Many of you know former Courier-Journal circulation executive Mike Huot sued the Louisville, Ky., paper and Gannett last week, claiming he was a victim of age discrimination last fall, when he was dismissed from his job.
Now more details have emerged in a copy of his six-page complaint that I've just obtained; you can read and download it here
The complaint shows GCI offered Huot severance of only 25 weeks' pay -- his base salary was $224,000 -- plus his prorated 2011 bonus, equal to $32,400. (With stock awards, his total annual compensation was $300,000 or more.)
Talk about failing Human Resources 101. That severance deal was what you'd expect GCI to offer a Joe Anybody employee -- not a high-level executive with decades of tenure who'd won at least 13 coveted President's Rings.
Bottom line: Humiliate someone like Huot, and this is what you get.
Now more details have emerged in a copy of his six-page complaint that I've just obtained; you can read and download it here
The complaint shows GCI offered Huot severance of only 25 weeks' pay -- his base salary was $224,000 -- plus his prorated 2011 bonus, equal to $32,400. (With stock awards, his total annual compensation was $300,000 or more.)
Talk about failing Human Resources 101. That severance deal was what you'd expect GCI to offer a Joe Anybody employee -- not a high-level executive with decades of tenure who'd won at least 13 coveted President's Rings.
Bottom line: Humiliate someone like Huot, and this is what you get.
Nice read, but they needed a copy editor.
ReplyDelete24. Huot was not asked to sign of Gannett or the Courier Journal from liability for employment claims.
I'm guessing the word "of" should be "off."
Best of luck to you, Mike.
Tony Simmons is not Vice President of Circulation for the Courier Journal, therefore he does not have Mike Huot's old job. Nice try. Tony works for GPS, which includes all Gannett products. Huot was a Courier only guy.
ReplyDeleteGannett will want to avoid discovery in this case. It will be expensive, and give others a road map for future law suits.
ReplyDeleteMy guess is that they offer another year's pay, and make it go away.
Two weeks for every President's Ring. Oh, the indignity !
ReplyDeleteLet this be an inspiration to all of us who got kicked out once we hit 50.
ReplyDeleteHow fortunate that Huot was not required to sign a release of liability form. I thought that was standard -- I sure had to sign one when my VP position was "eliminated" last year. Like him, I was a loyal, multiple ring winner who gave my everything to this company for many years. I wish him the best and hope he wins. Maybe this will open the door for others to follow!
ReplyDeleteGannett contributed to Hu0t’s 401k plan in the amount of 3 1/2 % of his annual salary and Gannett matched 50% of Hu0t’s employee contributions.
ReplyDeleteSWEET!
Like 4:56 PM I was also a multi ring winning VP and over 50 when I was let go a couple of years ago after 35 years. Gave it all and in the end got shot with the disappearing gun. I victim more of regime change (Jackson to Dickey) than cost cutting and my guess this was Mike's downfall too, because the current regime is still protecting and keeping a lot of long term dead wieght executives around that could save them a lot of money,if the bottom line was the motive. He pissed someone off and thought he still had cache at the top. Mike wasn't dead wieght he actually made decisions and worked for a living. Dont feel good does it Mike? I hope you take a big bite oot of there ass for all of us.
ReplyDeleteThat was a slip, not forcing the no lawsuit docs.
ReplyDeleteIf Tony has similar duties, the suit will go on.
Wonder who at Dinsmore gets the billable defense hours? Kenyon and Jon? Perhaps the Crystal Palace will be calling the shots on thus one.
ReplyDeletePool on this being settled prior to a day in court?
ReplyDeleteIs his wife still a courier journal vp?
ReplyDelete1:08 I believe she left around the same time as her husband did.
ReplyDeleteMy lawyer thanks you for the link, Jim!
ReplyDeleteDinsmore handles First Amendment issues for the paper. I'm not sure their retainer extends to labor law. I would bet this is a case for some D.C. lawyers to rake in fees.
ReplyDeleteGannett deserves to have someone with money and clout come in with this type of lawsuit and win. For all the people who were dismissed, titles taken away, salary reduced, positions eliminated all because of age discrimination. They should look at how the drivers at the APP would reach a certain age and the territory was changed to far away. Right Mike?
ReplyDeleteNot having him sign the waiver was a fatal mistake for Gannett. They are also not known for settling. I hope this plays out in the courts so everyone will get a peek into the inner workings of the Crystal Palace.
ReplyDeleteMore good leadership under Bob Dickey's supervision. A sign of inspiration and leadership team from the top brass? As a group VP for East, and a VP at a Metro, Huot's "position elimination" would require the blessing and parcitipation from Robert J Dickey and his clique.
ReplyDeleteThis points out how critical it is to fill the top HR position with someone from outside Gannett who is professional, competent, and removed from the inner circles of the Crystal Palace.
ReplyDeleteHell, I'd be glad if any of the HR positionsin my state were "professional and competent."
ReplyDeleteNot sure if this guy has an actual case based on age discrimination. He was a highly compensated manager who became an expensive line item. His severance package was pretty standard given his staus with the company. Maybe hell get another year of pay to make the case go away, but he would be better off making his case part of a broader class action suit against the company.
ReplyDeleteCan he be furloughed if still being paid severance?
ReplyDeleteBecause Kentucky is an "at will" state, this lawsuit is really the only recourse he had after he spurned GCI's end of service offer. He sat on the operating committee which for years penny pinched reporters and presided over draconian cuts so he could still schmooze big advertisers and draw a fat paycheck. I'm sorry he lost his job. But he can do what I and dozens of others had to do. Move the hell on.
ReplyDeleteI've noticed so much confusion about what exactly "at will" does and does not mean. States that have "at will" employment are still bound by the federal EEOC laws that prohibit discrimination in firing firing, training etc.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I do not believe that someone 40 and above should be in a protected class by virtue of age. But hey----that's what the law says and while it's that way, employers had by golly better follow it or face the consequences.
Age discrimination is winked at in every state. Anyone over 50 knows how prevalent it is. I'd love to be part of a class action. And I only made a lousy 150k my last year, and got next to nothing extra for being a VP level. And I signed nothing .....
ReplyDeleteFunny because in the suck out your mind HR session I
ReplyDeletehad to suffer through, age discrimination was mentioned and the over 40 set was cited as having the same protections as woman and minorities. Now we see why we need those protections. Go get em Mike and send a clear message to the Palace, F us and we'll F you back!
It's your blog Jim, but I would like to see this headline read "Age discrimination" rather than the softer sounding "age bias" lawsuit. People 40 and older fall into a protected class of workers, agree on not. Bias is way too soft a word for what Gannett is doing to people who fall into this protected class. No wonder the rate of homeless seniors is supposed to triple in the next decade. Discrimination in employment is so ugly.
ReplyDeletePeople over 40 are a protected class of workers? Not on Planet Gannett, where "job eliminations" skirt around the issue. I hope those forced out at Usa Today Sports and other Gannett properties file a class action suit asap.
ReplyDeleteeven if Gannett wins, its reputatiion as a place for experienced journalists is permanently tarnished.
Very interesting. I sure hope you follow up on this, Jim, so we can learn if it is settled with a gag clause or goes on to discovery/trial. Boy, discovery would really help the thousands of us over-50s who were laid off or coerced to buyouts since 2008. I'm ashamed that an Obama administration's Labor department hasn't gone after the in-your-face age discrimination at Gannett and other newspapers trying to cheapen their labor costs. I think they are exploiting the chaos of a strong and long recession as their cover for brazen age discrimination.
ReplyDelete8:05 p.m. Ummmmm------how would you hold the labor department or the president responsible for age discrimnation?
ReplyDeleteIt takes courageous acts by people like this guy who stand up for their rights to make changes.
I say shame on the cowards who are waiting for a class action, but then I still believe that one person can make a change.
If you're waiting for that class action suit, what don't you prepare by marching straight to the EEOC and taking action yourself. Only then will the labor department and prez know the magnitude of this epidemic. ItS free to you.
Keep your eyes on the Fenton lawsuit against Enquirer, which could include a second dozen more "elderly" ex-workers who were fired about the same time as Joe & others who weren't offered earlier buyout deals to make ends meet. Note that in September 2011, Cincinnati hired an unemployed, 60-year-old reporter to fill a Statehouse vacancy -- just as it became increasingly clear that Fenton and others were going file winnable federal EEOC claims. Smart but maybe not smart enough this time Crystal Palace lawyers!
ReplyDelete