Star-Ledger N.J.: buyout of 200 or bust

That's the weakest plea/threat ever. I sure hope someone asked bossman to be a good example and resign first.

 

Simple answer... if the majority of employees (including all newsroom employees) at the papers (Star-Ledger and Times) are non-union, there's no union to deal with. So whomever buys the paper can come in and fire people at will without repurcussions, say everyone stays but is getting 10-15% salary cut, everyone will have to start paying hundreds a month for health insurance (as opposed to the zero they pay now), the matching for the 401k is reduced/eliminated (or the 401k itself is eliminated).
The buyout offer is more than you've indicated.

 

I certainly hope so, but except for those either of retirement age or a handful who have their next job/change of professions lined up, it's a weak token.

And Ace ... an upper manager actually resigning? Logic and common sense don't come easily to all those upper management types.

 

You forget estreet to metion that whoever comes in can eliminate the annual end-of-year (right before Christmas) bonus.

The buyout probably is 2 weeks for every year worked up one year's pay....pension credit enhancements if you're over 55 and continuation of health bennies for a few months.

 

I could be mistaken, and if I am, I apologize, but I believe you plagiarized someone. I really feel like I've read that somewhere before.

 

nah, i totally made it up. could be the new business catch-phrase. or something. har.

 

1) What's a Christmas bonus? I've worked at a Newhouse shop for 19 years and have never received one.

2) Unlike the last round of buyouts, this one is not based on length of service. The basic buyout amount being reported* is your 2007 salary (from your W-2) and 1 year of health insurance. I'm guessing there are other details for those near retirement age.
* - http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003833976

 

I would guess that the new owner would not be held to the terms the current one is, as far as not conducting any layoffs. Wasn't that how they got them to agree not to unionize?

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/01/business/media/01paper.html?scp=1&sq=Ledger&st=cse

 

Could have an effect that management might not like: The youngest and most recent hires get to cash in on a terrific deal (imagine being 26 with four years of service, but instead of eight weeks pay you get 52 + year of health coverage, same as the oldsters, with a chance while you're still young to re-direct your career away from newspapering.) So the so-called next generation of techno-savvy journalists are the ones rushing out the door.

As for those at the other end, the terms of the buyout aren't bad but they might seem bad in a relative sense. As in, "I've been here 30 years and I don't get anything more than a kid who's been here four years?" That might be enough to cause the oldsters to dig in their heels and stay.

I think a flat buyout actually is pretty fair -- everybody has to leave, everybody has to hit the job market, regardless of age -- but it probably doesn't "feel" fair. Then again, maybe the Star-Ledger wants to shed its younger people, retaining the senior staffers who can relate so well to most newspapers' aging core audience.

And MAJOR KUDOS to the suggestion that Arwady set the fine example of resigning from his post first, for the good of others.

 

The difference is that the kid who's only been there a few years might have only made 28-30k last year while the veteran who's been there a few decades likely made 55-65k+ last year. So although the flat 1-year salary term is the same for everyone, that amount widely differs based on experience, position and title.

 

Who might buy the Ledger and Times? New Yor Observer owner Jared Kushner according to the Wall Street Journal.

http://online.wSportsJournalists.com/article/SB121752025131801243.html?mod=2_1567_leftbox