I e-mailed a newsroom recruiter acquaintance. He has worked at a Florida newspaper for over 25 years. The newspaper, which I won't name in order to protect this man's privacy, has always attracted top talent. The publication benefited from the efforts of this recruiter. It's been one of the best papers in the country, winning numerous awards and doing well in terms of circulation.
I discovered this week
that the recruiter's job was eliminated last year. Another casualty of the recession. However, the company that he works for let him stay at the paper in a non-managerial editing position. I am sure it isn't ideal, but it's a job. As a senior staffer, at least he was given the option of remaining on the payroll when his recruiting job was eliminated. He didn't have to go on unemployment or relocate in his 50s.I talked to another recruiter this week. She is at a well-regarded publication in Virginia. She is a couple years older than me. I told her of my situation. She was impressed by my resume. But I noticed a shift in her tone when she learned more about my extensive efforts to find work. She went from professional and complimentary to sounding scared and pessimistic -- scared for herself and her job, seemingly realizing that if I can struggle, so could she.I figure my story scares a lot of people. Folks look at my credentials and can't believe I was laid off, let alone unable to find work for more than a year. They then look at their own precarious situations, wondering if they are about to fall through the ice.The woman from Virginia told me how money is still being made at some newspapers, but that profits aren't going into hiring. Some papers are using revenue to pay down debt. She ended by saying she'd pray for me.
Another recruiter I know in another profession recently had to leave her job. It's not just newspapers that are struggling. Fortunately, she found a new job before being laid off. She saw the writing on the wall. The large company she worked for had lost a lot of employees in the last two years and wasn't hiring. Her position became unnecessary. She got out while the gettin' was good, something I regret not doing when I had the chance.
If you can break through the HR-speak, many recruiters will give you the real scoop on how bad the job situation is in this country. They are very well aware of the millions of very talented, very eager folks waiting in lines for jobs that don't exist. It has to be tough for these recruiting professionals to remain optimistic in the face of certain realities.
The Washington Post Company's CEO, Donald Graham, has been refusing raises and bonuses for himself during the recession.As I mentioned in a previous post, it upsets me when CEOs of other large businesses, particularly hard-hit newspaper companies, lavish themselves in cash while laying off employees, freezing salaries and forcing furloughs. However, Graham appears to have some scruples and leadership qualities that will benefit him and his newspaper company in a variety of ways in the long run.The Washington Post is a quality publication. It still practices watchdog journalism despite shrinking newsroom budgets and a thinning staff. It apparently has a CEO with heightened sensitivities, a man who at least understands that you don't show employees the door and then give yourself a raise. I know things are not all rosy at The Post, but at least there is some sense of integrity at the top.
Read more.
Is there any question that the system is rigged to favor the rich getting richer? Is there any doubt that the middle class is falling off the cliff at a faster rate as a result of the fix being in?When I learned that the top bosses in my former company got huge bonuses the year after cutting thousands of jobs (including mine), that was pretty much it for me. I don't need anymore convincing that the system needs to radically change.The salary gap between employees and CEOs has been widening for decades. The trickle-down theory isn't working anymore. These same CEOs who are pulling in disproportionately large salaries are also driving regular folks right to the poor house with layoffs, furloughs and salary reductions. I don't condone a system that rewards the wealthiest people for eliminating the jobs of folks who are just trying to get by. Is that radical of me?
I don't understand the lack of character it must take to accept a million-dollar bonus only weeks or months after laying off thousands of employees, many who may never work in a good job again because of their age. Ronald Reagan's trickle-down principles only worked when there was a sense of fairness at the top -- a willingness to share the wealth. It doesn't work when one guy runs off with all the profits.Even our tax system, with all the loopholes, favors the wealthy. I can't afford an accountant to find ways for me not to pay my fair share of taxes. But you can bet anyone of certain means isn't doing their tax returns with TurboTax software.
Is it time that the wealthy and powerful chip in a bit more? Certainly. They can do so in a number of ways, starting with hiring people in their businesses where existing employees are stretched thin. Getting people back to work increases the tax base and relieves some of the stress on the current workforce. If a company can afford to give out obscene bonuses, it can afford to hire a few people.This brings me to the top article in The New York Times today. It talks about President Obama wanting to address wealth inequalities as part of the health-insurance reform bill. Instead of screaming about socialism, the more conservative-minded folks should understand that evening the playing field isn't a crime against capitalism. This country was built on a sense of equality and relative fairness. We've lost our way in recent years. What we have now isn't equal or fair. If the president wants to shift things back to a time where wealth was built from the bottom up, I don't see that as an act of socialism. I see that as a method of preserving and rebuilding the middle class.
Of course, I am speaking mostly to reasonable conservatives here, not people who think Sarah Palin is on an intellectual par with Stephen Hawking or that Rush Limbaugh isn't mostly motivated by protecting his own wealth and ego.
I am not a proponent of handouts. I don't want to see America turned into a welfare nation. But I do back efforts to stop the wealthiest 5 percent from walking all over 95 percent of fellow Americans. Just think how many jobs would have been saved in the last two years if there was more corporate oversight and less personal and institutionalized greed. Instead, the rich and powerful drove us right into a recession while they fattened their bank accounts and landed safely with their golden parachutes. They fired hard-working people in order to be rewarded by their boards of directors. The bankers, the CEOs and everyone who is unethically benefiting from this recession are the ones behaving in a very un-American way.
Everyone knew there would be a lot of talk about the new health-care reform bill this morning. What's infuriating is that politicians still don't seem to understand that the economy is the No. 1 concern of most Americans. Our leaders in Washington are still focusing on health-care reform. Unbelievable. Republicans want to repeal it. Democrats want to enhance it. And the battle, which should have ended with last night's vote, continues on as job losses mount, roads crumble, wars rage on and the debt rises.Generally, I support h
ealth-insurance reform, though I must admit that supporting anything that Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, backs is difficult for me. It was tough listening to her babble during her victory speech late last night. At times, she seemed downright incoherent.We need to move on. Health-care reform is a done deal. A lot of what is in the bill will be good for most Americans whether they realize it or not. They should stop listening to "entertainers" like Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh -- two guys who are trying to protect their vast wealth -- and start paying attention to what really led to last night's historic vote.
The health insurance companies dug their own graves by exploiting Americans for decades. Greed and arrogance eventually caught up with the big insurers. They probably never imagined the party would end. But it has. And they only have themselves to blame. There should be a lesson in this for all corporations that lose their way. Few people want socialism, but measured governmental regulations seem to be necessary more often than not.
Both political parties would serve America well to shake hands and get on with more important business. If bad feelings linger from the health-care debate, and if the media can't also move on to other subjects of critical importance, we will surely be in far more trouble in the not-so-distant future. It's time for our leaders to start acting like adults and true patriots. Let's put the same energy that went into health-care reform into rebuilding our economy.
I saw "Up in the Air" this weekend. Perhaps not the wisest choice in a DVD rental, particularly a few days after I read that a certain executive at my former company received a million-dollar bonus for essentially laying off thousands of folks like me. Combined with a series of setbacks in my job search in recent weeks, and the harsh reality of how hard it is to find work at 52, the film didn't do a lot to improve my spirits.
So if you are jobless, or fear losing your job, I wouldn't recommend this movie. I appreciate Hollywood making a film that deals with real issues like aging, career and unemployment, but the people who really need to see it the most probably wouldn't fully comprehend the film. The basic plot is simple and the movie can be enjoyed on a couple different levels. But the subplots and messages are a bit meatier and, sadly, speak more to those of us on the outside looking in.
In 1994, after less than a year at The Associated Press in New York City, I was selected to go to Atlanta to cover the Super Bowl between the Buffalo Bills and Dallas Cowboys. It was quite an honor, especially considering there were far more experienced editors at AP than me at that time. I was so proud of being chosen that I kept my press pass for all of these years.Even after I left the AP, I was contacted about a year later and asked if I wanted to return. I was flattered. They were offering me a better job than the one I had before. I declined for personal reasons. Soon after, I went to work at USA Today in Northern Virginia -- one of my favorite newspapers in those days. After hopping around a lot for the first 15 years of my career, I figured USA Today could be my last stop -- one of those places one goes to where they earn their gold watch after a quarter of a decade of service. I got my five and 10-year anniversary awards, but fell far short of 25 years.Career moves came easily for me back then. In my first job out of college, I was promoted into a managerial editing position within my first six months. I was soon on a track to become a publisher in a small chain of newspapers, but I decided I wanted to live in Florida more than I wanted to be a publisher in Virginia. So after a short stint on the Eastern Shore of Maryland, I got a job as sports editor at a small paper south of Miami. I covered the Miami Dolphins and Hurricanes as well as the high school sports scene and professional boxing. Those were good years. Not much pay, but a lot of fun.It never took me more than a few weeks to find a new job when I was younger. Sometimes they were marginally better jobs, sometimes they were significant leaps. It didn't dawn on me that I would be without work. I was fairly versatile and had a good work ethic that my bosses always seemed to appreciate. And it certainly never crossed my mind that I would be laid off.Then on December 2008, as readers of this blog know, I was was laid off from USA Today after working there for 13 years. That was quite a shock.
The real harsh surprise for me came in the months following my layoff, when I began to search for work and encountered walls that were never there earlier in my career. I turned to friends and former colleagues, seeing if they could help. This was always a good method of finding work in the past, but not now. The recession wasn't helping, but there also seemed to be other forces working against me. The newspaper business began crumbling. A couple potential employers shockingly held it against me that I had worked at USA Today for so long. The national newspaper and parent company that owns it aren't well-liked within the industry for various reasons. It was guilt by association.My early days at USA Today were filled with fancy office parties, views of Washington, D.C. from our windows and a pretty good newsroom staff. It was always tough work, but as a third-generation journalist, I was accustomed to the late hours, deadlines and contentious nature of the newsroom.Here is a picture
of me (left) at my first USA Today Christmas party in 1995 with two of my former colleagues who are still at the newspaper -- Dash Parham and Dave Merrill. These parties were very extravagant. The paper was doing well. The booze flowed. The shrimp were large. If you worked in journalism, it was a good place to be. Lots of resources. In fact, USA Today's parent company, Gannett, more or less had a hands-off policy when it came to its flagship newspaper. We enjoyed our independence and did good work. Eventually, Gannett got more involved with USA Today, which led to layoffs at the newspaper most people thought was immune. Read about the bonuses received after those record layoffs.A lot has changed in the news business and my own career since the mid-1990s when that picture was taken. Essentially, I don't have a career right now. While I feel far from obsolete or incapable, I can't deny that finding work at this age is far different than finding work at 30 years old. There are days when I think back to how easily things flowed, the people I have met, the places I've been. And yet, things are so different now that it often takes my breath away how quickly one can go from cruising along in a modest career to ... well, I will let you fill in the blank.One of the many lessons that I have learned from this is to never take anything for granted -- not even your own abilities. There is always something lurking out there somewhere waiting to take you down. If it's not a layoff, then it could be an illness. If it's not an illness, it could something else. So it's good to treasure what you have and not get too caught up in the little difficulties of a career, relationships or just everyday life, because when it's prematurely gone, it's awfully hard to rebuild.
Whether or not I get another shot remains to be seen. Whether I work inside or outside of the media, my batteries are recharged. I have a new perspective on work and life. I believe I have more to offer to an employer now than I did when I got laid off. Finding that right fit isn't going to be easy, but if I do I know that the latter years of my career probably will surpass the early days in some profound ways. Job satisfaction, I suspect, will come from other sources that don't necessarily include fat paychecks, free Heinekens and trips to the Super Bowl.
President Obama just finished giving a speech about health-insurance reform at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va., just 20 miles from where I live. Whether you agree with Obama or not on this or any issue, you have to admit the guy can deliver a speech.What struck me about Obama's speech and broad support at GMU's Patriot Center today was that he was speaking to folks who, for the most part, have health-care insurance. Yet, these people nonetheless support efforts to help other citizens who are less fortunate. They don't take the position that just because they can afford insurance others shouldn't have access to medical care. They don't take self-reliance values so far that they are incapable of lending a hand.While you might not agree with the health-care bill that is being politically debated like no other issue I've seen in my lifetime, you have to respect folks who could easily turn their backs on the needy but don't. I hear too many overly judgmental people in my daily life who think everyone who has fallen from grace somehow did something to deserve being without health care, a job or a home.I am glad that we have a president who can passionately articulate his views about helping others as he did at GMU today. I rather his beliefs be debated than his basic intelligence or compassion be in doubt. I see some problems with this bill, but I don't see the sky falling if it passes. I refuse to get into the parochial argument of whether or not Obama is maliciously trying to ruin the country.
One way or another, the debate needs to come to an end soon. America is dangerously divided. Other serious problems need to be addressed. If the bill passes, I hope conservatives won't try to do some of the crazy things that have been suggested on talk radio -- like impeaching Congress. If it doesn't pass, I hope the left can move on to other matters and revisit health-care reform later on.
As the health insurance reform debate comes to a climax this week, you've probably heard the word "socialism" used a lot by conservatives who want to kill the bill. This is meant to scare people into thinking that we are about to lose all of our freedoms and liberties.Let's get real. Without a reasonable measure of government intervention, and some relinquishing of freedoms, we wouldn't have a country. We'd have no military. Planes would be crashing in our skies on a daily basis. Cars would be spewing deadly emissions into the air and drinking water would be polluted by companies dumping toxic waste into rivers. Highways wouldn't be built and the guy sitting in the cubicle next to you would be blowing cigarette smoke in your face all day long. There would be no space program because there would be no taxes to pay for it. Fewer kids would go to college and there would be no public schools. There would be no laws against murder, rape or stealing or any police to enforce whatever "wild-west" laws might exist. Street drugs would be pouring in from Mexico and folks would be screaming "fire" in crowded movie theaters just for kicks. White-collar crime would be off the charts. Discrimination would be the norm. If your bank failed, your money would not be insured. Get the picture?
Most "isms" don't provide the ultimate answer to a better society. And most "isms" aren't that radically different than others. It's really a matter of degree and who is getting screwed the most under whatever governmental system exists. Frankly, I would rather see the insurance companies taken to the woodshed than have Americans needlessly dying of curable diseases. I don't know what "ism" that belief falls under, but whatever it is, sign me up.I understand the perception that the government (federal, state or local) doesn't run many things very well. Motor vehicle departments are a mess. The Internal Revenue Service is the poster child for inefficiency. Some cities can't even get the streets plowed after a snowstorm. But to deny millions of people affordable medical care is heartless in a society that as a whole is relatively generous. To watch premiums rise 30 percent annually while insurance companies rack in record profits is absurd even for a country that prides itself on capitalism.I don't know if what conservatives call "Obama-care" is going to solve more than it damages, but I am reasonably certain that the spirit of the effort is just. I don't see what alternatives conservatives are offering that would prevent people from needlessly suffering and dying. Instead of screaming "socialism," it would be better if conservatives came up with a more understandable, feasible plan of their own -- one that is fiscally responsible but also helps return some sense of fairness to a health-care system that seems to shut out more people each year.
I am willing to let the government lean on greedy insurance companies and perhaps offer less expensive health-care alternatives. We don't have absolute freedom and self-reliance anyway. Never have and never will. Nor do we practice a pure form of capitalism. The government is involved in most things in our society, from checking our food to delivering our mail. Why so many folks are drawing the line in the sand over health care is somewhat surprising, particularly when you consider how many Americans have lost their jobs and insurance since the start of the recession.
I don't feel like I live in the wealthiest county in America. Yet, Forbes says households here have an income of about $110,000, making it the richest place in the U.S.Loudoun County, Va., is a nice place. If you live in the populated eastern end, you're less than 30 miles from D.C. If you live farther west, you have views of mountains, wineries and horse farms. Scattered throughout the county are high-end stores, restaurants and major companies.Two miles from where I live, in a more modest townhouse community, is the Donald Trump Golf Course. It winds its way along the Potomac River. However, two miles in the opposite direction are some low-income housing complexes. A little farther away, across Route 7, lies the community of Sterling Park (not part of Sterling) -- a place known as the home of illegal immigrants, lots of gang activity and rundown homes.The weather here isn't as nice as La Jolla, Calif. There are no views of the ocean like in Palm Beach County, Fla. You might run into the occasional politician or Washington Redskin football player out and about in Loudoun, but you aren't likely to see any celebrities of note as I did when I lived in the suburbs of New York and occasionally would run into Al Pacino or other famous people.The beautiful people do not live in Loudoun County, but that's not to say there isn't some old money to the west in horse country. Yes, there is plenty of grooming and lots of fitness gyms here, but no starlets fluttering about at any New Age spas or young guns cruising the boulevard. You will see a lot of luxury cars, but they are usually stuck in bumper-to-bumper traffic or driven by people who should have never been granted a license. A vanity plate will on occasion indicate that someone has too big of an ego for these parts. But there are showoffs everywhere. Big fish in little ponds.Life in Loudoun County is about making money and raising kids. That's its focus. It doesn't attempt to be the tourist capital of the world. It doesn't pretend to be enlightened or artsy like a Santa Fe or San Francisco. It is well educated, a bit arrogant and not the friendliest of places.Crime is low in Loudoun but taxes are high. On the eastern end there are lots of Arabs and Indians, but few African-Americans. Like most places, there is a mix of Hispanic folks from various countries. It is more of a melting pot than many other affluent areas around the nation.Dulles Interna
tional Airport continues to grow, giving the county another boost. New terminals and airport transportation systems are being built. A Metro train rail will connect the airport to downtown D.C. by 2016. Already-high property values are expected to shoot up once that project is completed. Unlike Reagan Airport in D.C., Dulles has international flights. Because there are a lot of foreigners living in Loudoun, the airport is a major convenience when they want to travel. Businesses throughout Northern Virginia benefit from having an international airport. Dulles also has some of the longest security lines in the country.Unemployment is low in Loudoun. Most of the jobs are in technology-related fields, but of course lots are jobs are tied to the federal government. There are also plenty of service-industry jobs. I am not sure how people working in lower-wage jobs can afford to live here. When I was working at USA Today (12 miles from here in Fairfax County), I needed every penny of my salary to maintain my home, pay my taxes, etc. Now that I've been unemployed for awhile, it's becoming less and less feasible to live in Loudoun. There isn't anywhere in Loudoun to go that would be safe and affordable.Overall, I like living in Loudoun. After my 9 years here, I'd have to say it's one of the better places I've lived. I hate the traffic. Don't appreciate the rudeness. And I do get worn out by all the kids. But I figure most places have their drawbacks. I like feeling safe in Loudoun. I like living in a place without too much ignorance. I like mountains and rivers and eateries that aren't run by large corporations.
I wish Loudoun had more of a sense of Virginia about it. You're more likely to hear an Indian accent here than you are a southern accent. Of course, you are less likely to see a moonshine bust in Loudoun than you are in Danville, Va., 200 miles south of here. Dental health is generally pretty top-notch in Northern Virginia, too. Kids from Loudoun tend to go to college. That's not the case in say the southwest part of the state.I don't think most Loudouners think of themselves as living in a highly exclusive area. Greenwich, Conn., has far more snob appeal than Leesburg, a historic town located near the center of Loudoun County. But Loudoun has a sense of livability and convenience that seems to attract folks of means -- folks who would not be as comfortable living in more rural or more urban places. We have our fair share of blue-bloods and residents who feel entitled to, well, everything, but I suspect Beverly Hills has more. As I mentioned, Loudoun is largely about families. And regardless of how much a person earns or how often they go to the tanning salons, you can only be so snobbish when immersed in raising kids. By the way, Loudoun has one of the highest rates of multiple-kid families in the country.Unfortunately, growth has also made Loudoun less desirable to folks wanting more elbow room. Like the other D.C. suburbs, sprawl is becoming a problem here. The infrastructure is not in place to handle all the new subdivisions. Schools are constantly being built to keep up with the growth rate, therefore taxes go up each year. Some older people without kids are beginning to move away, tired of paying for schools that don't benefit them directly. County leaders can't seem to say no to any developer. As a result, some of the charm of Loudoun County has disappeared.I like that I don't have to go far to get almost anything I need. Sure, if I want great crab cakes, I still need to drive the hour or so to Baltimore. If I want world-class museums, I need to go to Washington. But from Loudoun, those places are accessible. Loudoun has nice parks, a decent mall, good medical care and some of the best wineries on the East Coast. We even have not one, but two Wegman's food stores. Many universities have satellite campuses here. There are still quaint towns like Waterford and Middleburg that are nice to visit for the day. And parents rave about the public school system.I am sure there are glitzier places that would appear to be wealthier than Loudoun. I know there are friendlier places and states and counties with nicer weather and lighter traffic. Loudoun County is very good at providing for the upper-middle class. And as long as you have a good job and can tolerate an area that seems to have more than its fair share of Type A personalities, life in Loudoun is very doable.
With that said, I think Loudoun needs to pay more attention to quality-of-life issues and not shut out the middle and lower-middle class folks who want to live here. School teachers, police and county government workers should be able to afford to live in the county they provide services to. This should not become a county just for members of the Trump country club. Too many businesses in Loudoun still underpay their employees. A lot of the money made by Loudoun residents comes from D.C. and surrounding counties in Virginia and Maryland. Salaries in a place like Leesburg are still relatively low compared to salaries in McLean, just 20 miles away in Fairfax County. One of the reasons why traffic is so bad in Loudoun -- and why people are so cranky here -- is because they have to commute to get the big bucks to afford homes and taxes.
If I have to leave Loudoun this year because of not being able to find a job, I will be disappointed but not entirely devastated. Loudoun isn't a warm and fuzzy place. It's a functional county but not one that creates a lot of sentimental feelings. I personally don't know of any adult who grew up here. Few people have roots in Loudoun. Most of Loudoun's growth happened in the last 15 years. So there are people from all over the world who now call this home, but they don't really have any serious attachments to the area.
Still, I would rather stay than be forced to leave. Living here is a mixed bag, but it's more good than bad.
Yeah, we're No. 1 in household income. We have lots of new buildings, some scenic vistas to the west, lots of college-educated people. Whether Loudoun has a soul remains to be seen. Whether or not people who want to stay or move here can afford to do so also remains to be seen. As I have mentioned in previous posts, I am wary of anything that gets too big or is ranked too high. There is only one place to go once you've reached the top.
Read more about Loudoun's No.1 ranking.
You won't see the old Yankee Stadium imploding. Using dynamite to bring down large structures is not permitted in New York City. So the stadium, which holds many good memories for me, is being ripped apart piece by piece. Slowly. Painfully. It will be completely gone by June. Yes, I do see the potential metaphors...
Across the street lies the new Yankee Stadium, which debuted last year when the Yankees won the championship. I haven't been to the new stadium. Frankly, I didn't want to see the remnants of the abandoned old House that Ruth Built -- didn't want to see anymore reminders of what no longer exists. But I hear the new stadium is spectacular, so I hope to eventually make the trek up I-95 to the homeland to see it. It won't be the same, but few things remain constant in life. Baseball stadiums are no exception. Watch video.
that the recruiter's job was eliminated last year. Another casualty of the recession. However, the company that he works for let him stay at the paper in a non-managerial editing position. I am sure it isn't ideal, but it's a job. As a senior staffer, at least he was given the option of remaining on the payroll when his recruiting job was eliminated. He didn't have to go on unemployment or relocate in his 50s.
