Posted on 05/07/2008 2:19:27 PM PDT by abb
New York Times Co. will lay off some staffers in its flagship newspaper's newsroom to meet its goal of cutting 100 positions.
In a letter to the staff, published on the Poynter Institute's Web site, New York Times Executive Editor Bill Keller said, "While the overwhelming majority of our reductions did indeed come from volunteers, we have been forced to resort to a relatively small number of layoffs to meet our assigned goal."
Mr. Keller didn't mention the number of people to be laid off and the company declined to comment. In mid-April, assistant managing editor Bill Schmidt had encouraged more staffers to consider taking buyouts so the paper could meet its goal.
The company, like nearly all newspaper publishers, has seen its profit and stock price shrink as readers and advertisers turn away from newspapers. The New York Times is under more pressure than most, as it has faced campaigns from shareholders agitating for improved financial performance.
Amid the pressures, the newspaper said in February it would reduce its newsroom headcount by about 100 posts. The Times said then it might require layoffs, but it hoped to limit the pain by not filling vacant jobs and offering buyout packages. Several prominent Times journalists, including Supreme Court reporter Linda Greenhouse, accepted the buyout offers.
Last month, New York Times Co. swung to a first-quarter net loss on an asset write-down, as weak ad sales continued to push down revenue. Standard & Poor's then cut its credit rating on the media company to its lowest investment-grade level amid a poor advertising climate.
At the end of April, figures released by the Audit Bureau of Circulations, showed the New York Times was the third-largest U.S. newspaper, with circulation of 1,077,256, down 3.9% from a year earlier.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
ping
LOL
Light up the smudge pots with yer stolen copies of the NYSlime. The ol’ gray ho’s a kickin’ some old & tired hookers out de doh.
http://poynter.org/forum/view_post.asp?id=13313
Topic: Memos Sent to Romenesko
Date/Time: 5/7/2008 11:32:58 AM
Title: New York Times memo on layoffs
Posted By: Jim Romenesko
From: Bill Keller/NYT/NYTIMES
Date: Wed, 7 May 2008 07:21:47
To: [New York Times newsroom]
Subject: A Message to the Staff from Bill Keller
Colleagues:
A little over two months ago, I told you that we would have to reduce staff within the newsroom by roughly 100 jobs given the difficult financial challenges facing our business and the deteriorating national economy.
Our hope, as you know, was that we could trim our payroll by encouraging enough volunteers to accept buyout offers. While the overwhelming majority of our reductions did indeed come from volunteers, we have been forced to resort to a relatively small numbers of layoffs to meet our assigned goal. (We are not going to discuss numbers or the details of the staff reduction, nor will we be releasing a list of names.) All of those who are leaving will do so with a financial cushion that should carry them to other endeavors or to retirement, but that will not eliminate their sense of loss, or ours.
These past few weeks have been difficult for all of us, as we say goodbye to many longtime colleagues who have elected to leave. Others, who raised their hands for buyouts more recently, will be departing in the coming weeks. A few of those who sought buyouts will stay on longer, to help us through the demands of a year when we must cover both the Olympics in China and a national election campaign. We’ve had farewell toasts, and will have more, for friends and colleagues whose knowledge and dedication we will miss. We know this time has been unsettling and dispiriting.
We hope that the worst is now behind us. As I told you when we met in
the Times Center in February, our plan from the outset was to move through this difficult process as quickly as possible so we do not spend a year bleeding from serial cuts.
There are, of course, no guarantees, but so far nothing in the company’s performance or in the forecasts for the economy at large suggests we
will be going through this again anytime soon. Moreover, we remain in a far better position than most competitors, thanks to a large base of extremely loyal paid subscribers, a digital news operation that is outpacing our rivals in readership and revenue, and the backing of a family that sees our work as both a civic trust and a durable business.
Most important, we retain the strongest team of talented journalists in
the business, and they — you — remain the key to all of our ambitions.
Now it is time to regroup and move forward. In the coming weeks we
will be working with department heads to reorganize and reimagine our coverage to ensure the quality journalism that is our standard. When we met in the Times Center in February, I told you that we were facing two seemingly contradictory challenges in the coming year. On the one hand, we must reduce our staffing and costs. On the other hand, we must do whatever we can to strengthen our competitive position. As I said then, that will mean our staff cuts will be offset a little by some investments to ensure, among other things, that we are well equipped to navigate the passage to our digital future.
I want to thank each of you for your patience, your forbearance and your support during this extremely difficult period. Now more than ever
the newsroom needs you — your intelligence and creativity, your energy
and dedication.
Bill
http://poynter.org/forum/view_post.asp?id=13314
Topic: Miscellaneous items
Date/Time: 5/7/2008 4:08:25 PM
Title: NY Guild complains about NYT layoffs methodology
Posted By: Jim Romenesko
New York Newspaper Guild release
May 7, 2008
GUILD MONITORING LAYOFFS
Company appears to have violated contract
Guild files grievance
By now, everyone knows that The Times carried out what it calls “a relatively small number” of involuntary layoffs in the Newsroom yesterday. The Times took this unprecedented step because, it says, too few staffers signed up for the Guild-negotiated voluntary buyout package that provides up to two years pay and extended medical benefits. While the number of layoffs is not huge, the impact on the individuals affected is.
We note that The Times has decided not to release the names of those laid-off, and the Guild has decided to follow suit out of respect for the privacy of those involved.
The Guild wants to make clear that it has been carefully analyzing the layoffs to make sure that management has followed the contract’s job security provisions. At this point, it appears to the Guild that the company has not done so. In fact, the Guild has already filed a grievance regarding the methodology used by The Times to decide who would be laid-off. While the contract does allow out-of-seniority layoffs under certain circumstances, all dismissals are to be made according to the department(s) and job classification(s) affected. It is the Guild’s long-standing position that, for example, all reporters have to be judged as a group, no matter where they are assigned. The Newsroom is a department under our contract. In this case, The Times has made the decision desk by desk. In the Guild’s view, that means the determinations made by management appear to be fundamentally flawed. The Guild already has an arbitration going forward on this departmental seniority issue with regard to a small number of layoffs that took place earlier this year.
However, the Guild realizes that some of the affected staffers may prefer to pursue other options available to them. To that end, the Guild is seeking to negotiate an additional enhancement to the severance package provided in the contract for out-of-seniority layoffs, if the employee involved is interested. If the employee wishes to fight their layoff, the Guild will review each such situation on a case-by-case basis.
According to the notification received by the Guild from The Times, some of the layoffs were done in inverse order of seniority, and some were done out of seniority. The Guild believes that The Times is mistaken here, too. It appears to us that nearly all of the layoffs are out of seniority.
The difference is important, because under the contract, an employee laid off in inverse order of seniority receives what amounts to two weeks’ severance pay for each year of service plus notice pay, and the employee must sign a release to obtain that severance payment.
On the other hand, an employee laid off out of seniority order is entitled to an enhanced package worth three weeks’ salary per year plus notice pay up to 15 weeks, and the employee does not have to sign a release in order to enable the employee and/or the Guild to pursue a claim on the staffer’s behalf, if warranted. Out-of-seniority layoffs can be very difficult to overturn because the company is permitted to make a determination regarding the employee’s qualifications for the remaining work.
THE WRONG MOVE AT THE WRONG TIME
“While the Guild is keenly aware of the challenges being faced by The Times and the rest of the newspaper industry, it believes that the decision to forcibly cut the size of its editorial staff is the wrong move at the wrong time,” said New York Guild President Bill O’Meara. “ We had high hopes that the nation’s most respected newspaper would not resort, as so many other news organizations have, to a quick-fix effort to boost its bottom line at the expense of its newsroom. Sadly, we were disappointed. As a union that values quality journalism, the layoff is very disturbing news. With the competitive pressures it faces in the changing news business and now from Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal, The Times needs a stronger newsroom, not a weaker one.”
#####
Sinking readership and revenue, because of biased and mediocre reporting, is finally taking its toll
Yeah, but those problems ain’t nothing a brand new office building won’t cure.
Karma, baby, karma.
A lady from the NYT called me once to see if I would like to subscribe and I told her I wouldn’t use their paper for toilet paper.
This is a polite way of Standard & Poor's saying it considers The New York Times to be JUNK.
yitbos
The Arts section is good but that’s about all of it I read.
Bush's fault when you get right down to it.
Pinch is dong to the NYT what Barack will do the country.
Related.
New paradigm:
Bloodletting in Tampa
Ailing newspaper faces huge cuts in its workforce
By Lisa Snedeker
May 7, 2008
Just a year ago, when the Tampa Tribune announced it was axing 70 jobs, 10 from the newsroom, it came as no big surprise. Those cuts were pretty much in line with what other papers had been announcing in response to ongoing declines in circulation and ad revenue.
What a difference a year makes.
New cuts are in store for the Tribune, and they’re a lot harsher.
Parent Media General now plans to chop fully half of the people at its Tampa operations, which include the paper but also a TV station, among other media properties.
In all, 650 or so of some 1,300 employees stand to see their jobs disappear. Media General, which also owns the Richmond Times-Dispatch, is blaming the recession for steep losses.
Welcome to what could be a whole new era of downsizing and turmoil in the American newspaper industry.
As the sinking economy’s squeeze tightens, papers are considering measures that might have been out of the question just two years ago, or even a year ago.
“If the economy continues to bottom out, combined with the reduction of classifieds and some of the other slowdowns, the pressure on revenues is pretty dramatic,” says Rick Edmonds, a media business analyst at the Poynter Institute for Media Studies in St. Petersburg.
“Papers have to get expenses in line with revenues. I think we’ll see some pretty substantial cuts in the next several months.”
In fact, the pace of job cuts has already picked up. So far this year, nearly 8,000 people in the media industry have lost their jobs, according to a study by a Chicago recruitment firm. That’s up 57 percent over last year at this time.
And while the staff trimmings are often termed buyouts, the reality is that they’re looking a lot more like straight cuts, with far skimpier severance deals. Those who decline the buyouts face the strong prospect of simply getting shoved out the door.
Of the Tampa cuts, one unnamed online writer quips: “Gee, don’t look for too many takers of that great offer. Of course, the next step after no one takes the buyout will be more layoffs.”
One big risk, of course, is that in cutting so harshly newspapers will so weaken their editorial coverage that even more readers will chuck the subscriptions, further accelerating circulation declines.
In the case of Tampa, 270 editors and reporters now put out the paper, which has a weekday circulation of 220,522. Media General is not saying how many newsroom jobs will be cut, but what if those ranks are trimmed to, say 200, or 150? One must wonder what sort of paper they would put out.
At what point in trimming staff does the editorial product suddenly get a lot worse? No one really knows. It could take months or even years to know for sure, and then it might be too late. It’s a risky proposition.
Yet more and more papers are confronting in the face of revenue declines and rising costs, which include newsprint and also fuel to deliver papers to readers. Staffing is the one area publishers feel they can cut.
In recent weeks, the Orange County (Calif.) Register announced it’s slashing 5 percent of its ranks, or 90 employees, in its third round of layoffs in a year. The New York Times recently offered buyouts to 100 in the newsroom, and it had said it will resort to layoffs if it doesn’t get that number.
This week, McClatchy announced cuts at the Charlotte Observer, and those follow previously announced cuts at the Modesto Bee and the Raleigh News and Observer.
And as Poynter’s Edmonds suggests we’ll likely see more in these coming months as publishers struggle to keep up their profit margins in the face of sinking revenues and demands from Wall Street.
A lot of eyes will be on Tampa. The question will inevitably arise: If Tampa can slice its workforce in half, and pull it off, why wasn’t it done a year ago? Two years ago?
It says the entire operation was overstaffed, presumably long overstaffed.
And if it was true in Tampa, it would only follow that it’s true at many other papers as well. Or that’s the way Wall Street will see it. And that will put even more pressure on papers to cut costs. It won’t be pretty.
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003799839
Layoffs and Buyouts Announced at Three More Dailies
By Joe Strupp
Published: May 07, 2008 10:36 AM ET
NEW YORK Layoffs and buyouts have hit three more daily papers, with announcements of cutbacks in Colorado, Kentucky, and South Carolina.
Word that staff reductions will hit the Lexington (Ky.) Herald-Leader; The Daily Camera in Boulder, Colo.; and The Sun News in Myrtle Beach, S.C., added to the already growing list of dailies facing the prospect of fewer people.
The Daily Camera announced Tuesday that nine of its 155 staffers were to be laid off, the paper reported, citing an industry that company officials say is “rapidly changing.”
The cuts were made across various departments and included one newsroom employee, Al Manzi, president of Prairie Mountain Publishing, publisher of the Daily Camera, told the paper.
Severance packages were offered to all nine employees, he said, adding, “It was an incredibly difficult decision to separate from nine terrific, hardworking, and caring employees.”
Prairie Mountain Publishing is co-owned by E.W. Scripps Co., publisher of the Rocky Mountain News, and Denver-based MediaNews Group, publisher of The Denver Post.
At the Lexington Herald-Leader, a four-percent staff reduction is being sought through a buyout program announced this week, according to Business Lexington, which said the paper had 385 full-time employees.
Business Lexington reported that “a statement released by the Herald-Leader said there is no set number of employees it hopes will take the buyout, nor has the paper released information publicly or to its staff as to what the eligibility requirements are.”
“Our business models are changing,” read a statement e-mailed by Herald-Leader Publisher Tim Kelly to the business news outlet. “We plan to continue our focus on both our print newspaper as well as Kentucky.com. At the same time, we plan to pay attention to our current and future niche products.”
“In order to support this effort, we must look for ways to operate more efficiently. This leads to a realignment of resources and changes in many of our business practices,” the statement added.
The paper also is leaving the option open for layoffs if fewer than 4% take the voluntary buyout, Business Lexington stated.
The buyout announcement follows a March decision to shut down the paper’s internal ad design and outsource the jobs to an Illinois company with locations in India and the Philippines.
Finally, The Sun News, “faced with pressure from the slumping economy,” the paper reported, laid off six workers and offered voluntary buyouts to others Tuesday.
In announcing the changes to employees, Publisher Pamela J. Browning also said that one of the company’s satellite offices “will be closed, enabling the company to streamline the magazine, marketing and advertising divisions,” the paper reported. “The laid off workers are in the marketing and advertising divisions.”
The Sun News added that voluntary buyouts are being offered to a limited number of workers. Browning told the paper that there is not a target number of buyouts, and they will not become involuntary.
Browning, in a memo to The Sun News’ 255 employees, stated: “Both of these programs are in response to the need to operate our newspaper more competitively and efficiently, and to respond to changing business models.”
For every lib that’s sent to the streets to starve, another angel get’s it’s wings.
Hey, you libs want to pick our lettuce and mow our lawns?
Dork.
"At the Lexington Herald-Leader, a four-percent staff reduction is being sought through a buyout program announced this week, according to Business Lexington, which said the paper had 385 full-time employees.
The paper also is leaving the option open for layoffs if fewer than 4% take the voluntary buyout, Business Lexington stated.
The buyout announcement follows a March decision to shut down the paper’s internal ad design and outsource the jobs to an Illinois company with locations in India and the Philippines."
Bwaahahahahaha..."would you like fries with that, sir?"
They could do so much to stop their decline, but they have a compulsion to destroy Republicans on their front page everyday...
Yew betchum, Tonto!!! (and the Lone Ranger, not realizing that Tonto was disguised as a pool table... racked his balls) Them newspapers motto is: “If at first you don’t succeed... Give up!” (snort!)(hoot!!)(snicker!!!)
Most of the laid off journalist will just go back to their old jobs at Pravda.
Since nonya pukes are journalists anyho, yer friggin' outta hyar.
Now git yer liberal assrs out de doh an into the welfare lines, where ya belong.
Ten-Fur on nat, gud buddy!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.