[Updated at 4:15 p.m. ET.] In an e-mail, a second reader has now told me Gannett could extend buyouts to potentially hundreds of employees as soon as tomorrow.
My earlier post: Reports of a new buyout offer began circulating in The Washington Post newsroom today -- the fifth such round of offers since 2004, according to Poynter Online's Andrew Beaujon.
"Post ombudsman Patrick Pexton tweeted this afternoon that the buyouts would be capped at 48 people or 8% of the 600-person newsroom," Beaujon says.
He notes that the Washington Post Co. -- which owns the paper, plus Slate, a community newspaper group, and an educational unit -- had a dismal third quarter.
News of the Post buyouts comes amid speculation that Gannett will make a broad buyout offer to employees in their 50s who have a minimum number of service years. I have not been able to confirm details of the age/service combination.
But I now believe GCI's buyout notifications could come as soon as tomorrow, based on information I've now received from two readers.
My earlier post: Reports of a new buyout offer began circulating in The Washington Post newsroom today -- the fifth such round of offers since 2004, according to Poynter Online's Andrew Beaujon.
"Post ombudsman Patrick Pexton tweeted this afternoon that the buyouts would be capped at 48 people or 8% of the 600-person newsroom," Beaujon says.
He notes that the Washington Post Co. -- which owns the paper, plus Slate, a community newspaper group, and an educational unit -- had a dismal third quarter.
News of the Post buyouts comes amid speculation that Gannett will make a broad buyout offer to employees in their 50s who have a minimum number of service years. I have not been able to confirm details of the age/service combination.
But I now believe GCI's buyout notifications could come as soon as tomorrow, based on information I've now received from two readers.
The editor is a liar and cold fish,and the publisher is not the brightest bulb in the biz: Our objective is a limited staff reduction that won’t affect the quality, ambition or authority of our journalism. We believe this is possible, given the changes in how we work and the great successes we have had building our digital readership lately.
ReplyDeleteWhat bull.
See Erik Wemples's "Do more with less" column:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/post/brauchli-to-washington-post-staff-more-with-less/2012/02/08/gIQA9n16yQ_blog.html
Sound familiar?
ReplyDeleteHere’s a statement from Frederick Kunkle, a representative from the Washington Post’s newsroom guild.
"We’re in shock, like everybody else, particularly in light of Marcus’ recent reassurances that Raju was inaccurate in predicting large reductions over the next two years. We don’t know the target numbers yet, but from Marcus’ note, this would seem to be a fairly big cut. It’s also disconcerting in light of the phenomenal papers we’ve produced this week, with the investigative stories on Congress, DeBonis’ front page tale of corruption in DC, and Sheinin’s beautiful piece about the sailor in Sports. The best thing you can say about this is that they have backed away from their previous strategy of back alley buyouts, which involved trumping up performance issues against some folks to try to squeeze them out, and asked for volunteers. But it also raises more alarms about an issue the Guild has been hammering for three years, including during contract talks. And that’s that you cannot continue to cut your way to profitability alone, or offer readers less - and not just in quantity of the report, but its quality and sophistication in all sections - and expect the public to pay more. Yet we seem to be heading toward a model like Huffpo or Patch that relies on interns, freelancers, free content from citizen bloggers, and aggregation at the expense of original journalism created by experienced journalists. And that’s a sad path for a place that has long enjoyed a reputation for excellence."
So they pay dues and yet the union can't save their jobs? Wow the Superbowl commercial was right!!!
DeleteCold truth. Just pay the shareholders and family. Journalism and employees are second tier concerns.
ReplyDeleteSomeone(not from one of those useless publisher, editor or online groups) who actually calls B.S. the WaPo editor on his "bogus happy talk."
ReplyDeletehttp://ajr.org/Article.asp?id=5248
Can someone explain to me the differences between a layoff and a buyout?
ReplyDeleteTIA.
Buyouts are a voluntary layoff, where an employee agrees to quit their job in return for a severance package that is better than what they would receive if they were forced out in a traditional layoff.
ReplyDeleteFor example, I was given a buyout at USA Today in November 2007. At the time, those who took buyouts got two weeks' pay for every year of service, plus medical coverage at company rates for the length of the severance period.
We were told that if USAT did not get enough people to accept buyouts, layoffs could come next, and those laid off would get only one week's pay for every year of service.
Generally, buyouts are offered to a "class'' of employees; for example, those 56 and older who have at least 15 years' service.
But in that example, some jobs may be excluded entirely. At USAT four years ago, those newsroom jobs excluded bureau chiefs; all copy editors; columnists, and anyone holding an exclusively digital job for five years or more.
It's like Christmas Eve!
ReplyDeleteThere's definitely something going on tomorrow at my site, I'm guessing, based off of management activity. I just don't see a lot of buyout offers, because there's really no one left there who's old enough and has enough years of service to qualify. Guess we'll see tomorrow.
ReplyDeleteSo the buyouts won't effect all the 50+ group? Only those with 15+ years? At my property there are a handful of 50+ employees left BUT all the directors are in their 50s with 15+ years ... Wouldn't that be a hoot! Oh and that includes the publisher. Do these folks taking the buyout qualify for unemployment as well?
ReplyDeleteWaPo is an open shop, which means people can join the union but don't have to. Those who don't pay are still protected. Hence, the union isn't as strong as it could be -- only 25% of Guild-covered employees actually pay dues.
ReplyDeleteWaPo's buyout offer, at least in its current form, is basically a layoff in sheep's clothing. The severance being offered is about the same as what the Guild contract mandates for layoffs, and management reserves the right to deny a buyout to any eligible employee at its discretion. The only reason they're not doing straight layoffs is because they couldn't cherry-pick -- a layoff would have to be essentially last-hired-first-fired.
Oh that's right it's a union shop so talent has nothing to do with a layoff. Last hired could have won a Pulitzer but since the Guild protects the under performer they get to stay. Great system. I wonder why 75% of the newsroom wouldn't pay dues? Oh that's right, they are intelligent, free thinkers.
Deleteno unemployment check if you take buyout - it is voluntary.
ReplyDeleteNot true
DeleteJim, Are you starting a list of buyouts and/or layoffs by site? Would be helpful! Are the buyouts company wide including broadcast or just print?
ReplyDeleteUnless one has a job lined up, a buyout is a lose/lose situation for the employee UNLESS the buyouts are offered to top management because the next management tier are all in their 20s and early 30s
ReplyDeleteTo 11:47 p.m. Your observation about unemployment is inaccurate. A person may take a buyout and obtain unemployment by expressing the belief that he or she feared a layoff if the didn't. They were effectively dismissed.
ReplyDelete@11:47: Not necessarily so. Rules vary from state to state, but I qualified for unemployment after taking a voluntary buyout because the offer contained the statement that if not enough people volunteered, layoffs were possible. Basically, it was a case of "Jump before you get pushed." That's a common part of buyout offers. So, always check with your local unemployment office.
ReplyDelete11:56 asks: "Are you starting a list of buyouts and/or layoffs by site? Would be helpful!"
ReplyDeleteAnswer: Yes, I'm considering doing that.
Jim, will USA Today be included in the buyout offers?
ReplyDelete1:46 I don't know.
ReplyDeleteNah, they're journalists. :)
ReplyDeleteTo 5:49 am If you think talent has something to do with a layoff you're wrong. Senioirty is best protection. As talent is subjective....
ReplyDelete