data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/71e25/71e256dc164d541855b7747e29b3abf4819d530a" alt=""
Tuesday, December 04, 2007
USA Today buyouts said faltering; layoffs loom
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/71e25/71e256dc164d541855b7747e29b3abf4819d530a" alt=""
3 comments:
Jim says: "Proceed with caution; this is a free-for-all comment zone. I try to correct or clarify incorrect information. But I can't catch everything. Please keep your posts focused on Gannett and media-related subjects. Note that I occasionally review comments in advance, to reject inappropriate ones. And I ignore hostile posters, and recommend you do, too."
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
OK people, if you don't take the buyout, they'll get you out some other way. At least walk with some money in your pocket. I did, and haven't regretted a moment of it. Newspapers ain't what they used to be and it'll get worse.
ReplyDeleteAnd some people weren't even offered a buyout - they were laid off with NO NOTICE. This occured in IT and several other departments DAYS before the 45 buyout quota was announced. Here's the deal: Take the buyout, you get TWO weeks for every year at their (the minimum eligibility was 15 years; get laid off, you only get ONE and ONE-HALF weeks for every year of service).
ReplyDeleteFor the life of me, I can't understand why the buyout and layoff terms weren't identical. Can anyone else out there?
ReplyDelete