'Black Wednesday' in Tampa

Unfortunately, I don't think there really is a rhyme or reason to many of these decisions.

 

Ding. Ding. Ding. On the burning bridges part. To hell with the "we love our profession" stuff. Even if you won or settled, you'd have to make sure you got enough to last until Social Security or you'd be screwed. Screwed in this business and in your current market anyway ("Oh, that's the person who sues their employer").

That, and the cost of suing a company that has lawyers on retainer vs. your tear-inducing hourly bill from the mouthpiece.

Also, there's the fact that a union in some cases thwarts your attempt to sue, because it collectively bargains many of your workplace rights for you.

 

Mizzou, I'm not disputing your logic, but if those indeed were the reasons for Carter's and Gaddis' dismissals, how do you explain not only the blindsided manner in which the news of these layoffs were delivered to each writer, but the message confirmed by Andy Staples that the next round of layoffs were going to be performance-based?

Either the decision makers are even more inept at the art of communication than we already thought, or the rules of the game changed midstream and instead of at least warning some of those whose heads were about to land on the chopping block, they chose to take the "quick and painless" route.

 

OK, if that's a tactic they want to use when addressing the whole staff, don't you think they should still have the decency to meet in private with those in danger give them some sort of a heads up? Or at least, in Scott Carter's case, give his editors in the Tallahassee bureau a heads up so they can soften the blow? They found out 10 minutes before Scott found out and were just as much taken by surprise.

 

Exactly.

 

OK, OK. Orlando uses novocaine. Tampa doesn't.

Which means, well, nothing in the grand scheme of things.

 

... which brings us back to my original point that there really is no good rhyme or reason to these layoffs. And in an industry that, as has been poointed out before, is much more than just a business, a much better approach to dealing with the downturns is not only required, but should be demanded.

 

Perhaps. So maybe their blood pressure is a couple of points higher than everyone else's.

Even if I survive next week's cuts, I'm still worried about the next quarterly economic report, and the one after that, and the one after that . . .

As far as I'm concerned, life is basically a series of three-month contracts from now until I leave this business.

Is life in Tampa really any worse than that? The only thing on my mind is the ax coming down . . . not whether it is rusty or poorly swung.

 

I think the point is, practically everything is performance-based, to some extent. But there is a combination of other factors, regarding both the person directly affected, and the rest of the staff -- that usually goes into these decisions.

Performance can certainly help you, or hurt you, I think. Just not always enough to have the desired effect, that's all.

People trying to figure out these decisions will probably never know what all went into them, because they're not usually cut-and-dried.

Edit/Add: But, no doubt about it, there is a rhyme or reason to it.

 

Thank you. That was the only point I was trying to make, "idiotic assessment" aside. :

Apology accepted. I wasn't trying to single you out, dave. Others have expressed similar thoughts, and I just wanted to remind everyone that it doesn't make it any better for someone to get laid off just because they don't have a family to help support.

 

And not to throw this in a different direction . . . but it can be worse for said person.

If a spouse works, there is at least an income to pay the rent/mortgage and put food on the table.

A one-income household --- whether occupied by a single person or family --- doesn't have even that cushion.

And I do not think the bean counters take any of this into consideration. How can they? There will be people let go for whom this is an enormous burden. And there will be people allowed to stay who also have a spouse not only employed, but employed at the same paper. Fair?

 

Yes, exactly. And if any other reason is determined, then you better be more sensitive and honest when delivering the news, as well as more cognizant of other ways that you can possibly help this person or at least make the termination a little more bearable by amending the severance package.