High: 13° / Low: 7° — Dude Weather Subscribe to Secrets Minneapolis / St. Paul
Ex-Stribber wanted to know why, if there are now two of us blogging, why there aren't daily posts. As mentioned previously, my colleague Mr. Lambert is off kayaking in the wilds of Utah and is blameless. I was first out of town and am now deluged with out-of-town guests who want to see every piece of art the TC have to offer. So....haven't been making a lot of calls. Fortunately, one of our correspondents had his ear to the ground and sent in this tidbit. I have no reason to doubt this post, as I was one of the folks who was told of her "reassignment" within days of the buyout deadline. Course, then they denied my buyout, but that's a whole different story.
Read and discuss....
The Star Tribune Guild convened a 10:30 meeting this morning to look at a pattern of age discrimination in the reassignments cooked up by editors for the paper's owner, Avista Capital Partners. Speaking on background, one Guild officer said that by their count "only three or four" of the [30-40] reporters told they are being reassigned, "are under the age of 35".
It is generally considered "paranoid" or "cynical" to read individualized, strategic intent in these reassignment frenzies. But when, as the same Guild source points out, the percentage of reassignees is so heavily skewed to older writers AND they are notified of their reassignment only days/hours before they have to decide to accept a buy-out and leave the paper, you really aren't left with many credible explanations other than that this is the latest exercise in the tried-and-true corporate "right-sizing" template of -- let's describe it the way it smells -- -- insulting/threatening a veteran reporter with a switch to a beat usually covered by a summer intern, if at all.
There are specific examples all over the place, but when you get to Neal Gendler, a 60-something with 40 years at the paper being reassigned to overnights from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m., you're not even getting points for subtlety. In other words, police chase and flaming wreck with shoot out at 3 AM ... Gendler's your man.)
The Guild also has a problem with the peculiar sequencing of the reassignment/buy-out deadline process devised by the Star Tribune. As I asked/wrote yesterday, how else can you explain managing editors spending so much time re-mapping their employee universe BEFORE knowing for certain who they would have to work with, other than as a not too subtle and yes, fairly cynical process for "encouraging" those they most want out of the building to pack up and go?
It may be technically legal, but it runs contrary to the spirit of journalism, where your agendas, if you have them, are supposed to be plainly disclosed.
Whether the Guild alone can get any traction on the age discrimination issue remains to be seen. I happen to believe they should pursue aggressive outside counsel if only to squeeze Avista for a fatter, longer-term health benefits package. But that's me and it wouldn't be my money.
Here's what Nancy Barnes said at a 2005 industry convention about a study the Strib commissioned:
"The study also showed that newspapers need to hire young reporters," said Nancy Barnes, a Star Tribune deputy managing editor who led the initiative. "The only way to diversify your newsroom is to take risks you wouldn't take 15 years ago," she said. "If your newsroom is all full of 50-year-old guys, you miss a huge swath of the community."
(Source: cached web page of the Asian American Journalists Association.)
Hmmmmmmm.
The "spirit of journalism" has left the building...which I'm sure one of you would have noticed were you not either kayaking or conducting museum tours for out-of-town friends. Man, this blogging thing isn't as snappy as it used to be. Now that you're taking submissions, do we all get to share paranoid thoughts about our work? I've got some theories that would curl your hair...
RYBAK: Froggy, has anyone ever stopped you?
So the Guild is thinking about, maybe, possibly, giving Avista Capital Partners a timeout for their dastardly approach to the buyouts. Way to flex, lunch bucket brigade!
An ownership that would court the Ridder anti-Christ to run its operation, welcome him, his illicit laptop and his secrets-loaded thumb drive, and then spend millions defending him in court in a losing battle (eventually paying for Lean Dean Singleton's torpedoes too) surely is quaking that the union minions are looking at them cross-eyed over the staff gutting.
Meanwhile the rest of us are (all together now) shocked -- SHOCKED -- that such maneuvering would go on.
But oh, right, Nancy Barnes and Scott Gillespie weren't party to any of that intimidating, pre-buyout re-organizing -- just the inevitable post-buyout re-re-organizing. They whimpered into their hankies over it while thinking lofty journalism thoughts. Lightweights.
Glad somebody brought up that cold-blooded cold-cock on Gendler. I'm sure Nancy and Scott will include that one when they're both in the rocking chair, recounting the good old days of journalism to their grandchildren. Something to be proud of - a big black streak down a heart you keep pretending is soft. Scum. Of. The. Earth.
The big problem with this post is the underlying assumption your employer owes you a job, benefits and so forth regardless of business conditions.
The newspaper business is no longer a "cash cow" for owners but rather bologna beef for speculators. This is a natural devolution of the business as it enters Schumpter's "creative destruction" phase of its life. There is little anyone can do to protect workers when consumers have abandoned the previous business model.
Pile union upon union, grievance upon grievance and it still makes no difference if there is no "there" there to redistribute. I feel sympathy for those who lost their jobs and for those who will lose their jobs; however, it is useless to look for blame in these matters. Looking for "blame" does not solve the afflicted's problems; it leaves things the same.
Sooner or later someone will develop a business plan that works. Until then employees would be best to look for solutions to make the business work rather than indulge their paranoia.
What can you say but the people running the Trib are despicable. That puts the new conservative bent in perspective, with people like Doug Tice, James Lileks and Katherine Kersten in prominent roles.
NOW we're getting somewhere.
Bleuler scores and Levine starts to see the light...
Note to Rybak and/or Lambert: Can you fix the formatting glitch in my comment that was posted today? As is, it's too hard to read. I really want people to see what Nancy Barnes said about 50+ employees. Maybe it will help the union. There is also a glitch in Bleuler's (sp) post. In case it helps, the text of the post is below: (The above is not for posting, obviously.) Thanks.
Here's what Nancy Barnes said at a 2005 industry convention about a study the Strib commissioned:
"The study also showed that newspapers need to hire young reporters," said Nancy Barnes, a Star Tribune deputy managing editor who led the initiative. "The only way to diversify your newsroom is to take risks you wouldn't take 15 years ago,she said. "If your newsroom is all full of 50-year-old guys, you miss a huge swath of the community."
(Source: cached web page of the Asian American Journalists Association.)
Hmmmmmmm.
Ah, so let's see, the bidness ethics being espoused by the right-wing gonzamachers is that if you're profit margin dips below 20% you can treat people as shabbily as your denatured sensibility allows, that about it? This as you pound millions donw the alimentary canal that is Par Ridder.
And, meanwhile, the poor dim bertram jr, well out of his usual element as passively pliant right rant radio nodder, utterly misapprehends levine's point.
Neal's case is particularly obvious, but the fact of the matter is that newspapers have been using the nefarious "night-side reassignment" ploy for decades to deal with staffers viewed as "problems".
In the past, an occasional reporter was affected (few news beats are active at 8 or 10 pm), but mostly it was the anonymous newsroom folks -- sub-editors such as assistant city editors, assistant news editors, copy editors, etc.-- who were affected. Typically, these folks were rooted in the community, the paper and their families.
Faced with a change from "normal" hours to night-side hours, some would end up leaving newspapering for day-time jobs in other industries; some would retire; others would hope and wait for a management change; the optimistic would apply for day-shift openings; and the rest would more-or-less accept their fate (and the "night differential" pay bump at union papers).
The core reality is that senior editors know exactly what they're doing when they decide to reassign a person from a day-time shift to oddball hours. If they've been in the business for more than two weeks, they've experienced what it's like to work a 4 pm to midnight shift with a Monday-Tuesday "weekend" -- and they didn't like it. (At the Des Moines Register in the early '70s the managing editor got the first copy off the presses delivered to his home by courier so he didn't have to be away from his family.)
Not a pretty picture -- then or now . . .
The lightly medicated yet virulently world hating jimmy faints at such prospects as Levine mentions:
"wiith people like Doug Tice, James Lileks and Katherine Kersten in prominent roles".
Methinks the above would be a salve on what ails the poor, listing Strib.
People who know what's right, know what is the truth, and know what is good. And aren't afraid of those limp-witted, fools who oppose them, whose only recourse is the ad hominem attack.
People like Kersten, Lileks and Tice, who are anethema to 'jimmy'.
Now, back to Ms. Ingraham's show, where she joyfully excoriates the jimmy's of this world, all the while a ratings success and a best selling author.
Whither jimmy?
I guess when people posting comments here just start attacking each other, it's time for me to go to bed. Good night!
LAMBERT: Tomorrow will be a better day.
Of course it's a better day - Laura Ingraham's book is still TOP 5 nationally.
And still not a mention of it in the Strib's pages....
How odd.
Books:
Cracking Spines by Max Ross
Music:
Hear, Hear by Staff
Art:
The Vicious Circle by 6 Critics
Secrets:
Secrets of the Day by Kate Iverson
Theater:
Seen in the City by Staff
Film:
Talk About Talkies by Staff
Weather:
Dude Weather by Jimmy Gaines
Humor:
Spazz Dad by Todd Smith
Cars:
Road Rake by Chris Birt
Commentary:
Read Menace by Tom Bartel
Society:
The Adventures of Melinda by Melinda Jacobs
Politics:
Defenestrator by Rich Goldsmith
Food:
Breaking Bread by Jeremy Iggers & Ann Bauer
Sports:
On the Ball by Britt Robson
Hockey:
Spazz Dad by Todd Smith
Style:
Hook & Eye
Misc:
Is This News?
Fiction:
Yo, Ivanhoe by Brad Zellar
Food:
Consider the Egg by Stephanie March
Baseball:
Warning Track Power by Brad Zellar
Wine:
Beyond the Cask
Food:
Food Fight!
Media:
To the Slaughter
Misc:
Outrage by Staff
Food:
Chef's Table
Guest Commentary:
Just Passing Through