On Tuesday evening, RT╔ news reported that 250 jobs are to go at The Irish Times. The focus was on the axing of journalistic jobs. Prominent journalists gave vent to their anger and frustration, Frank McDonald eloquently asking why this crisis had been allowed to happen by those paid extraordinarily well to manage the affairs of The Irish Times.

Radio stations and newspaper coverage followed the same pattern. Two things struck me. Firstly, there seemed to be an acceptance that 250 job losses is a fait-accompli. Secondly, that the only people who work in The Irish Times are journalists.

A newspaper cannot function without a myriad of staff, including printers, administration and sales personnel, van drivers - bringing out The Irish Times is a team effort and the proposals announced last week will impact on the lives of a wide range of workers and their families.

The Dublin Printing Group of Unions has secured approval for the appointment of consultants to examine the financial situation at the paper.

On Monday we will agree terms of reference, but the primary objective is to examine the company's overall plan, if such a plan exists, and to bring forward alternatives to the wholesale cuts advocated by the board and their advisers, KPMG, this week.

Until that exercise is completed it is not possible to give a definitive trade union response. It is possible to state categorically that the Dublin Printing Group of Unions will resist the imposition of 250 compulsory redundancies.

The priority for the trade unions is to secure the viability of the paper. Is it really possible to cut 250 jobs and retain The Irish Times as a serious player in the newspaper market?

This week management did a disservice to the staff and to the public by preaching a counsel of despair. In media coverage this week the fact that circulation is at an all-time high was more or less ignored.

The Irish Times is not a failure, a point missed completely, for example, by an analyst in the Irish Independent on Wednesday, hiding behind a made-up byline.

The editor of The Irish Times deserves much credit for the manner in which he has championed editorial standards and resources, and that commitment has been rewarded in readership terms.

But his doomsday predictions and talk of "taking people out" angered and upset those who have contributed to the success of his newspaper.

Clearly, mistakes have been made, and the board of The Irish Times and the chairman and governors of The Irish Times Trust must accept responsibility for those mistakes. The workers, through their trade unions, will respond in a coherent manner and it is inevitable that tough decisions will have to be taken. But those charged with the corporate governance of The Irish Times must face up to their responsibilities.

Where has the chairman of The Irish Times Trust, the all-powerful Major Thomas McDowell, been this week? Surely the holder of an A share in a trust must also be held to account.

He could have addressed the Dublin Printing Group of Unions and displayed a concern for the welfare of his staff, or at least attended as an observer, as a show of solidarity to his own management and workers.

For Irish Times workers, the trust is important. That is why the group of unions is frustrated at the failure of non-executive chairman Don Reid to respond to requests for meetings to discuss worker participation on both the board and the trust.

Both the group of unions and the Irish Times Editorial Committee have been demanding openness, transparency and democratic participation in the trust, but the calls have been met by a deafening silence.

In a sense, that brings me to a central problem at The Irish Times, the failure of communications.

Many unions in the company have partnership agreements. In the case of the NUJ, we successfully negotiated a partnership agreement with the company under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission last year.

Partnership can work but, despite the efforts of individual executives, a partnership ethos has not been developed at The Irish Times. If it had, we would not have been faced with a situation whereby unions were informed that existing terms were effectively being withdrawn without consultation. Or that a task force had already been set up and is close to bringing forward proposals for the future of the company website, ireland.com.

Partnership is about participation. Irish Times management pledged that those existing agreements would be honoured. But a programme of compulsory redundancies, announced without consultation, flies in the face of partnership.

There is a need to examine alternatives to redundancy and to examine the cost base of the board and trust. Imaginative alternatives to redundancies can be found and it is imperative that these alternatives are sought in partnership. It behoves all of us to ensure that nothing is done to undermine the future of the newspaper.

Seamus Dooley is the Irish organiser of the National Union of Journalists