Welcome to the People's Republic of Seattle


Vort
 Share

Recommended Posts

https://www.foxnews.com/media/sports-illustrated-fires-star-writer-for-incomprehensible-me-first-behavior-during-coronavirus-pandemic

To be clear: I'm no fan of SI, and I don't know or particularly care about the writer involved. But it looks to me like he contracted to produce content for an agreed-upon salary. SI then unilaterally required a "voluntary" cutback—read "forced renegotiation"—which this writer refused*. So they canned him.

What the heck, man?

*The writer says he didn't object to the cutback, just its permanent nature out past the end of the COVID debacle.

In any case, yet another reason (as if we needed another reason) not to patronize Sports Illustrated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Vort said:

https://www.foxnews.com/media/sports-illustrated-fires-star-writer-for-incomprehensible-me-first-behavior-during-coronavirus-pandemic

To be clear: I'm no fan of SI, and I don't know or particularly care about the writer involved. But it looks to me like he contracted to produce content for an agreed-upon salary. SI then unilaterally required a "voluntary" cutback—read "forced renegotiation"—which this writer refused*. So they canned him.

What the heck, man?

*The writer says he didn't object to the cutback, just its permanent nature out past the end of the COVID debacle.

In any case, yet another reason (as if we needed another reason) not to patronize Sports Illustrated.

I don't read SI and had no idea that it was in...Seattle??

It sounds like both had good points.  When a company needs to cut pay, rather than simply cutting workers, cutting back the pay of the more senior members and higher paid seems an appropriate move.  It at least makes it appear as if they care about all their employees.  Such things can have more employee loyalty than other companies that cut everyone at a whim.

However, there seems to be a bit missing.  The writer indicates that this measure was to be a permanent thing rather than a temporary adjustment.  This sounds tricky.  With reduced revenues, it can be hard to say whether this is for a virus outbreak, or financial difficulties.  If it's for financial difficulties (and it seems to say in the article they had a 30 million dollar loss, if that's in the past month or two that could be substantial) they may not know when they can go back up in pay.  If it's for the virus and it's effects in the short term, it seems to be sort of shady to deal with an employee that way.

They said he did make 350K last year as a sporadic writer.  That makes him an extremely well paid writer.  That probably can pay for several writers to replace him.  I don't know the specifics of any contracts he made or signed, but it looks like they may not have protected him against this.  If so, I guess we'll hear of him suing SI before long.

Either way, this probably won't influence me whether to buy Sports Illustrated or not.  I have not bought nor subscribed to the magazine and do not plan to. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/10/2020 at 7:27 PM, JohnsonJones said:

They said he did make 350K last year as a sporadic writer.  That makes him an extremely well paid writer.  That probably can pay for several writers to replace him.  I don't know the specifics of any contracts he made or signed, but it looks like they may not have protected him against this.  If so, I guess we'll hear of him suing SI before long.

I've been working for the same contract for going on 17 years... I'm paid very comfortably.  Back in 2014, my boss decided to replace me with another contractor from India whose contract rate is less than HALF my contract.  I can't compete with that rate, of course - I don't work for contract rates that do not reflect the value of my work - you have to want my skills bad enough to pay me the amount of money that will make it worth taking the time away from my husband and kids.

Anyway, my boss signed the new contract with India, I was tasked to spend the rest of my contract training the new guy, and so I did.  When it came time for contract renewals, I was surprised to get my contract renewed.  So, I continued training the new guy for the duration of my new contract.  2016 comes around, the new guy is doing his work on his own and my boss continued signing me up for a contract renewal.  Why... because there is a stark difference between the way I work and the way the new guy works.  My boss realized WHY they were paying me more than twice the money - because the quality of my work is 4 times that of the new guy.  So for 3 years, I gained myself an assistant - somebody I can offload tedious work to - until he decided to move on to a different company and I'm back to doing things by myself again.

These are the kinds of things that a lot of people do not realize.  They simply think - oh, the CEO is making 10 million and the contract drafter is only making $35K.  It's sooo unfair!  Yet, you make that contract drafter do the job of the CEO and that company is going down in less than 2 weeks and everybody is out on the streets.

Edited by anatess2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/10/2020 at 7:06 PM, Vort said:

*The writer says he didn't object to the cutback, just its permanent nature out past the end of the COVID debacle

SI has bigger issues than the COVID issue.  I'm a 30+ year subscriber but have turned off auto-renewal and will allow my current subscription to expire.

My concerns really began a year or so ago when they changed to a bi-weekly rather than weekly.  They also seemed to have a lot of double issues so were basically running as a monthly.  At the beginning of 2020 they announced the were officially going monthly.  That was when I decided the magazine no longer provided the entertainment I desired.  See ya.  I suspect I am not alone and that their subscription rates have been nose diving since well before COVID.

Aside:  Several years ago they broke out their swimsuit issue to be a completely separate issue.  Previously it had been one of their weekly sports issues beefed up with the swimsuits and additional advertising.  When they split it off on its own I called SI to let them know I wasn't thrilled with paying for a fashion magazine.  I was told that I could adjust my subscription to skip the swimsuit issue and extend my subscription by a week.  So I did and haven't received the swimsuit issue since.  At the time I was told they weren't allowed to tell me how many others followed that option.  More recently, however, they run a footnote in their subscription information letting people know of the no-swimsuit-issue option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Colirio said:

Wait, wait, wait.... People still buy magazines?!?

So, you might have heard of this generation called BOOMERS. They call us that because we make up something called the baby boom. In other words, there were and are a lot of us. And, yeah, many more mature folk like the feel of real books and magazines. :ancient:

Edited by prisonchaplain
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've gotta admit I would never have imagined Seattle being HQ to Sports Illustrated. We are the epicenter of wokeness and feminism, yet host a misogynist tabloid like SI? Wow...just wow. Worse yet, @hzdbl5 is probably aware that for every individual that bypasses the swimsuit edition there are probably 20 who only get that one. :oops:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Colirio said:

Wait, wait, wait.... 

 

 

People still buy magazines?!?

I have had a subscription to National Geographic for a long time.  My parents had copies of National Geographic (which I did not get, though if I had I may have a complete collection, they collected them I believe as well and had an entire wall with them).

Of course, it could just be worthless paper pulp in the future as so many no longer see the value of print on paper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

So, you might have heard of this generation called BOOMERS. They call us that because we make up something called the baby boom. In other words, there were and are a lot of us. And, yeah, many more mature folk like the feel of real books and magazines. :ancient:

 

My grandparents had a magnifying glass in their library and next to their nightstands. They would have the lamp on as they fell asleep with the book in one hand and the magnifying glass in the other. 
 

The entirety of the world’s libraries in my hand at night automatically dims its backlight so as not to disturb my wife while she sleeps. I consider it a chore to set my phone on its wireless charger when my eyelids get too heavy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/10/2020 at 5:06 PM, Vort said:

https://www.foxnews.com/media/sports-illustrated-fires-star-writer-for-incomprehensible-me-first-behavior-during-coronavirus-pandemic

To be clear: I'm no fan of SI, and I don't know or particularly care about the writer involved. But it looks to me like he contracted to produce content for an agreed-upon salary. SI then unilaterally required a "voluntary" cutback—read "forced renegotiation"—which this writer refused*. So they canned him.

What the heck, man?

*The writer says he didn't object to the cutback, just its permanent nature out past the end of the COVID debacle.

In any case, yet another reason (as if we needed another reason) not to patronize Sports Illustrated.

The national anthem is highly ironic:

 

Edited by Emmanuel Goldstein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share