Former Los Angeles Times journalists continue to struggle with severe underemployment, soon-to-expire unemployment benefits and worries about retirement, a recent informal survey of 75 former staffers found. Nearly three-quarters of the respondents said they had been laid off or asked to leave by the financially troubled Tribune Company; the rest left the company voluntarily.
More than two-thirds are still receiving unemployment checks, though 68 percent expect those benefits to expire within 30 weeks of when the survey was taken in mid-November. The loss of benefits are despite the 14-20 week-extension recently signed by President Barack Obama.
The eventual end of benefits weighs heavily on the former Times employees.
“I’m hanging in there, but don’t know what I’ll do when I don’t have unemployment as a base,” wrote one female ex-staffer. “I’m in my 50s and it isn’t easy to find a job at my level and impossible to find one that pays what I used to make.” All comments were offered anonymously in the survey.
The survey, which was conducted by TheJournalismShop, targeted 124 writers, editors, news editors, managers and artists who banded together to discuss benefit, health care and career options on a Yahoo message group. The group, which began in December of 2008, grew to its present size as layoffs mounted at the Times.
While almost two-thirds of the respondents say their families are now on sound footing, 84 percent report that leaving the Times had a negative impact on their finances.
“Week-to-week takes on a whole new meaning,” wrote one father in his 40s.
Four out of five of the respondents reported earning half – or less – of what they were paid at the Times. Thirteen percent of the respondents reported zero income.
The loss of a salary is forcing tough personal decisions.
“We’re living on $50,000 less a year with two kids, one in college and (one) in high school,” wrote a father in his 50s. “We’re not at risk of losing our home but our ability to help our children get through college has been severely threatened.”
Others are reaching deeply into savings or selling their homes.
“After taking a pay cut of almost 30 percent in my current job – and I’m just happy to be working – I had to tap into my savings, retirement and other resources just to pay the bills and taxes,” wrote a laid-off male who is now working fulltime.
For others, full-time positions remain elusive. Only 11 of the 75 respondents reported landing jobs. Nearly 40 percent of the members are working freelance jobs only, and 28 percent are not working at all.
Of those respondents who are working full time or freelance, 90 percent are making less than they did at the Times.
“As with many of us, after working at the Times for more than 20 years, I was at the high end of the pay scale,” wrote a woman in her 50s. “It will be very difficult to re-establish myself in a similar position.”
Although many journalists were upset about losing their jobs, much of the anger was directed at those who fired them. About half felt they were treated unfairly, particularly as the Times has recently hired younger, less experienced journalists, presumably for less pay.
“It was extremely dismaying to me to hear of a younger reporter being hired after some 70 layoffs occurred this past spring,” wrote one female respondent. “The fact that she – and others – have been hired after so many were laid off leaves me unconvinced that the economics were such that they had no choice but to do such extensive layoffs.”
On the other hand, nearly half of the respondents believed they personally were treated fairly. Some placed blame for the newspaper's foundering on the Chandler family, longtime owners of the Times who sold it to Tribune in 2000.
Tribune then sold itself to Sam Zell in 2007 for $8.5 billion and increased the company’s debt load by $8 billion. The extra debt precipitated the company’s financial crisis. Tribune has been in bankruptcy protection since December 2008.
“At some point, I became grateful that I wasn’t tossed on the street with no compensation at all,” wrote a woman, who was laid off last December when severance packages were still available. “I feel Tribune and the L.A. Times were mismanaged and put into a death spiral by a sale deal that benefited the Chandlers and left the papers with a sure-death debt load.”
While half of the respondents said they expect to recover financially, 79 percent feel less secure about their retirement. Only two respondents, or 3 percent, expect a better retirement after parting the Los Angeles Times.
Reasons for concern over retirement are varied, but several indicated the stock market’s sharp decline over the past year had a sharp impact on 401k and IRAs.
“Lost more than a third of my 401K in the recession, and have had to tap into what was left to keep the house,” wrote one female in her 50s. “There is little likelihood that I will be able to put enough away to ever be able to retire now.”
“The money that I had saved for retirement over the past 30 years is now almost gone,” wrote one man.
– Brett Levy
For more information, contact the author at Brett.Levy@thejournalismshop.com. Journalism Shop members Robin Rauzi and Scott Martelle edited this report.
Wednesday
How parting the Times impacts health and personal lives.
Comments