Next in Line ... Milwaukee

Ray Allen needed a reach-around.

 

Of course he had his reasons. What's the alternative? "Garry, why didn't you join the staff for a beer?" "I have no reasons." The question is whether his reasons outweigh being a good boss and a better friend.

 

I'm leaning, not heavily, on the Bubbler side of this deal.

Things you say in sympathy can come back to haunt you. Sad but true.

I understand human resources telling him not to contact anybody; I wonder what I would have done given the state of the business right now. As we've seen, nobody's job is ironclad. And Howard has family and everything else to worry about, too.

I guess I'm saying it's easy to sit in the bleacher seats and rip without knowing all the circumstances.

 

Understood, SF. I conceded the point that there are obviously reasons for him not officially contacting them.

But I just can't comprehend turning your back completely on people who slaved for you.

 

Well said, SF.

Mind you, I'm not defending Howard per se, I'm just giving everyone a possible reason for his alleged actions.

 

Human Resources -- a misnomer if there ever was one in this type of situation -- is misguided and wrong to tell managers/editors not to contact people in instances such as this one.

In fact, the advocating of and insistence on such total alienation of former staffers likely is often a significant contributing cause of the very legal actions HR may be trying to avoid.

Lawsuits usually occur as a result of pain, anger and/or a desire and intent to right a wrong.

By treating people -- people you have known, and, as of a few hours ago, you used to like, enjoy and obviously, believe in, or else, you wouldn't have employed them, by the way -- the right way, you would probably avert all but the most egregious tendency of people to see the situation as something other than a regrettable occurrence and a choice between two (or more) equally bad choices that had to be made.

There are individual cases and instances where, perhaps, it might be advisable not to speak to someone. But a mass layoff that is portrayed and played out as such is not one of those times.

 

Newpaper people often are horrible managers. They learned how to write, edit and design pages, but they didn't learn how to manage people.

The county clerk recently personally wrote letters of recommendations for the people who were laid off. I think it was around 50.

 

This "don't talk to them" crap as HR advice -- if indeed it actually exists -- is the same sort of bullshit that has lawyers telling clients, "Don't apologize to the person you wronged, because it could lead to big money liability in a lawsuit." What garbage. The whole world becomes a little less human with each and every instance.

Say "I'm sorry," when you inflict damage on someone, directly or indirectly, for fuck's sake.

As much as we love capitalism and keeping score by the paychecks and job titles and hanging onto some precious job, it is NOT the only thing that matters in life. And if a boss is told not to offer a bit of friendship or basic decency to people who worked hard for him/her and now have been whacked, then I'm telling you, that boss' soul is going to take a hit. Eventually and day by day until "eventually" gets here.

Let's remember, too, that this is Garry Howard adding this behavior to his portfolio of jerk-off maneuvers. This isn't Paul Anger or Lynn Hoppes or Glenn Schwartz or some other sainted SE beloved by most on this board who had a rare and unexpected transgression. It's the guy in Milwaukee who has embarrassed his staffers and played the clown many times before, taking his me-first schtick to a new low.

 

Getting laid off has little or nothing to do with the SE. It's generally not their call to make --- now maybe there are instances where they are told by management they need to cut someone and it's up to the SE to decide, I don't know. I've been laid off twice in the last three years and I never felt any hostility to the SE's because I knew it was coming from over their heads. I was royally pissed at upper management but I knew the SE would've loved to keep my extra set of hands if it was up to them.

Hence, I don't think management should be worried about the newly laid off people lashing out at the SE.

 

Besides, a SE who does a great job and produces a great section can provide more cover for his people than one who doesn't. A lot of newsroom managers, grudgingly or not, see that sports can drive eyeballs to print and, more so, to Internet. That can spare them layoffs -- maybe not all, but maybe not lose 17 spots or whatever Milwaukee lost. It all starts with the person leading his staff to achieve great things. Or, it should.

 

Great theory Joe and it's been proven time and time again that sports is the pulse of many newspapers. But for some reason, the powers that be believe that it's an easy job and replaceable.