Big, big changes at USA TODAY

I'm reminded of the scene from Goodfellas after Joe Pesci's character was whacked. Ray Liotta and Robert DeNiro's characters are shown grieving - as much as goodfellas can - and Liotta comments how they just have to take it and there was nothing they could do.

I saw a report that 15 were left go today, including somone who was there when I reported to work nearly 27 years ago. I can only imagine some of the other names. Damn, damn, damn. This isht sucks.

 

“This process was about redefining and reimagining Sports and the roles within it to create a center of excellence and build a great sports franchise,” said USA Today Sports Media Group President Tom Beusse. “With this new structure, we are now well-positioned to operate in a 24-7 digital environment. This is a major step forward.”

Another spectacular quote from an executive-slash-spin-doctor.

http://shermanreport.com/layoffs-in-usa-today-sports-mccarthy-weir-pedulla-out/

 

Those three are maybe 25 percent of the total list in sports.

I understand some of it. That department hasn't responded well to the challenges of the 21st century. I understand going smaller, and I understand reshaping the staff.

Some of the cuts are absolute nonsense. And their handling of things has been rather ridiculous.

 

That is so much shit I can smell it from here (2,000 miles away). It's about "we ain't making as much money as we want to, so let's cut some expensive employees and see what that will do for the bottom line". THAT'S what it is really about it. Dare you to prove me wrong.

 

Are you legally required to be at least 2,000 miles away from Washington D.C. at all times?

 

No, he heard The Blacks live there.

 

Ted Kaczynski's cabin was 2,164 miles from Washington D.C.

Coincidence?

 

Obviously, no union contract there so no severance pay?

 

I believe severance pay is standard for Gannett in these situations, even without a union. But I think its less than most other companies offer.

 

When they did this in Arizona, they used it only as "supplemental" to state unemployment -- meaning that if a person was making $500 a week from Gannett and then was eligible for $300 a week in state unemployment, Gannett would only pay the $200 difference. (A rare stance.) And if a person was ruled ineligible for unemployment for whatever reason, Gannett was off the hook entirely because there was nothing to supplement.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/27/business/media/27gannett.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss

Gannett operates hundreds of newspapers in many states, but the benefit restrictions are a particular concern in Arizona, whose unemployment benefits are among the nation’s lowest, capped at $265 a week. The Arizona Department of Economic Security says that unemployment beneficiaries become ineligible if they bring in more in a week than their maximum weekly unemployment check. And for former Gannett workers, any interruption in unemployment eligibility means no further payments from the company.

“If you take part-time work or freelance work, even for a week, you get nothing from Gannett,” said Dave Lumia, 52, who was an assistant sports editor at The Republic. “It certainly doesn’t encourage me to go out and look for work.”

They're pretty fucking evil even by newspaper standards.

 

Haha. I DID once work in Montana, but no longer. I'm in hiding. And, obviously, renting space in a few people's heads.