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!

End of the 40 hour work week

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by Drip, Sep 9, 2008.

  1. if it's a mcclatchy paper, as alluded to above, it'd be boise.
     
  2. Angola!

    Angola! Guest

    Yes.
     
  3. from what i read, mcclatchy has some serious problems.
     
  4. you could say that.

    almost as many as gatehouse. almost.
     
  5. Joe Williams

    Joe Williams Well-Known Member

    Then nothing in your world would change here, Tar. Except, of course, the paycheck.
     
  6. Fredrick

    Fredrick Well-Known Member

    We reporters have contributed to the problem in sports. Most sportswriters work 60 hours and put down 40. If everybody in America put the whole 60, papers would have had to adjust long ago. For some reason at McDonalds if you work 60 you get paid 60. On a sports staff so many work 60 and get paid 40. And it's expected. Amazing.
     
  7. Stitch

    Stitch Active Member

    Not from me. I put down the extra hour if I'm working 41 hours in a week. If I work it, I get paid, plain and simple.
     
  8. Cadet

    Cadet Guest

    Broaden your horizons, man. It's not just reporters and it's not just sports. Photogs, editors, designers in all sections of the paper have long been working the 60-for-40. Because every so often we get a speech from the suits that says it's not about money, it's about passion, and if we're really passionate and prideful about doing a good job we'll do whatever it takes. We're also told that unpaid work is the only way to get ahead, the only way to prove your desire to be in the biz.
     
  9. TwoGloves

    TwoGloves Well-Known Member

    We've always had a 37.5-hour work week.
     
  10. BTExpress

    BTExpress Well-Known Member

    My first employer (Post and Courier in Charleston, S.C.) many moons ago had a 37.5-hour pay schedule.

    That being said, there are tradeoffs and perks to most things.

    As a desker I almost never work more than 40 hours a week.

    But I also do not get frequent-flyer/hotel perks from flights made on the company's dime. Nor can I parlay an interview done for the company into a freelance assignment. I have spent $4,400 on airfare this year. I know reporters who haven't paid for a personal flight in years.

    And if you are seriously working 60 hours a week for 40 hours pay and no perks and no comp time . . . who is your employer, P.T. Barnum?
     
  11. Joe Williams

    Joe Williams Well-Known Member

    Stitch, most joints I know, that would make you a pariah or a laughing stock or someone who quickly would have his desk dragged right next to the boss', so he could clock your time input.

    I'm not disagreeing with your outlook and expectation of compensation for time worked. But I know people who never recover from reputations as clock watchers or OT mongers. I hope this keeps working out for you, because I agree that the alternative -- donating gobs of unpaid time -- has contributed to our plight. If a place can get the work of eight people done with only six because the six are working for free a lot, then two people don't get jobs at that place.
     
  12. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    Same here. I'm not volunteering my time. I like my job at 40 hours. I would hate it if it was 60, and if I was working 60 hours a week at any job, I'd expect to get paid a lot more than what I'm making right now.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page