I'll bet a big reason was fear of losing guaranteed healthcare -- helping explain why no more than 116 employees applied for voluntary layoffs at the Detroit Free Press, Detroit News and their corporate parent. Medical benefits were a major worry for scores of USA Today news staffers considering buyouts in November, when I left the company. The nation's No. 1 printed daily originally sought 45 volunteers, but eventually settled for 43.Earlier: Boozin' Neuharth loves his Cadillac healthcare. Plus: Do top execs pay for their own health insurance?
How important is healthcare in your post-Gannett planning? Please leave your thoughts in the comments section, below. To e-mail confidentially, write gannettblog[at]gmail[dot-com]; see Tipsters Anonymous Policy in the green sidebar, upper right.
Things have gotten so bad at USA Today that many newsroom staffers are now wishing they took the buyout offer back in November. Personally, I am hoping for a second round of cuts soon, with or without medical. Just give me the two weeks per year and reduce the number of years of service to 10 or more rather than 15 (as was required last time). The department I work in is so bad that if I don't get out soon I am going to need more than medical coverage...I am going to need a funeral director. The lies, the deceit, the shortages of staff, the anger, the passive aggressive managers, the workload...it's all too much to endure. What's really frustrating is that the managers in my department actually think the merger with online is working out just fine. They don't seem to see all the cracks and really horrible decisions that are undoing everything that previously worked just fine. They are either horribly naive or are just putting on a happy face, thinking that the rest of us will buy in. Of course, there is a percentage of folks who are happy about things. They are the ones who are catered to in every way imaginable for varied reasons. Folks who at most other newspapers would have been fired a long time ago. Anyway, USAT, bring on the second round of buyouts, please! And open them up a bit more this time. You'll have no problem thinning out the print staff even more, which is ultimately what you empty suits want to do. Just be upfront and more humane. Stop bleeding us veterans to death as you hire the online kids. Stop with the lies.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the last comment. Buyouts have become the least of all evils for some newsroom workers at Gannett's horrendous newspapers. Even at the flagship, conditions continue to worsen for many experienced journalists. I am there so I know this is true. As a sidenote to the last comment, bad managers want only one thing from their staffers -- the perception that all is well under their watch whether it is or isn't. This is particularly true at USA Today where managing editors and DMEs are highly paid. That perception (lie) keeps their bosses off their backs. They don't really want to know what's going on. They certainly don't put doing the right thing above getting paid. They only want to pretend all is all right so they can keep their corner offices.
ReplyDeleteThe term used for what you folks are describing is called "managing up." It's where a Gannett editor doesn't give a darn about his staff or journalism, what's right or wrong, or anything other than pleasing the boss above him. We used to call it "sucking up." In essence, it prevents supervisors on all levels from doing their jobs or identifying important issues. It's really bad when it comes from the top. Perception is all that matters. Reality just gets in the way of a fat paycheck. And it's why business eventualy collapse and why you all are longing for buyout offers. It's a slow disease. But in the end, it kills all morale, all productivity. It's a totally selfish act. Leave it to Gannett and other companies to come up with a nice term for it: Managing up. Sounds sweet, doesn't it? Good luck, and hopefully you'll get a buyout offer soon that isn't too insulting.
ReplyDelete"Managing up." A horrendous concept indeed! No surprise USA Today is using the catch phrase. It's what leaders with no abilities or feel for people do. They use catch phrases to manage. I left there awhile back. Before I left, I sat in on an all-day management seminar conducted by the Gallup folks. It was actually a good presentation. They didn't use the phrase "manage up." They made sense. Had solid, scientifically proven ideas. They said workers should do what they do best...a concept completely foreign to USA Today's mindset. In the weeks and months that followed, not one of the Gallup ideas was spoken of, let alone instituted by my a managing editor or any newsroom supervisor in my department. Folks, I am not talking about the Gallup survey. That was a farce for a variety of very naive reasons. This was a different presentation. Affiliated with that survey crap, but not directly. My point is that when good ideas do come along, usually from the outside, leave it up to USA Today editors to ignore them. Yes, USA Today fell short by two of getting all the buyouts they wanted last time. I doubt they would fall short this time if they open it up a bit more and eased up on the length of service requirement. If managing up is the new craze, expect many to manage themselves right out of a job, but hopefully with a buyout.
ReplyDeletehmmmm, managing up, sounds like W's whitehoue managing style
ReplyDeleteLook at the people in Gannett who have managed up and done quite well. They don't care anything about anyone but themself: Carroll, Giallombardo, Maness to name just a few
ReplyDelete"Managing up" is just another term used by upper-level managers who don't want to take responsibility for their direct reports. They are the same managers who won't defend one of their staffers, won't go to bat for them, and leave them to fight their own battles. Then they'll ask those same employees they left to defend themselves why they did come to them for help. Gannett is a company that has some horrible managers and that probably is the root cause for some people now wanting buyouts. As the old saying goes, most people don't leave their jobs, they leave their bosses. If your boss doesn't have your back, you will get swallowed up and demeaned by the rude incompetents in this company. USA Today is falling apart and people are at each others' throats while management hides in their offices. I wish the anger would be directed at management rather than each other, but human nature is what it is. It's bound to get physical real soon. So if you are one of those people who can take a buyout, it's probably a good time to go if your paper offers them. Neither your manager or HR is going to come to your defense when someone loses it and decides to target you for all the frustrations that newsroom heads are creating or neglecting to address.
ReplyDelete