gannett plans to layoff 3,000 by december.

Considering what I've gone through, I can definitely sympathize with Hoops.

And I'm still "not ready to make nice."

 

In my experience of being laid off, I was specifically told by one manager I had earned too many merit raises for my own good while at the Herald.
It's about the money you make. That's all it's about. Golf writers tend to have seniority, and thus make too much money.
I was kind of a mess after I left the paper, but it wasn't because I doubted myself. I just had no idea what to do next, and that made me more than slightly crazy. But nobody who gets laid off by a newspaper today should worry about their abilities.

 

When I was a writer, I would get quotes from a coach about the other team being "well-coached." I would tell the coaches I covered to not bother telling me that a team was "well-coached" unless they were also prepared to tell me that a team was "poorly coached."
In other words, I vote that both sides of the story be allowed to be presented here. If somebody is a complete asshole who has ruined career, and now that person is given the boot, let it out.
I've worked for a few in that category.

 

If Phoenix won't have a full-time golf writer, no one will.

 

I was thinkn the same thing.

 

Thirty-three jobs eliminated in Jackson, Miss. Story says 11 employees, but is unclear how many were in the newsroom. Anyone know more?

http://www.clarionledger.com/article/20081203/BIZ/81203016/1002/newsfrnt

 

No doubt it's trickier or more involved, lowering the boom in a two-stage or three-stage maneuver. You first would have to talk to the person -- let's say for this example, the golf writer -- who is in the role about to vanish. Find out whether that writer would be open to other things and then, without revealing the identity of the person who might get whacked, hint around to see if a new specific role might be a fit. Then you have to hope that nothing leaks, make sure all your paperwork (trail) is in order for the underperformer and finally get around to cutting that person loose.

With all the anxiety these days, and with the vast numbers being shed, it seems newspapers favor the all-at-once ax, which precludes this sort of managing of the downsizing. I would argue that this is one reason those people are supposed to be managers, to figure out and execute (oops, bad word) maneuvers like this. But it seems as if it barely is tried, as if the brass either can't be bothered because they don't differentiate newsroom quality or they don't really think it would matter.

Way wrong, though, to dump someone who has been doing the company's bidding in a role, just because the company now wants to shed the role. That's baby going out with bath water.

 

In a rare piece of good news, a former colleague of mine told she was being let go yesterday was spared today when another co-worker took a buyout.

That's the good news. The bad news is she still works for a piece-of-shit company.

 

when i read something like this posted anonymously on a message board:

it just makes me hope "hoops mccann" gets fired

do you guys even think about the shit you post on here?

 

Binghamton, Ithaca and Elmira combine to cut 40 jobs across all three papers.

http://pressconnects.com/article/20081203/BUSINESS/812030366

One preps reporter gone from Bingo, and a photog took voluntary lay-off. That leaves Binghamton with exactly one staff photographer.