CNHI 2011 furloughs?

Seems around the time the shoe usually drops: Anyone hearing rumblings around their shops that we'll be sending more paychecks back to Birmingham next year?

 

Heard earlier this fall they're going to be in the coffer for the next 2-3 years.

 

SS: I was told to "never" expect to "not" have them. They are planned into the budget.

In other words, etched in stone.

It's our gift that keeps on giving (just like the Jelly of the Month Club).

 

Enjoy this little nugget -- our executive editor was worried about this very thing the other day. He had the publisher call corporate and inquire whether we should prepare to schedule them for the first quarter.
They could neither confirm or deny the possibility of more furloughs.
But I tend to agree with Colton, why would they ever go back to not having them?

 

It must be nice for our companies to know that they can pretty much screw us over with impunity because we've come to expect it.

Our's keeps pointing out that they haven't had furloughs (like they're doing us some huge favor), even though they continue to cut newsroom staff and we're headed into year 4 of a wage freeze. To echo kimronspringle, after three years of not giving out raises, why would they suddenly go back to them?

 

Had a boss say once, "Well, at least we're not cutting salaries."

I replied that, with inflation, a wage freeze essentially is a pay cut, since there isn't a cost of living adjustment.

I was then stared at blankly, "wow. I never thought of it that way before."

 

Our shop was just boasting about the most Thanksgiving inserts ever. In fact, our paper was delivered in two separate bags on Thanksgiving because there were so many Black Friday ads. Was it enough to cancel furloughs for first quarter. I'm guessing we get a memo in a few weeks that sings a very different tune.

 

My favorite is when the announce layoffs/furloughs then emphasize, "But we're still profitable." Uh huh, of course you are. I mean, it's obvious.

 

I'm not a lawyer, obviously, but if everyone in the company files for unemployment for thier furlough week then over time the practice should become unsustainable. I haven't had time to research it but I think the government hits them with some of tax or partial responsibility for unemployment benefits if they reach a certain threshold. That's how it was explained to me by an unemployment agent anyways....could be hogwash I haven't researched it.

 

The gift and the curse. Apparently this is what it feels like to be Jay-Z.

 

i think you don't get benefits the first week you file. so, that wouldnt work

 

which probably is why they do furloughs on a quarterly basis, so people can't take their 4-8 weeks a year all at once and collect unemployment.