[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Entercom imposes contract on AFTRA

<throwing on flame suit beforehand>
>> On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 19:04:04 -0500 "tony schinella"
>> <radiotony@attbi.com> writes:
>>> First off, I didn't say they were only working six minutes, I said
>>> they were
>>> only on the air for six minutes.
>> Dave:
>> So you only have to pay people for the actual time on air?
>> Tony:
>>> I know what goes on in WRKO's news department since I have been over
>>> there
>>> to cut ads before. But most of the work is behind the scene,
>>> preparing text
>>> or working on stories, not broadcasting for an hour, that was my
>>> point.
>> Dave:
>> Most of a reporter/anchor's job is done off-air yep, and you are
>> paying for their expertise both on the air and off air.  I have also
>> observed the anchors/reporters at WRKO and they are among the best
>> still working in the business.

Tony and I have a different perspective on this (coming from the newspaper
world) but let me say that I'd be thrilled to read news and work in the
office for $45k. I did many of the same duties (and then some) when working
as a sports writer for CNC, er, Cheapo Newspaper Company (except go on-air,
of course) for less than half the wage. Tony does many of the same things
now working as an editor of a weekly (if he's still where I think he is).
Just giving you some perspective here...

Now, should the salary be higher? Yes. Can people live on it by themselves?
Probably not. Many people in the media (including newspapers) with similar
experience are making nowhere near that amount that Entercom is starting at,
though, and would jump at the chance to take it. As Dan alluded to, it's all
about supply and demand.

>> Dave:
>> That means if you are married with children, just to afford an
>> apartment you have to give up hope of sending you kid(s) to college,
>> or buying a home, or taking vacations...because you can forget about
>> saving money and getting ahead.

I don't think so. There's a lovely thing called financial aid that actually
seems to benefit kids whose families don't have much in the way of assets or
are in debt. I'd argue that the poorer you are after a certain point, the
easier it gets to finance your education through Pell Grants and other
need-based aid.

>> Dave:
>> Gosh, now I feel guilty, I guess I'll be giving my paycheck back

Don't feel guilty...maybe some of us are just too jaded and cynical on this