The Northern account secures one of two contracts requiring Gannett to pay former CEO and Chairman Al Neuharth, 85, a combined $200,000 annually for the rest of his life, public documents show. (The second contract makes Neuharth a consultant to GCI. He's been fulfilling those duties, at least in part, by writing a weekly column every Friday in USA Today, the paper he launched in 1982. USAT is now facing possible job cuts under a rumored Gannett-wide layoff that could hit next week.) This post is about the secured contract.
The board of directors must have been scratching their heads back in 1989, when Neuharth's far-sighted attorneys insisted Gannett set aside that money as security, to guarantee GCI keeps paying his $100,000-a-year-for-life payments, under his platinum-plus retirement package. "Our company? Unable to pay the light bill? How much Pouilly-Fuissé have you been huffing, Mr. Chairman?!"And yet! I'm reminded of that long-forgotten bootie by a recent Deal magazine article that floated the once unthinkable: Gannett's facing the business end of a Chapter 11 filing, should that trade publication's scary forecast prove accurate. Interestingly, of course, someone in Gannett thought to include a caution in the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filing, disclosing the terms of that $5 million treasure chest. It says: "General creditors of the company may reach the trust's assets if the company becomes bankrupt or insolvent."
And, no: Thank you, for helping drive Gannett closer to extinction. We couldn't have done it without you!
* Related: All about dangling participles.
Please post your replies in the comments section, below. To e-mail confidentially, write gannettblog[at]gmail[dot-com]; see Tipsters Anonymous Policy in the green rail, upper right.[Photo: Another chilled Pouilly-Fuissé? Why not; it's on the employees, and those sucke -- err, shareholders!]
Hopkins wall-to-wall: Two snaps, and a meow!
ReplyDeleteI understand it's Jim's blog and he can focus on topics like this if he so chooses. But in all this time the blog has existed, I don't think enough attention was placed on the everyday, real world problems of employees of Gannett. What Al makes in retirement or how Craig's back might impact the company probably has meaning and some sort of indirect impact on us all. I guess we should be more outraged. But I can't help feeling that lots of little stories were missed here. Combined, all the many smaller issues are what really makes or breaks a workplace. Employee spirits and productivity are often broken by bosses who hit the bottle a bit too much or by managers sleeping with the help. I know of one Gannett editor who was emotionally/clinically disturbed to the point where he should have been removed from his job years ago, before he inflicted so much damage on so many careers of people who worked for him. He went undetected because higher-ups refused to open their eyes to realities -- a common problem at Gannett properties of all sizes. Staffers who have to pull double duty because of a coworker's incompetence... The general lack of accountability for some while others are held to impossibly high standards... The huge workloads and all the rework that is necessary because of territorial misbehavior... The inability of mid-level editors to truly lead without being either mean or over-the-top friendly (in sort of a fake way)... The lack of respect that comes in all forms... These are the things that really bug Gannett employees and why the company is rotting from the bottom up as much as it is from the top down.
ReplyDeleteWouldn't this be a great time to connect the dots between top dogs like Ken Paulson leaving USA Today for greener pastures and the pending layoffs? What was all that nonsense from him about not bailing out on USAT? I guess Wilson and Moon didn't bail either? C'mon. They knew what was coming. They didn't want any part of eliminating more jobs and ruining lives of people who worked for them. Maybe Jim should pester them for an interview now (or after July 8) the way he hounds Tara. And no, I am not defending Tara. She is a snake in the grass for more reasons than have ever been revealed here.
There is so much stamped deeply into the Gannett culture that it's become a mish-mash of misdirected fools in corner offices, on front lines of various desks and at the head of committees that accomplish nothing. One department goes in one direction. Another goes in a completely opposite one.
A really fearful trend is the blending of editorial with marketing/advertising. What the public has to be educated on now is that journalists are performing business functions for their papers. This is a particular ethical problem with the online versions of those papers. Even at the large papers, editors who should be thinking like journalists are instead acting like pitchmen. They are draining resources away from editorial content in a quest to prop up the marketing machines associated with these web sites. In essence, editorial is surrendering its independence -- a vary dangerous thing in a free society. I would have liked to have seen more written about this because even the biggest Gannett papers are doing it now. It's still subtle in some places, but it's happening.
Anyhow, as I said at the start, it was Jim's blog and he did a lot of good work. Not every blog item he reported appealed to me, but it was his right to go after whatever and whomever he felt was in the wrong. Whether it was Tara or any other host of empty suits, his entries seemed to have a special place in his mind. For me, however, I just wish there was more written about things happening every day across Gannettland that have really made this company a miserable, unethical and increasing stupid place to work.
Alert: One of the best comments ever! Possibly a Top 10!!!
ReplyDeleteIt is the revelations of one of the nuggets like this post that will make me miss this blog. I had no idea of the $5 million set aside for ole Al. Why $5 million. Did Al intend to live 50 years beyond his retirement at 65?
ReplyDeletecan you post a top 10 comments ever Jim? as a sort of parting shot?
ReplyDeleteHow does current management feel about Neuharth? CEO and Chairman Craig Dubow started April's annual shareholder's meeting by warmly greeting Neuharth as a friend of Gannett. Ditto for Doug McCorkindale and retired HR chief Madelyn Jennings.
ReplyDeleteBTW: Wait until I tell you how much Neuharth's Freedom Forum has paid Jennings in trustee fees, according to public documents I'm still analyzing. Un-fucking-believable. Ditto for Neuharth's daughter, Jan Neuharth.
Hello, Ken? You reading this?
Ummm...in case no one else knows Al has like 8 kids all under the age of 20, so I am sure he is making sure that his family is going to be set for life...::rollin eyes...
ReplyDeleteNeuharth has nine children in total: Six he adopted with his current wife, No. 3. He has two adult children from wife No. 1. (None with wife No. 2.)
ReplyDeleteThe ninth, a daughter, is a result of a liaison; he does not publicly acknowledge that child. I met her in late April. She is his spitting image, and is a terrific writer. She also is owner of an official Gannett Blog baseball cap.
After I mentioned her on this blog, Neuharth questioned whether "bad bloggers" should have access to a free press. The man is a fool, and editors who publish his trash share in that distinction.
Neuharth has nine children in total: Six he adopted with his current wife, No. 3. He has two adult children from wife No. 1. (None with wife No. 2.)
ReplyDeleteThe ninth, a daughter, is a result of a liaison; he does not publicly acknowledge that child. I met her in late April. She is his spitting image, and is a terrific writer. She also is owner of an official Gannett Blog baseball cap.
After I mentioned her on this blog, Neuharth questioned whether "bad bloggers" should have access to a free press. The man is a fool, and editors who publish his trash share in that distinction.
10:43 am: The principal is a guarantee that the $100K payments continue as long as he lives. At his death, as I recall, the corpus (the money -- not Al!) reverts back to Gannett, or the creditors -- whichever is left standing.
ReplyDeleteA company is just that. But a family is something else when children are involved. I hope someone investigates all the circumstances surrounding the adoptions now that we know the guy's wife has an agency.
ReplyDeleteI, for one, will sure miss this blog. I'm not a gay man, but will be checking out your new work, Jim. Wishing the best to you buddy.