Getty WMUR booted from next Democratic debate

New Hampshire’s most influential television station is being pushed out of next week’s Democratic debate.

The reason? A labor dispute between a handful of employees at the station, WMUR, and its owner, the Hearst CorporationS. The Democratic National Committee announced WMUR’s fate on Friday in a joint statement with the New Hampshire Democratic Party that blamed the TV channel and Hearst for the impasse.


At issue is an accusation by the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 1228 that WMUR is trying to strip pensions from about a dozen of its employees because they decided to join the union.

“Regrettably, as a result of WMUR’s unwillingness to move forward on scheduling negotiations between the Hearst Corporation and Production Department employees represented by IBEW Local 1228 prior to the debate, we will no longer include WMUR as a co-sponsor of the debate, and their talent will not be participating in any way,” DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz and New Hampshire Democratic Party chairman Ray Buckley said. “The right for workers to form and organize a union is a key principle of the Democratic Party, and is key to ensuring the economic safety of the American people by protecting their rights and benefits.”

In a statement, WMUR president and general manager Jeff Bartlett said the negotiations with the union will continue despite their disappointment in the DNC’s decision.

“Needless to say, we’re disappointed that the efforts of the 140 WMUR employees in helping organize this debate will now be undone. Nevertheless, we’ll continue to cover the debate, and the candidates and campaigns. As for the negotiations with this particular union, we will continue with the policy we’ve followed with the many prior union negotiations we’ve successfully concluded — to negotiate in good faith, and directly and not through third parties. To that end, we have a mutually agreed-upon date for another meeting, which has been scheduled and confirmed for some two weeks now,” Bartlett said.

In early December, in an effort to get WMUR and Hearst to the negotiating table, the IBEW local had called on Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Martin O'Malley and the DNC “to terminate WMUR’s sponsorship and any participation” in the debate if a contract was not reached prior to next Saturday, Dec. 19.

“The only other alternative we have is to put up a picket line at the debate, and we don’t want to do that,” IBEW 1228 business manager Fletcher Fischer previously told the Union Leader.

On Thursday evening, DNC spokesman Eric Walker said the committee expected “negotiations to be resolved prior to the debate,” but others closely involved in the process were less optimistic.

It’s an untenable position for the party, as no Democratic candidate would have been likely cross a picket line in order to attend the debate — a distinct possibility if WMUR remained involved.

Several people familiar with the situation said it was unlikely WMUR and Hearst would be able to resolve the dispute ahead of the debate, citing a meeting already scheduled for after Dec. 19. As a result, employees of the politically powerful station had been growing increasingly nervous and angry about the prospect that it would lose the debate — which will still be broadcast by ABC.

Most directly affected in the loss of sponsorship will be WMUR anchor and political director Josh McElveen, who was scheduled to question the candidates alongside ABC News moderators David Muir and Martha Raddatz. WMUR will also lose branding opportunities, though the debate will still air on the station’s channel because it is the local ABC affiliate. Removing WMUR means little for ABC News, which is producing the event using its own staff.

In an interview, Fischer said the DNC did the right thing, though he acknowledged that when the union meets with the station on Dec. 22, the station will likely be less cooperative.

"It didn’t ever need to get to this escalated point, but they pushed it. And I suspect when we get back to the table, they’re going to be a little less cooperative and try to take stuff out on the workers," Fischer said. "It’s become a national story and we have thousands of people looking at this story now as opposed to a couple of hundred a few weeks ago."

This is far from the first time labor issues have affected WMUR’s debate sponsorship — but it is the first time the sponsorship has actually been pulled. Several sources knowledgeable about the current situation said that, like clockwork, unions have used election cycles to push WMUR into negotiations. The union, it appears, has been more aggressive in its negotiations this year than in previous cycles.

In 2003, for example, WMUR avoided losing its sponsorship when the station agreed to ratify a union’s first contract six days before a scheduled December debate. The three-year contract included among other items, "significant improvements to wage rates that will gain workers increases between 5.6 percent and 34 percent, depending on years of service,” according to an IBEW report from the time.

But signs didn't point to a similar resolution this time around, multiple people familiar with the deliberations said, noting that both sides in the dispute have dug in their heels.

Though the issue between the union and the station had been brewing for months, a statement from O’Malley's campaign on Thursday afternoon campaign added urgency to the situation, leading many to believe a decision would come soon. The release called on the DNC and NHDC to reconsider WMUR’s role in the debate and urged the other two campaigns to pull their advertising from the station.

“We stand in support of IBEW, and one of the reasons we’ve called for the DNC and the NHDP to pull together is we need to figure out what the backup plan is,” O’Malley's New Hampshire director, John Bivona, told POLITICO on Thursday evening — refusing to rule out any possibility for the campaign, including that the former Maryland governor would boycott the debate if WMUR remained a sponsor.

But the O’Malley campaign — which, unlike Sanders and Clinton — can't afford to air any ads in New Hampshire's saturated, expensive media market, is relatively new to the dispute. Thursday’s statement was the first indication of the Maryland governor’s attention to the labor disagreement, said a handful of people who have been intimately involved.

“They've been completely uninterested in the labor issues surrounding WMUR until today,” said one neutral Democrat who is familiar with the negotiations.

Both Clinton and Sanders have personally met with Bartlett, and both have cleared their appearances on the station’s programming with the local IBEW. Clinton sent a letter to Bartlett urging him to negotiate on Oct. 23, and Sanders sent a similar note on Nov. 3. The DNC chimed in with one of its own on Dec. 1.

Requests for comment from IBEW Local 1228 were not returned by press time. ABC News declined to comment.