According to my tipster, Randi Austin is now responsible for the Indianapolis-based Central Group of papers, and Julie Lusk got the South Group, based in Nashville, Tenn. My tipster wasn't sure about their counterparts for the East Group in Wilmington, Del., and the West Group in Des Moines.
"What the e-mail didn't explain was where us peons fit into the scheme of things,'' my tipster says; Horning told recipients only that "we'd know more by October."
Did these promotions come at the expense of other people's jobs? 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.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteFollowing is an edited version of a comment posted by Anonymous@8:44 a.m.:
ReplyDeleteSure hope some of this reorganization impacts HR at The Journal News. The VP position there was eliminated, and the [XXXXX] has been useless. [XXXXX] either doesn't know much, or doesn't want to share.
An example: When some people took a buyout a couple of years ago, neither [XXXXX] nor the company disclosed that their cash would be taxed as a bonus or in the 50 percent range.
If people asked about that beforehand, [XXXXX] gave the information. If they didn't ask, [XXXXX] didn't volunteer the information, and the company didn't disclose it in the ream of paperwork that accompanied the buyout offer.
HR used to be something of a buffer between the management and the rank-and-filer. It now basically management's process server.
Love the "process server" descriptor. How very true. There was a time when Human Resources meant embracing employees as assets, providing them with training and skill development, and helping employees understand their benefits. Nowadays we're treated as liabilities, and HR is nowhere in sight to defend us from the insidious practices that have crept into the newsroom, like employees being blackballed for turning in overtime and like employee job descriptions being changed arbitrarily by petty bosses. HR blatantly takes sides with management. Why would anyone confide problems with unfair treatment, discrimination or harassment with them?
ReplyDeleteWhat is most telling about this Reorg in HR reporting is that it impacts everyone but wasn't shared with everyone. I work at USAT and as of today, we still haven't been notified of this change. Falls in line with the BS Hunke fed us about giving the rank and file "transformation" progress reports. That was two months ago and there have been no updates - except a couple postings of high profile "retirements". Seems like the more things "transform" the more they stay the same.
ReplyDeleteGeesh, good thing we're not in the information business. ...
ReplyDeleteHey, Jim, have you changed your policy on naming names? I thought anyone in an executive position was fair game on this blog, yet I note you are eliminating names of top supervisors and top managers named in blog postings. Where is the threshold for using a name now?
ReplyDeleteI haven't changed my policy; I've always discouraged identifying people by name except when factual assertions are being made.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteAn example: When some people took a buyout a couple of years ago, neither [XXXXX] nor the company disclosed that their cash would be taxed as a bonus or in the 50 percent range.
ReplyDeleteThat's a blatant lie. A bonus is taxed about half of that figure. Plus, the buyout offers were continued payroll back then. They weren't taxed as bonuses. Once again someone with no clue commenting on something they know nothing about.
I wish HR would clean up its own ranks by administering a reading comprehension and functional writing test.
ReplyDeleteThe test would give the company an excuse to fire expensive, incompetent people who don't make news, and replace them with cheaper, possibly competent people who also don't make news.
When my layoff comes, I want it to come from an HR department that can write clearly and conveys an air of professionalism. Anything less would be insulting.
Following is an edited version of a comment posted by Anonymous@9:07 p.m.:
ReplyDeleteConfirmed...[XXXXX]r will be retiring from Gannett Corporate HR. Good riddance [XXXXX]!
Can we just get everything over with already? These piecemeal cuts are like a bad version of Jaws. Cut throat and morale sapping. Where is the Gannett leadership on this one? Spending time figuring out where to spend this year's bonuses and how to get company funds to pay for pet causes like toney private northern Virginia schools and North Carolina colleges?
ReplyDeleteDear 10:17 p.m....That was not a lie. I was there. I was told by a HR functionary that quite a few people who took the buyout were surprised that their checks were smaller than they anticipated.
ReplyDeleteThat "bonus" idea may have been shared with some, but not all.
I for one, was not informed until I asked about it.
Hey 10:17 p.m....The buyouts a few years ago were given lump sums - bonuses as you called them - at The Journal News. They were not paid out weekly, and most of us did not know the tax implications.
ReplyDeleteThis issue here is that HR at The Journal News is basically a useless function unless you like the coupons they send out for Rye Beach.
9:39 it is a lie. You said 50%; that's a lie. Get your facts straight. If it was a one time payment it had to be for several weeks at best. No one getting 20 weeks would get a one time payment. You don't know what you are talking about.
ReplyDelete12:42am: in regard to hiring during the last few years, I've come across a number at GCI corporate who cannot write, spell, punctuate, etc. God knows how they were ever hired in the first place and have managed to keep their jobs. Professionalism went down the drain long ago.
ReplyDeleteYep, coupons and money-saving consumer gimmicks seem to be the main function of HR at The Journal News these days. In fact, that's been about it for years.
ReplyDeleteNot much justification for keeping them around.