Sun-Times: Happy New Year! You're fired!

Yeah, when about half of us are in different fields...

This isn't getting better anytime soon...

 

When I worked under the auspices of a union, I believed its essence was to negotiate mandatory minimum salaries, benefits and working conditions. Period. The onus was on me to remain relevant through the quality of my work, not the date by which I walked in the door (I realize that some contracts do cover this; the one I worked under did not). If you're looking for an objective standard by which to measure each and every aspect of working life, you're going to suffer a lot of disappointment.

As for "fluidly," sorry, didn't mean to drop in blatant corporatespeak. I simply meant that if upper management comes to you, a section editor, and says, "Three have to go in your department," you've gotta figure out pretty quick what the work is going to look like after those three are gone. Assuming you've been deploying folks in a smart way, you're not going to be able to do the same things you did before with three fewer people.

As for your last line -- a place that lays off without regard to seniority is called a non-union shop -- all I can say is: The place I'm speaking of was a union shop. I know. I was there.

(Please note the verb tense, by the way.)

 

Enjoying the discussion, Bump, not arguing with you. I still think there are too many opportunities for abuse if you abandon seniority when it comes to layoffs. That is something a union needs to watch and protect, in my view. Too easy for a relatively new boss, or someone just passing through a department on his way up the ladder, to prize HIS people over those who were there before. That might have absolutely nothing to do with their production. And we all know that, in most cases, the lowest performers haven't exactly been read chapter and verse on what they need to do to improve, or even been "nurtured" to pull more work out of them; most bosses just keep going to their heavy producers and end up letting other folks slide. Well, layoffs are not the time to erase management mistakes in actually leading and running a department.

What I'm saying is, I'd have some sympathy for a boss who truly kept tabs on a low producer and already had taken steps to get the person to improve or leave. But too often none of that gets done until a round of layoffs is announced, and then a boss' eyes brighten, knowing he can blindside a few low producers. Or, if he sees fit, a few who haven't smooched his buttocks sufficiently. Or a few he didn't recruit and hire.

See, too many chances for abuse. Strict seniority -- last in, first out -- is aribtrary, but at least it isn't subject to favoritism and ageism and other -isms. There's also something fair about those who have paid the most in dues, over the longest period, having the most job protection.

If someone "deserves" to be laid off more than the next guy, then he or she should have been critiqued or developed or otherwise attended to before a round of layoffs provides a handy, non-managing solution.

 

Everybody in my office uses IM, all the time, for pretty much everything. Previewing pages, communicating with writers (all remote, none are based here), passing along information -- all this is done with AIM. We're actually severely crippled work-wise when IM is down for any reason.

Obviously, there's some personal communicating going on. We've never worried about it or had a discussion about excessive IMing with a single person.

It's also effective in terms of fixing things; instead of yelling somebody's mistake across the room, or having to "go into the office," you simply IM that person.

My only objection is that we're to the point where sometimes, you communicate that way with somebody sitting right next to you.

But I'm with those who say it's technology, take advantage of it.

 

Hey, SF, I'm going to the coke machine. Want something?

 

Dr Pepper, and please fix that typo on the home page before you go.

 

Can one of you guys hand me a pen? No, not the red ink - the blue one right next to you. Yeah, thanks.

 

Get back to your damned agate page! Don't make me tell you again.

 

Here's how they got around seniority at the Philly paper layoffs last year:

The day of our axing we were called in and told that our positions were being eliminated.  No more suburban staff of writers and photographers, all(13)but one had 18-20 plus years of seniority.  Everyone else who was laid off had 5 years or less.  Thanks to the gutless guild, a stream of dedicated, responsible, and talented people went out the door.  The following weeks proved that our jobs were not eliminated, but were being done by college journalism students, commonly known as interns.  So, our jobs didn't disappear.  We knew where they were and who was doing them.

 

Moddy, unfortunately, there is no good time to get pink-slipped. Skiles should have been fired a few days before or after Christmas. Not Christmas Eve.

 

A disease that's becoming rather common among the country's fading newspapers. Beware!! :'(

 

The role of hondo today will be played by The Good Doctor.