1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Big, big changes at USA TODAY

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by geddymurphy, May 23, 2012.

  1. Bruhman

    Bruhman Active Member

    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.
     
  2. Riptide

    Riptide Well-Known Member

    “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/
     
  3. Flying Headbutt

    Flying Headbutt Moderator Staff Member

    My understanding is everyone was told to reapply for their jobs. I only know one guy over there, but he's a good and decent guy so I hope he's still working. That said, it still sucks bad for everyone over there.
     
  4. geddymurphy

    geddymurphy Member

    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.
     
  5. Mark2010

    Mark2010 Active Member

    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.
     
  6. LongTimeListener

    LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

    Are you legally required to be at least 2,000 miles away from Washington D.C. at all times?
     
  7. Zeke12

    Zeke12 Guest

    No, he heard The Blacks live there.
     
  8. imjustagirl

    imjustagirl Active Member

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

    Coincidence?
     
  9. Magic In The Night

    Magic In The Night Active Member

    Obviously, no union contract there so no severance pay?
     
  10. Bruhman

    Bruhman Active Member

    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.
     
  11. LongTimeListener

    LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

    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.
     
  12. Mark2010

    Mark2010 Active Member

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

Share This Page