Pay cut at the New York Times

Thomas Lifson
Once again the management at the New York Times Company is shocked to discover that their projections turned out to be optimistic, and business is worse than expected. So, in an apparent emergency measure to save cash, the company is imposing a 5% pay cut on non-union employees, and negotiating with the Newspaper Guild labor union to accept a cutback in pay, in return for a 10 day "leave."

Another 100 jobs were cut from the 1300 person editorial staff last year, and this pay cut is supposed to be in lieu of more downsizing.

The company is even cutting pay for about.com employees by 2.5%, despite the subsidiary having been hailed as a growth move when purchased by the Times.  

This article by Richard Pérez-Peña of the Times does not mention the cuts for top management being any higher than for the lowliest newsroom employee. So it is kind of a flat tax on employees to support the enterprise with pay cuts.

Given the fact that Pinch Sulzberger pays himself millions of dollars a year in compensation, and has benefited substantially from bonuses, shouldn't he give them back? In Japanese corporations, when there are cutbacks, top management always takes the steepest pay cuts, after all, because they have far more responsibility for the troubles than low level staffers. How about a progressive pay cut for this left wing outfit? Maybe Pinch should work for a dollar a year, since he bears the most responsibility. Or maybe really do something to save the company and resign.

But don't expect an elitist like Pinch Sulzberger to have any regard for the suffering of those below him. While the company was tanking, he held onto the corporate jet, and even used it for private travel, reimbursing the company for only incremental costs of his use. The company only announced a few weeks ago that it was putting the jet up for sale.

Hat tip: Sweetness & Light
Once again the management at the New York Times Company is shocked to discover that their projections turned out to be optimistic, and business is worse than expected. So, in an apparent emergency measure to save cash, the company is imposing a 5% pay cut on non-union employees, and negotiating with the Newspaper Guild labor union to accept a cutback in pay, in return for a 10 day "leave."

Another 100 jobs were cut from the 1300 person editorial staff last year, and this pay cut is supposed to be in lieu of more downsizing.

The company is even cutting pay for about.com employees by 2.5%, despite the subsidiary having been hailed as a growth move when purchased by the Times.  

This article by Richard Pérez-Peña of the Times does not mention the cuts for top management being any higher than for the lowliest newsroom employee. So it is kind of a flat tax on employees to support the enterprise with pay cuts.

Given the fact that Pinch Sulzberger pays himself millions of dollars a year in compensation, and has benefited substantially from bonuses, shouldn't he give them back? In Japanese corporations, when there are cutbacks, top management always takes the steepest pay cuts, after all, because they have far more responsibility for the troubles than low level staffers. How about a progressive pay cut for this left wing outfit? Maybe Pinch should work for a dollar a year, since he bears the most responsibility. Or maybe really do something to save the company and resign.

But don't expect an elitist like Pinch Sulzberger to have any regard for the suffering of those below him. While the company was tanking, he held onto the corporate jet, and even used it for private travel, reimbursing the company for only incremental costs of his use. The company only announced a few weeks ago that it was putting the jet up for sale.

Hat tip: Sweetness & Light