gannett plans to layoff 3,000 by december.

That just proves that they are going about this all wrong.

They are cutting people lose to save money to try and fix this terrible problem; but instead of waiting to see if it will work - which we all know it won't, they are already planning for the next cut back.

This would be like a company that makes widgets, lets just call this company XYZ, restructuring in December but not waiting to see if the restructuring works. Just planning to make cuts in 3 months. STUPID AS HELL.

 

Why doesn't Gannett just do what they are ultimately planning to do: have no fulltime reporters, just editors who will edit the copy of 8 dollar an hour stringers/"citizen journalists?"
What a dreadful piece of shit company.

 

Is there any newspaper company that people on this board don't absolutely hate?

 

I worked for NYT and enjoyed my time with the company. I'll admit the benefits under Gannett are better than NYT's were, but that was like 15 or so years ago.

I don't ever recall the company making a lot of cuts or staff reductions. Then again, it was a different time and different economic climate, I guess.

Don't get me wrong, I'm thankful for my job and, in that regard, thankful that Gannett is my employer. I just don't agree with a lot of their practices, and I'm certainly not alone.

Gannett's rubbed people the wrong way for a LONG time and they've done nothing in the past year or two to change anyone's opinion.

There's a reason why you'll never find Gannett on a list of "Great corporations to work for" and it has to do with the way they treat their Gannettoids, I mean employees.

Maybe it's like that in a lot of corporate environments, but I've yet to have a colleague of mine leave Gannett and not have their lives change for the better. And most of them have left for jobs at other corporations, and they come back and talk about how much different/better it is to work for company XYZ.

 

I went home over the holiday and got to read one of the biggest newspapers in the country for a couple days. It really hit home that this business is dying. This paper has always been a leader in the industry and I spent about 10 minutes reading its sports section each day. There was nothing to it. Just a bunch of 15-inch stories and roundups. We've talked on this site dozens of times how newspapers messed up by not coming up with a way to make money off the internet. But it wasn't simply a "mess up." It was a fatal blow.

 

It wouldn't hurt to say a prayer or two. There will be many people affected by what happens Wednesday. As I understand it, at least at the closest Gannett shop to me, the section editors aren't the ones who will decide who leaves or goes.
I have one glaring question about all of this, since when did the definition of layoff change to termination?

 

Also, technically taking a buyout counts the same as being let go, which means you can get unemployment.

If you can get your buyout/severance in a lump check, you can collect more unemployment... Just a friendly FYI. ;D

 

Newhouse.

 

Never had a problem with Harris back when I worked for them. Granted, regional chain...not the behemoths that get discussed around here.

 

I'm not sitting here saying Gannett is perfect. Far from it. But a lot of major companies (newspaper and otherwise) are really making some bad decisions.

 

GannettBlog has a list of the profitability of most of the chain's papers. Be seated when you read them.

 

And that's my problem with the company.

If we're not making as much money as you think we should be making, then say that. Don't say we're not making money; that's a flat-out lie.

Like I said in that other post, our publisher told us point-blank in a meeting earlier this year that our local group (consisting of five newspapers) all lost money in 2007. Then I see this list and not only did all five papers make money, all five papers produced double-digit profit margins.