"Are CEOs taking advantage of middle class workers for their own gain?" he asked his audience in this video of the show. "You can go anywhere on this map across this great country and you're going to find greed. This country has developed a culture that I don't think our forefathers would be proud of."
Earlier: Document confirms $37.1 million payout to Dubow.
Related: Annual pay last year of GCI's six highest-paid officers.
Great suggestion from a reader about pulling this as a still frame. So, so true.
ReplyDeleteIt's pretty clear that when the nation's worst employers are discussed, Gannett will be among them. Quite a nice reputation we've built for ourselves.
ReplyDeleteI was glad to see Gannett included on that map. Too often Gannett goes unmentioned in the national media when the discussion has anything to do with large companies behaving badly. Wonder if the folks at USA Today noticed this?
ReplyDeleteKudos to Ed Shultz and his msnbc staff, and to Jim for posting the map.
Gannett, you've really sunk to new lows in recent years, laying off thousands of good people for no legitimate reason.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete7:23 USAT has hundreds In the newsroom. If so many people are dying to get out why has actual turnover been so low and why are folks coming back?
ReplyDelete7:23 Note: I remove comments that include the word lemming.
ReplyDeleteI never watch "Sgt. Schultz's" program, but he's spot on with this segment that includes Gannett.
ReplyDeleteTurnover has not been low.we have lost several editors, reporters, graphic artists, database specialists and dot.com employees this year. With the exception of layoff years, USA today has had the most tumultuous year in lost employees in its history.
ReplyDeleteLemmings is now banned? Why not just take out the offending word and allow the post?
ReplyDelete9:50 USAT lost people through resignation but it's not a large number. You're being melodramatic. In fact a growing number are returning. Why are they coming back? Hmm
ReplyDeleteI know of two returnees. That's it.
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile, the cover story editor just left. The newsroom content chief, a former ME, left. The investigative team editor left. A senior projects editor resigned.The poltics editor left. A white house reporter quit. An economics reporter quit. Two health reporters quit. A database team reporter quit. Two graphics editors quit. An online politics editor quit. A deputy on line business editor quit. A social media editor left. This is all in the past year.
I could list another 10 departures. But I wouldn't want to be melodramatic.
USA today does not have Hundreds in the newsroom. It has a few dozen who do any actual meaningful work on a regular basis?
ReplyDeleteAnd USAT has lost several excellent people on the business side. People who just got tired of all the back and forth nonsense, the constant restructuring, the poor communication, the arrogance from newcomers who think they have all the answers yet have accomplished nothing, and so on. We still have some outstanding people left, but for how long?
ReplyDeletePeople will continue to leave if the mission continues to be unclear and new hires come in with titles but no articulated strategy or apparent leadership skills. For too long, this has been the problem at Gannett and USA Today. Why THIS hire? What do THEY bring to the table? What is their SPECIFIC job? How do they fit into the overall game plan? What IS the game plan?
ReplyDeleteWhen you frustrate intelligent people who feel like they are constantly out of the brain trust's oddly secretive loop, when you keep loading the bureaucracy with high salaried vice presidents and bonsus baby cronies, when you demonstrate a consistent we know better attitude and fail to produce results, you lose good people who feel disenfranchised and no longer valued. This team can't even tell us if our jobs are secure for the next six months.
It isn't any more complicated than that. Maybe Susie and Dave can speak to that on Dec 12 instead of the normal b.s. we've grown accustomed to.
When Forbes magazine calls out a company and criticizes it's executive compensation practices, you know something is wrong, which is what happened earlier this year to Gannett. And their case was that the bulk of the $33 million saved from layoffs and furloughs should have gone to the company, where it rightfully belongs and not in the pockets of five failures The MSNBC piece is icing on the cake.
ReplyDeleteOkay time to cue the trolls collecting their "holiday bonus" for posting on the blog, bashing everyone except those who deserve it.
Duck and cover people!
... and this my fellow Gannett co-workers is how corporations, now, make their money. Not by producing, but by cutting. How sustainable is that?
ReplyDelete