NY Times freezes wages of NON-UNION employees (lest there be any doubt about why we need unions)

[marmar]

....although I'm sure some will blame the unionized workers for the non-unionized workers' plight :eyes:



from Forbes:



New York Times Freezes Wages
James Erik Abels, 12.12.08, 05:05 PM EST


Non-union employees at both the newspaper and the Web site will receive no raises in 2009.
The New York Times Company told print and Web employees of its flagship New York Times newspaper this afternoon that non-union staff would receive no pay raises next year.

"Advertising revenues at both the paper and the Web site remain weak and the financial outlook for 2009 is daunting," the staff was told in an internal e-mail from publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr., obtained by Forbes.com. (Read the complete memo below.)

companies have seen massive revenue declines this year as a result of a weak ad market and continued erosion of their traditional business by the Internet. In October, advertising revenues from its New York Times Media Group, which includes properties such as the Times and the International Herald Tribune, dropped 15.3% over the same time last year. At the time, the company said advertising revenue for the group was down 10.6% over last year for a total of some $900 million. .......(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.forbes.com/business/2008/12/12/nyt-pay-freeze-biz-media-cx_jea_1212nyt.html?feed=rss_business

[Double T]

1. The union had better hustle their butts to the negotiating table and volunteer concessions........

or there may not be a NY Times to provide union jobs.

[FreakinDJ]

Round #2 of Reaganomic's wage cuts

Damm RATpublicans are determined to resurrect the failed policies of Reaganomics in the face of a World Wide Economic Melt Down cause by those very same policies

Does everyone still remember the wage cuts of 1981-82 ?

Just as Milton Friedman's theories used as the basis for Reagan's Trickle Down theory prescribe, Unemployment is used to control inflation. In the case of 1981, Massive Unemployment was used to leverage 60 million workers to make wage concessions.

I say let the Trickle Down Economics work, make the cuts at the Top 1% first and then let it trickle down

[Double T]

7. Harsh reality; lower advertising revenue and fewer subscribers.........

force across the board cuts by ALL. The corrupt corporate executives should be drastically reducing their obscene compensation. Everyone else, including the union workers MUST contribute to the sustainability and viability of the NY Times business.

[FreakinDJ]

9. Cutting wages merely adds to the economic melt down

The economy needs stimulus and that only will come from the working class

Hasn't the current economic melt down demonstrated to you the failed policies of Trickle Down Economics yet!!!

[Double T]

11. Trickle Down is a conservative rethug scam; we all know that.

If revenues are down there is nothing left do but cut the budget and that includes everyones wages and compensation.

[FreakinDJ]

13. And I'm sure your privy to the NYT financial ledger

they can keep wages for Union workers but not Non-Union workers

Don't advocate failed RATpublican Trickle Down Theories

[depakid]

29. They've also slashed dividends on their stock

Douk.

There goes that theory.

[wtmusic]

14. This is trickle up.

It works like this. The paper continues to give union members wage increases while they are heading into the toilet. The union members spend these wages on necessary items like food and medicine.

The workers at the grocery store where they bought their food use that money to buy necessary items like food and medicine.

And so on.

Then one of their uncles dies and they use that money to subscribe to the Times, except it went bankrupt 8 years ago. So they instead choose USAToday, which is now printed in China and flown daily to the US on cargo jets (cheaper that way).

:crazy:

[4 t 4]

30. USA Today is printed in China

I didn't know that , it doesn't suprise me but it make me really mad. I don't buy that paper often, but I will never buy it again.

[Clovis Sangrail]

2. that sound more like an argument *against unions

all workers should be willing to accept wage freezes if their company is tanking.

What's better... getting your scheduled wage increase on June 1 and losing your job on Nov 1 because the company goes under
or not getting your wage increase on June 1, the company surviving, and having a job for another x years ?

Obviously the company actually has to be in the red for this and the union leaders (hence the members) should be involved in determining if this is the case.
:shrug:

[marmar]

3. The company is not tanking.....Shareholders' returns are lower......

..... but the New York Times is not tanking.

[dems_rightnow]

6. That depends on whether

they are able to reinvent themselves. It's a factual matter that subscriptions are declining and will likely continue to do so as more people get their news over the internet.

The print media are in very serious trouble.

[geckosfeet]

5. Yes - the standard issue at least you have a job approach.

How about we fix the economy and built in wage disparities instead?

[wtmusic]

17. It's going to be a combination of efforts, and union workers are not immune.

No one wants to go first. "I want mine."

That frame of mind is not going to cut it, or this depression will last until the next big war when people are so damn scared they give in and work together even with reduced pay (that includes CEOs, btw).

An inconvenient truth.

[geckosfeet]

21. I see. So I need to take a cut and/or lose my job/benefits so the rich can get richer?

If you ask me, thems fighting words right there.

[wtmusic]

23. You may need to take a cut in pay.

Join the club. What makes you think union members should be entitled to a bigger slice of the pie than the rest of us? :shrug:

[geckosfeet]

24. What makes you think they are getting it - besides MSM lies?

BTW - I am not union but I do not resent them.

[wtmusic]

25. I took a cut in pay

and I'm not crazy about it, but I'm working. I'm also self-employed so I have to pay for all my own health/retirement, and costs are going through the roof.

I don't resent anybody who works hard for a living, but it chafes when I hear about unions demanding raises in an economic climate like this.

[geckosfeet]

26. I don't hear them asking for a raise - just some leadership from their

CEO'S and government so that they can keep their jobs.

But maybe I missed that piece.

[wtmusic]

32. A wage freeze means no raises

and that should go all the way to the top.

[readmoreoften]

33. But you're fine with CEOs taking all the bailout money. "Times like this" my ass.

They're getting handouts is what they're getting. If companies can't afford to employ people at a living wage, better for the company to go under then drive the wages of everyone across this country to ashes. Because in 2010, when the economy 'rebounds' all the CEO bastards will have their cake back, and we'll have useless unions that accepted minimum wage for their workers.

They ran their companies into the ground. If the "management" can't run their companies for shit, then maybe they should be taught a lesson.

[wtmusic]

34. I'm fine with that?

I didn't even know.

[Clovis Sangrail]

18. right ... and let's change our voting system

and the way power is distributed in govt too

I think either of those would be easier than a complete overhaul of the economic system society is founded on
:eyes:

good goals but we got what we got and the existing reality is what puts food on the table or gets people to join the ranks of the unemployed.

[FreakinDJ]

8. How many CEOs will receive a $10Million bonus for cutting wages

The current economic melt down we are experiencing is brought on by Trickle Down Economics.

You place the wealth in the top 1% and this Depression is the result

You disperse that same wealth across the working class and you get liquidity

[Clovis Sangrail]

19. how is our current mess a result of trickle down economics?

CEOs making in a day what their workers make in a year isn't trickle down economics.
Bankers writing 'regulations' for their own industry isn't trickle down economics.
Offshoring labor to lower costs and evade taxes isn't trickle down economics.

From what I can see it's a result of a lack of regulation, letting the financial sector make shit up as they went along, and govt being utterly corrupt that has led us to where we are.
Not trickle down economics.

Trickle Down Economics is the (wrong headed) idea that you best stimulate the economy by providing tax cuts to the wealthy.
Yes taxes have been getting cut on the wealthy... but in this case it's a symptom not a cause of the current debacle.

[geckosfeet]

20. The rich don't trickle surplus liquidity down. It's a bogus and crackpot

economic dream put forth by ronnie raygun and his mis-administration.

Hey - it gives the poor people hope as you pull the rug out from under them.

Works every time.

[Clovis Sangrail]

22. that doesn't answer why the current mess is a result of 'trickle down economics'

Trickle Down Economics is about tax policy.. not economic viability.

It sounds like you're railing against the capitalist economic system not trickle down economics.

[geckosfeet]

35. My perception of trickle down is simply that when the rich have it all,

some of it will trickle down to the po folk. Tax policy may be part of handing them all the countries wealth, but the guiding principle seems to be let the rich spread it around by buying houses and boats an cars and diamonds. Let the po folk serve them for peanuts.

[Clovis Sangrail]

36. like I said... you're railing against capitalism... not supply side economics

big difference

[geckosfeet]

40. Ahhh. So rigging the game so that the rich get richer is capitalism?

[Clovis Sangrail]

41. that's the game /nt

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

12. Exactly.

[geckosfeet]

4. Expect this to be the norm for the next year or two. Crappy economy don't you know.

[Fumesucker]

10. Why bother to read or subscribe to a newspaper when a big portion of what is written there..

Are lies and spin?

Where was the NYT in the runup to the Iraq invasion?

Cheerleading, not asking the hard questions they should have been.

Does the name Judith Miller ring a bell?

If the Times goes down, it did it to itself.

[wtmusic]

16. And take all those meatheads like Frank Rich and Paul Krugman with them!

Um, have your ever read the New York Times? :eyes:

[Fumesucker]

28. No, I always criticize things I haven't read..

:eyes:

[stray cat]

15. Salarys for professors and other non union positions have been frozen for years

However, I would prefer to not get a pay raise to not having a job because some universities may be going under as well. As long as management pays in the suffering to keep a business afloat I think its fair.

[sarcasmo]

27. Union crushers, this is why we all should have a union, this shit needs to stop.

Serfdom here we come.

[4 t 4]

31. Maybe if we ever come out of this hell

we can all learn a thing or two. Bring back Unions for everyone. How can you be against a Union? They make sure you are payed a living wage, they are great on benefits, vaca pay, overtime ect... In this new financial environment we have a chance to stick together and change things. We really need to wake up. Look at the people at the Republican Window and Door Company, they got what they wanted. Chicago might turn out some of the worst but I think over the years they have also turned out some of the best.

[Clovis Sangrail]

39. How can you be against a union? easy

Not everybody sees a benefit from unions.
:shrug:

If I were part of the owner class I think I'd want both union and non-unionized workers to exist in my industry.
Hiring the union workers would ensure I was most likely to get the better workers.

From the owner perspective:
I think everybody unionized would be about the same as nobody unionized - at least in terms of finding qualified employees.

From my perspective:
I've been a teamster and a member of the IBEW.. and I was very glad to be in both.
IBEW directly saved my ass re: being forced to work in an unsafe environment.

However, I've been in IT for a lot of years now with no union.
The only attempt I've seen to unionize the type of work I do would have resulted in my getting a massive pay cut.

[charlie]

37. But there's money for Kristol and Friedman

neither of whom has ever made an utterance that wasn't immediately confounded by reality. Way to prioritize guys.

[Hubert Flottz]

38. NYT blames the workers for their loss of income, but it was the

people who ran the place that kissed BushCo's ass to the point that their rag has lost it's old readership and credibility. Maybe the owners should Blame scooter's girlfriend, or their other right wing hacks who promoted bush's war in Iraq?

From the stirring up of the Whitewater story to helping bushCo sell the War in Iraq, the NYT has sold out to the GOP, too many times, and nobody but fools trusts them anymore.