cutting full-time hours

Well, Cosmo, let's see how you feel when you're flying places on your beat and you notice on next week's schedule that the day before the big game in Cleveland is scheduled as your "day off." Then ask the bosses how they were so wise to know in advance that, on your day off, you would go to the airport, work your way through the TSA line, wait at the gate, board the plane, wait some more, take off, endure the pain-in-the-ass flight, get your stuff at the other end, ride a rental-car shuttle and drive to the local Businessman's Cut-Rate Motel near the Cleveland aiport, maybe grab dinner alone while your kids are home needing daddy -- again, all on your "day off."

 

You know, I really hope you've removed yourself from this terrible business. I'd hate to think you're still making yourself suffer through it.

In fact, if I were your employer, chances are I'd help you in that regard.

 

Don't work for free. You're undervaluing yourself and putting a target on your back when the next kid comes in saying he'll volunteer even more of his time than you, at 75 percent of your current pay.

 

He might feel as if he still likes his job more than something else he might be doing. It amazes me that you don't consider that, Joe.

I spend any number of hours on my couch at home, looking up stats for a monthly feature. I don't charge for it. I enjoy doing it more than anything else I would be doing at that time.

Your reality is NOT everyone's reality.

 

But what you are also doing, Shot, is setting up an auction mentality in which the people most willing to donate time, and days off, and dollars off their hourly wage, get the plum assignments and even retain their jobs the longest. Unions try to discourage working for free, because it undercuts the next man's chances of a fair livelihood. It leads to a downward spiral where places won't want to pay a proper price for true journalism.

I got a job at a metro paper once where the SE was called out a couple years later on his pattern of hiring all single folks in their 20s, because he liked deploying his "troops" whenever and wherever, without them bothering to file for overtime or cite a kid's game or theater production as a conflict. It really sucked for staffers who were married with kids -- and eventually sucked for those singles who got married and started families. They weren't this boss' chosen ones anymore.

A business that won't pay proper freight to get the job done -- a simple cost of doing business -- isn't professional. People shouldn't feel intimidated into working for free. Just because one guy is willing to fly to Cleveland on his day off doesn't mean his career should soar compared to a man who thinks he should be compensated somehow for that.

 

Joe, I guess that's where we're going to have to agree to disagree.

I think the guy who is willing to go the extra mile should get that extra consideration. Better perks for better performance.

See, if you turn it around the other way, it leads to the union-aided scenes I have seen where the occasional worker will mail it in because he knows he's going to get his paycheck regardless of whether he works hard or not.

 

If I work, I should get paid, plain and simple. That extra mile BS is used to justify screwing people over.

 

Believe me, I'm no staunch union guy. Have addressed that before on the board and certainly have my reasons as a professional.

But let's be honest here and admit that we're not talking about going the "extra mile" for the company. We're talking about going the extra 300 or 500 or 1,200 miles.

Also, taking your approach to a logical end, the guys who slave away covering preps ought to be paid more than the folks who write the three- or four-a-week columns, because a lot of us would grab at the column jobs for no raise or even accept pay cuts, just for the duty. Why don't papers pay accordingly? Are they irresponsibly blowing the company's money, not putting supply/demand forces into play?

Those willing to do the most work for free should get the best assignments, hmm? Guess that's why we're headed toward citizen journalists. Those folks don't require any pay at all beyond seeing their byline in print or on a Web page. To the victors go the spoils!

Now we can agree to disagree, pardner.

 

You were more right in what you wrote and deleted.

 

Shotglass I hope you are a 10 a.m. meeting guy because I think I've succeeded in getting one of them mad at me. I agree with everything Joe Williams writes. I hope you read what he wrote on the Cuban thread. Shotglass whether you believe it or not, one of the horrible things about this business as Joe writes is failing to pay reporters for all hours worked. Have fun editing and managing all the free citizen journalists in the future shotglass.
You may not like the anger in my posts. If not read Joe's long, beautifully worded calm posts. Because what he says logically is true. Just because I write it angrily does not mean I am wrong!!!

By the way shotglass you wrote: "I think the guy who is willing to go the extra mile should get that extra consideration. Better perks for better performance."

This infuriates me!!! You are saying going the extra mile means eating hours? Doing all that flying and working on your "off day?" When news fucks are sitting in the office 9 to 5 and leaving with work undone? Please grow up.

 

Perhaps not.

But it does assure that you won't be taken as seriously as you otherwise might be.

And don't tell me to have fun doing something when you don't mean it. That's a weak tactic.

And likewise, do not let the words "grow up" slip from your fingers again. I stuck up for you until the point you began to attack from the lunatic fringe.

 

I said please grow up to be exact. Please quote me correctly.