<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: WaPo: Clearing the Way for Layoffs?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2009/06/10/wapo-clearing-the-way-for-layoffs/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2009/06/10/wapo-clearing-the-way-for-layoffs/</link>
	<description>68.3 Square Miles of D.C. News and Opinion</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 14:05:00 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: RUMOR - - Wash Post hires Jason LaCanfora's Replacement - The Warpath</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2009/06/10/wapo-clearing-the-way-for-layoffs/comment-page-1/#comment-602421</link>
		<dc:creator>RUMOR - - Wash Post hires Jason LaCanfora's Replacement - The Warpath</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2009 00:32:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/?p=23784#comment-602421</guid>
		<description>[...]    I guess the people at the post don&#039;t really know who they have or haven&#039;t hired. If I was them I wouldn&#039;t be either.   __________________ If you use &quot;never in the history of [...]&quot; in a sentence you know [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...]    I guess the people at the post don't really know who they have or haven't hired. If I was them I wouldn't be either.   __________________ If you use &quot;never in the history of [...]&quot; in a sentence you know [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2009/06/10/wapo-clearing-the-way-for-layoffs/comment-page-1/#comment-597996</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Jun 2009 15:19:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/?p=23784#comment-597996</guid>
		<description>Why would a Guild member vote for this contract, especially a member who has minimal seniority?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why would a Guild member vote for this contract, especially a member who has minimal seniority?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Remainders: Jon and Katie</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2009/06/10/wapo-clearing-the-way-for-layoffs/comment-page-1/#comment-596873</link>
		<dc:creator>Remainders: Jon and Katie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2009 21:52:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/?p=23784#comment-596873</guid>
		<description>[...] Does new WaPo contract mean layoffs?  Copyright &#169; 2008 Capitol News Company, LLC &#124; Distributed by Noofangle Media [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Does new WaPo contract mean layoffs?  Copyright &copy; 2008 Capitol News Company, LLC | Distributed by Noofangle Media [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: edward</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2009/06/10/wapo-clearing-the-way-for-layoffs/comment-page-1/#comment-595957</link>
		<dc:creator>edward</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2009 13:12:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/?p=23784#comment-595957</guid>
		<description>There are reporters at the Post whose stories appear in the paper only once or twice a year, and editors who have done nothing for years. Unfortunately, they are still favored in the front office, and this contract won&#039;t do anything to thin out the ranks because they are so protected by the Graham family.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There are reporters at the Post whose stories appear in the paper only once or twice a year, and editors who have done nothing for years. Unfortunately, they are still favored in the front office, and this contract won't do anything to thin out the ranks because they are so protected by the Graham family.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Craig Plumfagen</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2009/06/10/wapo-clearing-the-way-for-layoffs/comment-page-1/#comment-595955</link>
		<dc:creator>Craig Plumfagen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2009 13:11:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/?p=23784#comment-595955</guid>
		<description>&quot;If there’s a fresh-faced staffer with great potential, there’s no way editors will have trouble protecting her. And a longer-serving reporter will be out of a job.&quot;

This won&#039;t just be a problem at the crisis moment of layoffs. This becomes a huge morale problem immediately. Newsrooms always have had teacher&#039;s pets, because of some man- or woman-crush that an editor has on a young journalist, because of their lower salaries and longer work hours (better bang for the bucks, y&#039;know, in part because they&#039;re more likely to be single and free from family obligations), and because they are the ones most likely to have been hired by the current managers. 

That last one always has been a dicey dynamic because the newest teacher&#039;s pets often crowd out yesterday&#039;s pets -- the boss who hired you and thought you were hot stuff moves on, and a new boss comes in and can&#039;t claim credit for hiring you, so YOUR value goes down even if your work remains excellent. This is what happens in such a thoroughly subjective profession -- you&#039;re only as good as the current boss thinks you are, and there are few ways to prove different. 

In the past, the suddenly disregarded and neglected journalists at least could take solace in knowing that they would have their jobs over the young&#039;uns, if times got tough, thanks to seniority. Now that will be gone. In a group of 100 reporters, the person who has been there longer than 25 others will be on the bubble. Don&#039;t think for a moment that lunchroom lists won&#039;t be compiled starting immediately, guessing at the chosen ones and calculating who really would be in jeopardy. 

At which point, there&#039;s this: That person or those persons will have paid Guild dues a heck of a lot longer than the newbies, for less security. Might the union, based on this and the stagnant pay/benefits, soon be reducing its dues, so members aren&#039;t paying more for less? 

If I&#039;m the person on or close to the 25/75 line, I sure as heck am not in favor of the change. And if you need to cut 25 percent, you&#039;ll end up with the newbies, then a big gap in mid-career people, then a bunch of lifers. Until the next round, then more of the lifers get thrown overboard. 

Good luck with all of this. Should make for a real unified newsroom, the epitome of team.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>"If there’s a fresh-faced staffer with great potential, there’s no way editors will have trouble protecting her. And a longer-serving reporter will be out of a job."</p>
<p>This won't just be a problem at the crisis moment of layoffs. This becomes a huge morale problem immediately. Newsrooms always have had teacher's pets, because of some man- or woman-crush that an editor has on a young journalist, because of their lower salaries and longer work hours (better bang for the bucks, y'know, in part because they're more likely to be single and free from family obligations), and because they are the ones most likely to have been hired by the current managers. </p>
<p>That last one always has been a dicey dynamic because the newest teacher's pets often crowd out yesterday's pets -- the boss who hired you and thought you were hot stuff moves on, and a new boss comes in and can't claim credit for hiring you, so YOUR value goes down even if your work remains excellent. This is what happens in such a thoroughly subjective profession -- you're only as good as the current boss thinks you are, and there are few ways to prove different. </p>
<p>In the past, the suddenly disregarded and neglected journalists at least could take solace in knowing that they would have their jobs over the young'uns, if times got tough, thanks to seniority. Now that will be gone. In a group of 100 reporters, the person who has been there longer than 25 others will be on the bubble. Don't think for a moment that lunchroom lists won't be compiled starting immediately, guessing at the chosen ones and calculating who really would be in jeopardy. </p>
<p>At which point, there's this: That person or those persons will have paid Guild dues a heck of a lot longer than the newbies, for less security. Might the union, based on this and the stagnant pay/benefits, soon be reducing its dues, so members aren't paying more for less? </p>
<p>If I'm the person on or close to the 25/75 line, I sure as heck am not in favor of the change. And if you need to cut 25 percent, you'll end up with the newbies, then a big gap in mid-career people, then a bunch of lifers. Until the next round, then more of the lifers get thrown overboard. </p>
<p>Good luck with all of this. Should make for a real unified newsroom, the epitome of team.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ted Scheinman</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2009/06/10/wapo-clearing-the-way-for-layoffs/comment-page-1/#comment-593864</link>
		<dc:creator>Ted Scheinman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2009 16:18:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/?p=23784#comment-593864</guid>
		<description>HuffPo,

Thanks for your note. We&#039;re pretty sure we&#039;ve fixed it now, but our computers weren&#039;t showing a problem to begin with—so let us know if the problem persists.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>HuffPo,</p>
<p>Thanks for your note. We're pretty sure we've fixed it now, but our computers weren't showing a problem to begin with—so let us know if the problem persists.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: huffpo</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2009/06/10/wapo-clearing-the-way-for-layoffs/comment-page-1/#comment-593854</link>
		<dc:creator>huffpo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2009 15:55:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/?p=23784#comment-593854</guid>
		<description>You need to fire that Rob Kunzig. Every time he posts a story, the page gets fucked up. Is anybody minding the store?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You need to fire that Rob Kunzig. Every time he posts a story, the page gets fucked up. Is anybody minding the store?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

