon is madness. End result would eventually be no other choices to feed or clothe ourselves. I.e. an unbreakable monopoly. Almost Soviet. Cradle to grave, everything you read, eat and wear from the Party/Amazon.

In reply to by JedClampIt

Chupacabra-322 Mon, 09/18/2017 - 13:17 Permalink

He's nothing more than a "Company Man" / front man for the

Pure Evil War Criminal Treasonous Seditious Psychopaths at the CIA.

Pure Evil Goolgle's front man is Criminal Schmitt.

FaceFuck's is Zuckerberg.

All "Company Men."


Chupacabra-322 CuttingEdge Mon, 09/18/2017 - 14:05 Permalink

Think about this way.

The Pure Evil War Criminal Treasonous Seditious Psychopaths at the CIA had their "Company Man" / front man Pure Evil War Criminal Treasonous Seditious Psychopath Obama in the Office of the CEO aka "President" for eight years.

They don't now.


Trump. For whatever he may be.... Isn't their "Selected" choice Company" front man to hold the Office of CEO.

Their Matrix of lies & their Dystopian Reality has been exposed.

The Criminal Deep State has accentually lost control of the Intelligence Community via its Agents / Operatives & Presstitute Media vehicle's to Gas Light the Masses.

In reply to by CuttingEdge

small axe Mon, 09/18/2017 - 13:32 Permalink

Main Streets all across America would erupt in cheers if Bezos' unfair practices were exposed. His ideology starts and finishes with personal gain, and greed is the only currency he understands.

djrichard Mon, 09/18/2017 - 13:28 Permalink

I'll be shocked if this somehow shows up under the news that gets syndicated on Yahoo's web page. But just to test that theory out, I did a search on Yahoo for Kunkle and Bezos,  just to flag my interest.  Will see what happens.Edit: kind of like Harvard recinding its invite to Chelsea Manning to be a Fellow.  I tuned Yahoo to show interest in that as well.  And yet, the news articles on that topic never made it on to my feed at Yahoo.  Shocked.

insanelysane Mon, 09/18/2017 - 13:34 Permalink

"And it almost overshadowed Bezos’ demand for the right to cancel everyone’s health insurance..."Bezos is an ordinary, everyday, limosine liberal.  Listen to what I say, ignore what I do.

SurfinUSA aloha_snakbar Wed, 09/20/2017 - 23:23 Permalink

Remember when Bezos started out he dressed as a preppy with his full haircut.  He looked like a mousey little beta-boy lost on his way to the university.Now he comes roaring out with a shaved head wearing black biker gear.  He's trying to look like the bad guys in a cheesy action movie or a bareback rider in gay porn.  I guess he is following his daddy Lucifer and being his bitch. 

In reply to by aloha_snakbar

shutterbug Mon, 09/18/2017 - 14:00 Permalink

Any person who has more then 1 billion euro/usd/gbp in assets should automatically get a death sentence...The massive amounts of stolen wealth are only there because of the trillions put in the economic systems by central banks.That is no longer real capitalism but criminal behavior made possible by government and its agencies. 

Chupacabra-322 shutterbug Mon, 09/18/2017 - 14:54 Permalink

"That is no longer real capitalism but criminal behavior made possible by government and its agencies."

Correction my Dear Watson.

"That is no longer real capitalism but criminal behavior made possible by CORPORATE government and its Corporate agencies."

It's Criminal Fraud UNITED STATES, CORP. INC. & it's Criminal Fraud affiliates at the CORP. INC. STATE & LOCAL Municipal Levels.


Black Laws Dictionary, CONSENT to it by birth, silence, signature etc...

They're all involved in an elaborate scheme based on contrat law & Criminal deceit to Fraud The American People by CONSENT (Black Law's Dictionary) & being an accessory to the deceit & Criminal Fraud by contracting with the Criminal State.

We are "Governed" Indoctrinated into a Political, Educational, Religious & Economic UNITED STATES, CORP based on contract law which is based on Criminal Fraud, deceit & illusion.

The Private Corp UNITED STATES, CORP uses the cover of being a functional Government when in reality they are not. Much like the Criminal Federal Reserve uses The "Federal" in their name & use it as cover to give the illusion that they are a branch of the US Government when they are not.

Through bankruptcies, Criminal Contract Fraud & deceit the Charlatans have incrementally incorporated the US as well as your souls (birth cert) which are securitized via the Criminal Federal Reserve through to the IMF.

They're functioning off corporate version of the THE CONSTITUTION. It's the reason why The Global Criminal Oligarch Cabal Bankster Intelligence Crime Syndicate continues to lie, cheat, deceit, rape & pillage with impunity.

The only power the have over you is with CONSENT (Black Law's Dictionary). Pay no Taxes. Peaceful Non-Participation, Non-Compliance & being an accessory into their Criminal system/s based on Criminal Fraud, Debt Bondage & Enslavement.

Long Agorism.

The ideology which asserts that the Libertarian philosophical position occurs in the real world in practice as Counter-Economics (see below).

Conscious practitioner of Counter-Economics; older terms include Left Libertarian and New Libertarian.

The study and/or practice of all human action which is forbidden by the State, including violation or non-compliance with regulations; sale and delivery of controlled or forbidden substances; ignoring of all borders and internal state boundaries, customs, tariffs, duties and taxes; evasion of taxes, tributes, levies and assizes; non-compliance with personal regulation such.

In reply to by shutterbug

Faeriedust shutterbug Mon, 09/18/2017 - 20:41 Permalink

Capitalism began as criminal behavior.  The famous "alchemist" Nicholas Flaumel, for instance, pretended to have the secret of turning lead into gold, because practicing sorcery was a lesser crime than loaning money at interest which was what he was really doing.  Later, British "gentlemen adventurers" took to the sea in search of fun and profit, mostly gained at gunpoint from someone far away from Britain and therefore unprotected by the laws of that country.Then you had the stock company swindles of the 18th century, mostly centering around the projected gains to be had from colonizing land that already belonged to someone else; the robber barons of the 19th century who made their profits by swindling their customers and competitors, and finally the war profiteers of the 20th century and the vaporware salesmen of the 21st.  You cannot elevate greed as the highest goal to be expected of humanity, and not end up with a society where lawless scum regularly rises to the top. Capitalism is about the subordination of virtue to personal profit.  That in a nutshell is the definition of crime.

In reply to by shutterbug

SurfinUSA Faeriedust Wed, 09/20/2017 - 23:18 Permalink

Horseshit.  The Sumerians and Phoenicians traded for profit 3,500 years ago and built working civilizations.  Every society has lawless scum.  That's why we have laws.  Western Civilization was able to maintain itself even with the profiteers and scoundrels.  Now, no one respects the law and it won't be long until civilization falls and chaos ensues. Profit is not evil.  Profit allows the entrepreneur to build savings from production to safeguard his business when sales are down, and it provides a storehouse of wealth to grow the business as it becomes more successful.You can call me a criminal.  I made profits.  I also employed 15 people, paid their health insurance out of my pocket with no demand for contribution from them, set up IRA's for those employees who didn't know how to do it, and served my customers for years. I finally retired and made sure my employees had a place to go before I sold out and closed up.  So, point your candy ass finger at me for being a capitalist.  I'm proud of what we, as a team, achieved in my business.  And no, that queer president we had and that lesbo senator from Massachusetts didn't have a damn thing to do with my success.  

In reply to by Faeriedust

East Indian Mon, 09/18/2017 - 14:01 Permalink

Who is powerful?20th Century laws, unions, pension schemes,or18th century feudal mind owning 21st century assets?Whether the world will stay on course chartered nearly a hundred years ago, or will end up in a global neo-feudal serfdom?A moment of truth. 

Faeriedust East Indian Mon, 09/18/2017 - 20:28 Permalink

Would you people PLEASE stop using "feudal" as a generic perjorative?  This word, it does not mean what you think it means.A feudal mind owning any assets, sees them as capital held en-feoff -- as reward for services rendered.  Those services include absolute fidelity to those from whom the assets are essentially rented, not for cash, but for loyal support.  In turn, the feudal "owner" or fief-holder sublets those resources to others in return for their loyalty.  It is the furthest possible remove from 21st-century treatment of human beings as interchangeable parts in a machine.  In the feudal system, people matter.  All resources are connected to and derived from people.The use of the term "feudal" as a disparagement derives from the ascendancy of 17th-century merchants who aspired to replace the hereditary feudal aristocracy with an elite based solely on the possession of wealth, however acquired.  Naturally, as that system developed, "however acquired" came to favor those who acquired by "innovative" strategies, usually criminal in substance if not appearance.  The idea of "feudal" nobility, honor, and noblesse-oblige as insults could only be conceived by the kind of scum that rise to the top of a grossly capitalist system -- the likes of Martin Shrkeli.Pray for neo-feudal serfdom.  Under feudalism, serfs matter

In reply to by East Indian

A. Boaty Mon, 09/18/2017 - 14:02 Permalink

"Bezos’ decision on retirement benefits had nothing to do with the balance sheet and, arguably, everything to do with ideology..."

What ideology?

Dilluminati Mon, 09/18/2017 - 14:39 Permalink

https://pagesix.com/2017/09/18/did-jedediah-bila-exit-the-view-because-… rep for Bila declined to comment. Show reps deny Bila’s exit had anything to do with the Clinton interview, telling Page Six, “Jed asked good questions during that interview, and the producers were really pleased with how she handled it.”http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4877864/Hillary-Clinton-slams-M…Subject: Matt Lauer & Hillary what REALLY happened….     WHAT REALLY HAPPENED AT THE NBC PRESIDENTIAL FORUM WITH MATT LAUER?     DEMOCRAT HILLARY CLINTON’S BEHIND THE SCENES TIRADE AFTER NBC’s MATT LAUER ASKED CLINTON ONE QUESTION SHE HAD NOT PRE-APPROVED.        VETERAN NBC CAMERAMAN:   ‘YOU REALLY HAD TO SEE THIS TO BELIEVE IT…SHE CAME APART – LITERALLY UNGLUED; SHE IS THE MOST FOUL-MOUTHED WOMAN I’VE EVER HEARD…AND THAT  VOICE AT SCREECH LEVEL…AWFUL!’     “SHE LOOKED SO ENRAGED THAT WE ALL THOUGHT HER HEAD WOULD EXPLODE…IT WAS A FULL-ON MELT-DOWN, AND THEN SHE SCREAMED SHE’D GET THAT F – – – ING LAUER FIRED FOR THIS. IT WENT ON FOR AT LEAST A HALF HOUR; WE ALL THOUGHT THE EMS  WOULD BE THE NEXT CALL.”    NBC Associate Producer of Forum:       Behind the scenes, NBC technicians and cameramen at the Wednesday night, Commander-in-Chief Forum (Sept 7) report that Hillary Clinton was so angry and incensed that she had been  ‘blind-sided’ by one question she was not prepared for and had not approved in advance.       “When her time in front of the cameras ended, Clinton shook the hand Lauer extended to her and smiled once more for the wide camera shot and then Hillary proceeded to pick up a full glass of water and threw it at the face of her assistant and the screaming started. She was in a full meltdown and no one on her staff dared speak with her – she went kind of manic and didn’t have any control over herself at that point. How these people work with this woman is amazing to me.  Most of the small military audience were cordoned off, their seating not close to Mrs. Clinton, but certainly they heard her screaming because it was loud…and she really didn’t seem to care who heard any of it.”       Republican Donald Trump also appeared, in a separate telecast from Hillary Clinton’s and arrived with his two sons but no entourage or assistants in tow.  The NBC cameramen involved in his segment said he was a ‘true gentleman’ and Trump and his sons spoke to everyone and thanked them for inviting him to speak: “It was a pleasure to answer your questions Matt.”       Hillary Clinton’s segment was much different. According to people working on the sidelines, “When Matt posed the one legitimate question about the FBI investigation concerning her homemade server and the unsecured emails, we could see she was beginning to boil and her eyes looked to pop.”        “It was toward the end of her interview so she was becoming unglued by the time Lauer finished with questioning.  Hillary went ballistic, throwing a huge tantrum and screaming at her staff, “you f – – – ing idiots, you were supposed to have this thing set up for me and you’ve screwed it up!   If that f – – – ing bastard wins we all hang from nooses!   Lauer’s finished…and if I lose it’s all on you ass – – – – s for screwing this up.”       Clinton finally stormed off the military ‘set’ and the assistant producer said she was screaming that she wanted to talk to “the idiot who set this mess up…you do not blindside me – ever!” and continued to demand to speak with executives at Comcast, parent company to NBC Universal.        Her dozen or more aides were visibly disturbed and tried to calm her down when she started shaking uncontrollably.  That did not stop her from demanding an executive “on the phone, now!”  She was told the executive-in-charge of the forum was ready to talk with her and she was led away by two rather large aides who appeared to help her walk.       The TV executives got the message with all of the censuring headlines that followed over the next couple of days when it seemed the entire media turned on Matt Lauer for behaving in a “partisan” manner and “being grossly unfair and critical of the former secretary of state.”      Matt Lauer was heavily criticized on air by the Clinton campaign the rest of the week with most of the mainstream media joining in.  The media appeared to frame Matt’s one serious question as the Clinton campaign was doing…”an unfair and partisan attack on Mrs. Clinton.”        Matt Lauer is still facing major backlash following his 23 minutes with Hillary Clinton.  Privately, many reporters said Matt handed the Democrat nominee the expected softball questions, but made the decision to ask about the emails because, “the American people deserve an answer from the former secretary of state.”      Calls were made to New York Times, Washington Post and Huffington Post and Twitter executives with orders to “Crush Matt Lauer”.   As you can easily see with all the headlines from these MSM sources, they did as they were told by the Clinton campaign.     Hillary also screamed that she would be “treated with respect at the debates or heads will roll.”   Staffers at the Clinton campaign report that they fear her wrath and uncontrollable outbursts, and one described Hillary as  “an egotistical psychopath”.      Since Hillary does not allow any staff to have cell phones when she is in their presence, no footage is available, but Hillary will never let this rest.  She has made it clear that she wants Matt Lauer to be “persona non grata – for putting her on the spot.”       Interim DNC chairman Donna Brazile, the first black woman to hold the position, was singled out by Hillary during the rant.   She screamed at Donna, “I’m so sick of your face.   You stare at the wall like a brain dead buffalo, while letting that f – – – ing Lauer get away with this.   What are you good for, really?   Get the f – – – to work  janitoring this mess – do I make myself clear?”         A female NBC executive said that Donna Brazile looked at Mrs. Clinton and never flinched, which seemed to enrage Hillary all the more.  The executive continued, “It was the most awful and terrible…and racist display – such a profane meltdown I have ever witnessed from anyone,  and I will never forget it.  That woman should never see the inside of the oval office I can tell you that.  She was unhinged and just continued to verbally abuse everyone – she was out of control.”

SurfinUSA Dilluminati Wed, 09/20/2017 - 23:04 Permalink

The bitch is crazier than a church house rat.  IF the outtakes were ever shown to the Clinton acolytes they would be "deniers."  What Happened Hillary?  Clinton wasn't defeated by the Russians, she was defeated because of the words that came out of her mouth and her condescension towards people who didn't agree with her. If voting constitutes a conspiracy, then the voters conspired to deprive Clinton of her quest for power. 

In reply to by Dilluminati