Re: Entercom imposes contract on AFTRA

[Dave Faneuf <tklaundry@juno.com>]

On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 20:09:54 -0500 "tony schinella" <radiotony@attbi.com>
writes:
> First off, the bureau statistic for $44k was "average wage" not 
> "household
> income." http://www.mnwfc.org/lmi/rankings/rankfg16.htm

Dave:
Your site from Minnesota says average income, however my site from
Massachusetts shows the median Household Income in Massachusetts 
http://www.mvpc.org/reg_info/Census2000/HHIncome.htm

Tony:
> I guess I am not making my points clearly but Dave, I guess you 
> don't read
> the business pages or realize what is going on in America and 
> Massachusetts
> right now.

Dave:
IIRC the last report I heard on radio advertising is that revenues were
UP, not down in spite of the economy.

Tony: 
> I work for a newspaper company. Two years ago, when the economy was 
> so
> called "good," many of us accepted pay freezes to keep our jobs and 
> keep
> others in our company from being laid off.

Dave:
Many newspapers across the country are finding readership and advertising
revenue dropping.  In my own community the local paper used to boast
nearly 100K copies sold daily on its masthead, now the figure they quote
is 50K and they have taken it off the masthead.

Tony:
> Many towns in this state are considering going to their teacher's 
> unions and
> admin staff and asking them to take pay freezes and cuts to keep 
> layoffs
> from occurring.
> Why shouldn't we expect this in other industries?

Dave:
This has more to do with overspending and adding programs during the
"good" times and with mandated programs not radio advertising revenue.


Tony:
> Entercomm wants their employees to take pay cuts and freezes - just 
> like
> everyone else in the country is facing - to keep the maximum amount 
> of
> people employed and keep the company solvent. This is a no brainer. 
> The
> employees can take the freeze or cut, cut in benes, whatever, or 
> they can be
> easily replaced.

Dave:
Not so easily replace, get a warm body in there? sure, get a talented
person in there who is proficient at interviewing, writing, editing and
still sounds great on the air, not so easy any longer.  There are far
fewer  smaller markets to draw from that still employ these kinds of
people.  Thank you consolidation.

Tony:
> For years, all I have heard from corporate politicians and big media 
> pundits
> is that people have to deal with the free market and learn to 
> compete.
> Factories have been sent overseas for cheaper labor decimating towns 
> and
> destroying families. Don't matter, they said, you have to learn to 
> compete.
> Now, radio, TV, and other "professional" industries are being asked 
> to take
> pay and benefit cuts to keep the companies, towns, whatever, solvent 
> - just
> like everyone else has had to do, and NOW people are surprised? Get 
> a grip.
> The employees of Entercomm and others can adjust like the rest of us 
> have
> had to do or lose their  jobs. It sucks but it is as simple as that. 
> Deal
> with it.

Dave:
This is hard to do because the landscape has changed so much, but what
are the corporate revenues of Entercom today as compared to 1990?  1990
wages is what Entercom is asking their employees to accept.

Tony:
> Lastly, there are a whole slew of people in the radio industry who 
> would
> gladly work for $43,000. Damn, for years when I was shopping my demo 
> to
> stations, I would have accepted a lot less than that to do radio 
> new. Hell,
> I still do radio for free [!] and I make a fraction of that working 
> as a
> newspaper editor. I would gladly read radio news for $43,000.
>

Dave:
It's people who are willing to work for "free" that are contributing to
efforts by large corporations and others to keep wages artificallily low.
   I don't know what a newspaper editor makes but if it's less than 43K
then I'd say you need to find a larger paper to work for, and as a
newspaper editor you certainly should know what goes into "reading radio
news" and that is goes far beyond cracking the mic and reading a script.