Thursday, November 11, 2010

With Burlington, estimated job cuts now hit 243; 62 of 81 U.S. community newspapers are counted

The Burlington Free Press has whacked seven jobs, including an unspecified number requiring layoffs, during the recent round of reductions, a Gannett Blog reader told me this morning. Jim Fogler, publisher since late August, told staffers at the Vermont daily about the cuts during a staff meeting last week.

"He was grim, but I appreciated hearing the news from him directly," the reader said, adding: "He did not rule out further cuts or furloughs.''

In leaving furloughs on the table, Fogler joins several other publishers who left open the possibility, adding to speculation furloughs could be imposed during the three months starting Jan. 1.

I've  added this new information to my running tally of estimated layoffs and pay cuts during the job reduction that began Nov. 3. These figures are based on information supplied by my readers. (Site-by-site numbers.) As of 10:23 a.m. ET today:
  • Newspapers reporting: 62 of 81
  • Estimated job cuts so far: 243 (excludes USA Today's 130)
  • Estimated papers imposing pay cuts: 6
Note: GCI has about 25,000 U.S. newspaper workers, out of a total 35,000 employees worldwide. (Breakdown by major division.)

Earlier: Survey asks, how old were you when you got laid off?

Related: CEO Craig Dubow got paid $4.7 million in 2009 vs. $3.1 million in 2008. (Table shows annual pay for five top executives.)

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.


  1. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  2. Jim you need to keep the count going through the end of the year. There will be more cuts coming, however they are going to be 1 here and 1 there. Such as myself, I did not get cut this time but was told I'll loose my position before Jan 1.

  3. "Loose my position"? The flaws here are stunning.

  4. We aren't all wordsmiths because we don't all work in the newsroom.

  5. Thanks Jim. 2:18's comments totally unnecessary and actually cruel when taken in context of 1:58's situation. Shame on you, 2:18.

  6. Not to mention most of us live and die by spell check these days. It's not that we're lazy. We just don't have the time to sit around and think about how smart we are.

    So 2:18. You can take your bloviations on spelin korectly and shove it.


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.