Please post your replies in the comments section, below. To e-mail confidentially, write jimhopkins[at]gmail[dot-com]; see Tipsters Anonymous Policy in the rail, upper right.
[Photo: legendary gossip columnist Hedda Hopper. Blind item?]
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Blind Item | Hey, batter, batter!
Please post your replies in the comments section, below. To e-mail confidentially, write jimhopkins[at]gmail[dot-com]; see Tipsters Anonymous Policy in the rail, upper right.
[Photo: legendary gossip columnist Hedda Hopper. Blind item?]
27 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)
Nope: It's not Margaret Buchanan of The Cincinnati Enquirer, nor Michael Kane of The Indianapolis Star!
ReplyDeleteNah: It's not Laura Hollingsworth at The Des Moines Register.
ReplyDeleteI'll guess Detroit.
ReplyDeleteThe D-bags went to see the D-backs?
ReplyDeleteI guess no one really gives a shit if they don't comment after you seed your own post not once but twice.
ReplyDeleteThat was just class A ball. The most expensive seat is $8.50. Publisher probably paid for it herself, knowing how much dealing with reimbursement is a pain in the ass these days. As a team-building exercise it was more effective and cheaper than much of the valuable webinars we get shoveled down from Tyson's.
ReplyDeleteThose managers & directors run some of the most profitable sites in the company - and they also got the same pay cut/furlough/no raise everyone else did. I used to work there - and a publisher couldn't ask for a better team of managers - or for the most part, staff.
What your tipster doesn't see, and probably doesn't care: The management all have Blackberries and laptops, and after the baseball was done, they went back to the office to clear any issues or took it home with them. The work they do doesn't go away. It just got shifted to later in the day.
I'm a grunt. I'd be embarrassed if my manager left for the day after a couple hours and I couldn't do my job without her holding my hand. Seriously, who bitches when the manager leaves?
For god's sake, the stadium is five miles from the paper and worst case that drive is ten minutes. Big deal, they went to a doubleheader, and by some miracle the paper came out the next day.
My comments are public responses to e-mails sent directly to me, asking about those three papers.
ReplyDeleteNot Detroit.
ReplyDeleteLong live gannettblogsucks.
ReplyDeleteGreen Bay! Kinda cheesy?
ReplyDeleteYou're an apple's throw away!
ReplyDeleteappleton?
ReplyDeleteHa! Sorry... Appleton....
ReplyDeleteI know it's not Reno. The publisher there gets a thumbs up for offering everyone in the building (not just managers) free tickets to an upcoming game. His team even arranged seating for a day game and night game, so most employees could go, regardless of the shift they work.
ReplyDeleteI'm not a fan of many things the company does, but I think this was a nice gesture on the part of the Reno publisher.
Big deal. Have to agree with 7:09... not sure why this warrants any discussion. If the entire OC went on vacation at the same time at any Gannett newspaper, the paper would go out. Always has. Always will. New model should be to cut more managers and add more people that can do the real work.
ReplyDelete7:09 a.m. is incorrect on many accounts. Management is NOT taking a paycut, beyond the furloughs that all employees took. All represented, non-management employees in Appleton are taking an additional cut.
ReplyDeleteIt is also NOT true that management returned to "clear any issues" (interesting that your comment wasn't about "working"). Yes, some did. Others chose to drink while they were at the game and then got the rest of the day off.
I can't believe I have to explain why this is a big deal, but I guess you all must be blind followers.
People's livelihoods are at stake with layoffs, pay freezes and wage cuts. But you take out half of the staff (the ones with the best pay and vacation time) on company time to a free sporting event? And reward the irresponsible ones who choose to drink with a paid day off? Meanwhile, the other half of your staff stays back to continue working as usual?
Yes, you could still "put the paper out" (or update those silly websites) if you remove management from the equation like Appleton did. But could you still put the paper out if you gave all the reporters a paid day out at the ballpark?
Hey, 7:57, did you really write "or update those silly websites?"
ReplyDeleteI'm not a huge management fan, but I recall it was the web editors were the ones who came back and worked a full day.
Maybe the tickets were just $8.50, but if you factor in the hourly pay rate of each of the attendees, you'll get a better picture of the actual down time. I remember coming up with a lost time figure once at my old Gannett place to account for just how expensive those twice daily management meetings were. Fortunately, Gannett axed the publisher, EE and a bunch of other non-essentials at that place, and it sure appears to me that the online paper is equally as bad as it was without the cost of all the fat sitting in meetings where they did no more than plan to plan and meet to plan planning meetings.
ReplyDelete"All represented, non-management employees" i.e. the CWA? If you lost anything there, blame your negotiating committee. If only the union took the additional cut, then there's a great case to join the union, right?
ReplyDeleteClearing issues is what management does. Solves problems. Makes decisions. I guess synonyms to 'working' may have been confusing. I'll try to use shorter, more direct words.
Yes. Management typically makes more money. (Vacation time is based on years in, management doesn't 'get more'). At some point in time, you chose not to go that route - your work was fulfilling, you valued your personal time, you didn't want to do the things that could train you to manage others. Hey, not everyone wants to be a manager. Fine.
Some people do. Used to be we rewarded extra effort.
And to answer your final question: could the paper go out if all the reporters had a day off? They did at two papers in Detroit, July, 1995.
I'm posting the following comment by Anonymous@10:45 p.m., with some unsubstantiated information removed:
ReplyDelete7:57, we took a paycut because too many of you stuck with a union headed by a guy so [XXXXX], and yet he's still our steward. I can't believe a bunch of 'reporters' are too dumb to realize in Green Bay they got furloughs not pay cuts because they're not led by a union that doesn't do jack or benefit us at all. Wish I could be free of union 'benefits' and 'protections.'
Isn't a furlough the same as a pay cut?
ReplyDelete10:42 am: Kinda yes, kinda no. With a traditional pay cut, you get paid less to do the same work. With a furlough, you get paid less for doing less work.
ReplyDeleteGreen Bay gets the full 401(k) benefit too, for what it's worth.
ReplyDelete"I guess no one really gives a shit if they don't comment after you seed your own post not once but twice."
ReplyDeleteFunny. But you shouldn't use the word "seed" with Jim.
The better way of illustrating the difference between furloughs and pay cuts is the future effect.
ReplyDeletePay raises are based on your annual income, so if you made $40,000 and took an 8% pay cut, you're now making $36,800.
The person who took the furlough doesn't mae their full income the year of the furlough, but they still have the $40,000 base for future increases.
A 2% pay raise on $40,000 (the furlough rate) is $800, making your new income $40,800.
A 2% pay raise on $36,800 (the pay cut rate) is $736, making your new income $37,536.
That's a difference of $3,264.
Then look at the next year.
If the pay raises are 2% in both cases again, the person who was furloughed will be paid $41,616 in the second year. The person who took a pay cut will be paid $38,286.72.
Now the difference is $3,329.28.
The gap just keeps growing over time. And that doesn't even take into account 401(k) benefits -- if both are contributing at the same percentage rate, the higher-income person is contributing more AND getting a bigger company match.
Those who were furloughed suffered a short-term loss of income that doesn't affect future earnings.
Those whose pay was cut suffer a permanent setback and can never close the gap over those who were furloughed, and in fact will lose more and more ground over time.
It's similar to the power of compounding interest.
The decision by Appleton's represented employees to take pay cuts over furloughs doesn't make economic sense.
Didn't anyone compare the contract against non-union Gannett shops of similar size? Didn't anyone do the math?
Am I missing something?
The unsubstantiated part? Not sure what youre worried about. What is true is the steward no longer actually works at the paper. And the 'benefits' the union secured are actually worse than what non-union shops get.
ReplyDeleteThat's fact.
Ask the union to provide the contract, then ask Green Bay employees to weigh in.
Not anti-union. Anti the bs contract I work under here and pissed there is no info being shared.
"The decision by Appleton's represented employees to take pay cuts over furloughs doesn't make economic sense.
ReplyDeleteDidn't anyone compare the contract against non-union Gannett shops of similar size? Didn't anyone do the math?"
At least paying dues is optional there.