The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette said on Jan. 7 that the paper was closing its doors after the Supreme Court rejected its request to avoid restoring a worker benefits package from a 12-year-old labor agreement.
The newspaper said in a statement that it was “saddened” to announce it will publish its final edition and end operations on May 3 after losing more than $350 million over the past 20 years.
“Recent court decisions would require the Post-Gazette to operate under a 2014 labor contract that imposes on the Post-Gazette outdated and inflexible operational practices unsuited for today’s local journalism,” the statement read.
The decision to shutter the newspaper comes after Justice Samuel Alito on Dec. 22, 2025, issued an administrative stay temporarily blocking a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit injunction in the case of PG Publishing Co. Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board. An administrative stay gives the justices more time to consider an urgent matter.
The new ruling, which vacated Alito’s stay, took the form of an unsigned order. No justices dissented. The high court did not explain its decision.
The applicant, PG Publishing, does business as The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, a newspaper. The lead respondent was the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Under the National Labor Relations Act, the NLRB hears complaints about employers allegedly engaged in unfair labor practices.
The Third Circuit’s injunction mandated that the company revert to the health insurance coverage that was in effect when a collective bargaining agreement lapsed that was between the company and the Newspaper Guild of Pittsburgh, which is Local 38061 of the Communications Workers of America.
The Guild’s three-year strike against the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette ended in November 2025.
An administrative law judge previously found that the company violated the National Labor Relations Act “by bargaining in bad faith, unlawfully declaring impasse, and surveilling employees in the exercise of their rights under the Act.”
The judge ordered the company to reinstate the terms of the previous contract, including health care coverage, while bargaining for a new agreement. The Third Circuit upheld the ruling.
Under the National Labor Relations Act, an employer may declare an “impasse” and then implement the last offer given to the labor union. The union is free to disagree that there is a true impasse and file a charge alleging the employer has engaged in unfair labor practice by bargaining in bad faith. It is then up to the NLRB to rule whether there is a true impasse. If the board finds there is no impasse, the employer is then obligated to return to the bargaining process, according to the NLRB.
In its emergency application to the Supreme Court, the company said the Third Circuit’s ruling would force the company to enter into a health care arrangement that “will be catastrophic.”
After the new ruling, the Guild criticized the newspaper.
“Instead of simply following the law, the owners chose to punish local journalists and the city of Pittsburgh,” Andrew Goldstein, president of the Guild, told The Epoch Times.
Approached by The Epoch Times, the NLRB said it had no comment on the new ruling.
The Epoch Times reached out to PG Publishing’s attorney, Chris Paolella of Reich and Paolella in New York City. No reply was received by publication time.
This article by Matthew Vadum appeared Jan. 7, 2026, in The Epoch Times.
Photo: Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito