Friday, June 11, 2010

Wrongful dismissal, age discrimination lawsuit filed against GateHouse Media

After GateHouse Media bought the Norwich, Connecticut, Bulletin from Gannett in April 2007, the changes began, the type of changes I remember occurring after the company, then known as Liberty Group Publishing bought The Carthage Press in the mid 1990s.

GateHouse began stripping the newspaper of any connections with the local community. Jobs that had been done in Norwich for decades were now farmed out so the new owners could milk every cent out of the publication, without adding anything of value.

When the printing was shipped off to Auburn, Mass., Publisher Ellen Lind, a holdover from the Gannett operation, explained it this way to her readers:

The unblemished truth is, newspapers are changing. Some will survive and some won’t.

Here in Norwich, we’re working mighty hard to be on the list of survivors. Last Monday in this space, I wrote about the move of The Bulletin’s manufacturing operation to Auburn, Mass., next week. As a follow-up to those comments, I want to explain further the transition and the process.

A local team of approximately a dozen key people here at The Bulletin is working to redefine trucking patterns, ensure accurate electronic transmission of pages, working with preprint advertisers to make sure preprints are delivered to the correct locations and myriad other details.

Meanwhile, our colleagues in Auburn are performing press test runs, evaluating electronic transmission feeds, modifying production schedules and ensuring equipment and supplies are ready.

There will be some changes made to the paper as a result of this transition, changes we believe will make the paper better. We have never stopped trying to make the paper better, nor do we intend to stop. All the elements that are in the paper will remain, although it may be necessary to move some to other parts of the paper.
Those words were printed in the March 8, 2009, Bulletin. Ms. Lind did not write a column explaining the next step GateHouse took to cut costs. Five months later, the 62-year-old veteran publisher was kicked out the door, replaced by the newspaper's 39-year-old advertising manager.

That step has landed GateHouse Media in federal court.

Ms. Lind's wrongful dismissal lawsuit, initially filed in state court, but transferred this week to U. S. District Court for Connecticut, outlines the way GateHouse gave her the old heave-ho.

Ms. Lind had never been given a negative evaluation and had received performance bonuses for the previous two years, but from the way GateHouse treated her, you would have thought she was caught skinny dipping in the company till.

"On July 31, 2009, plaintiff's manager, a younger male, Rick Daniels, president and CEO of GateHouse  Media New England, traveled to Norwich from GateHouse Media's New England headquarters located in Massachusetts to advise plaintiff that defendants intended to temrinate plaintiff for cause

"At no time during plaintiff's employment with defendants was she informed of any deficiencies in the performance of her job duties.When plaintiff discussed the reason for cause with Mr. Daniels, demonstrating the underlying facts were not well founded, Mr. Daniels stated he would get back to her.

"On Aug. 5, 2009, Mr. Daniels returned for a second time to the Bulletin and informed plaintiff that she was 'at will' and no cause was required to fire plaintiff. Mr. Daniels then stated that plaintiff was going to be replaced by Paul Provost, a significantly younger (39 years of age) male who would take on plaintiff's duties because the newspaper was going in a new direction."

During a meeting five days later, according to the lawsuit, Daniels refused to tell her why she would not be capable of leading the newspaper in this different direction, and wouldn't even tell her what the new direction was.

Provost was announced as the newspaper's publisher in September 2009.

Mrs. Lind is asking for a jury trial and for damages in excess of $50,000, according to the petition.

GateHouse Media owns The Carthage Press, Neosho Daily News, Pittsburg Morning Sun, and more than 300 newspapers across the United States.

8 comments:

Howard Owens said...

Just because somebody files a lawsuit doesn't mean they have a valid complaint.

estrobel said...

I have worked for a variety of employers. My experience with Gatehouse Media was that they are very unprofessional and unpleasant people when they want to get rid of somebody! I observed this as they dispatched other employees, and later through personal experience. Near the end of my relationship with Gathouse, I returned one of my supervisors to his hotel. As I unloaded and wheeled his luggage into the hotel near the airport, I was told that I didn't have any redeeming qualities as a manager, and that I was only suited for a position as a "car valet". I was told to improve my financial performance. When I did that, exceeding budget expectations, I was asked to resign and told that "it really wasn't about the money after all". These are the worst people and human beings I have ever worked for. Stay far away from Gatehouse. I hope Ms. Lind wins her case.

Eric Strobel

Anonymous said...

True Howard, but then again, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck.....

Howard Owens said...

What makes you think there is a quack?

Anonymous said...

Hi Howard, let me help you.

39 year-old replaces 62 year-old. Quack.
Man replaces woman. Quack.
No negative performance reviews. Quack.
Previously paid performance bonuses. Quack.
Company wanted to "go in a new direction" (courts have interpreted this as "younger"). Quack.
Terminated (there were no other positions where her skills were relevant?). Quack.
No triggering event for terminating by "cause". Quack.

Let's be honest. Most employers aren't stupid enough to say (or better yet, put in writing) "we have decided you are too old and we want to hire younger people." But they think it, and they do it. That's why there are so many 50 year olds out of work. Many of whom will never get a decent job again, because the same employers that discriminate based on age in terminations also do it in hiring.

Discrimination? The EEOC looks the other way. But that doesn't mean it isn't happening, or that you have to suspend your common sense. So yes, I hear lots of quacks in that story, and no moos or oinks.

Anonymous said...

To all of you: you are nothing more than a number with this company. And believe it they really like the numbers at the very top. Like a $500,000 dollar bonus to the CEO Mike Reed. Don't fool yourself into thinking this is a kind and considerate company to work for. All morals have been left out of treating people with ethics. It goes all the way down to the very people that they expect to buy advertising from them. Age discrimination and gender discrimination can be proven in more than just one of their media's that they have purchased. They should be put under review by the government all acorss the US and every single employee that has been let go or has left should be interviewed to find out what happened. I think that you would all be very appalled. I encourage all of you to go seek out the truth.

Anonymous said...

Is this management talking again like if it rains out does the ground get wet hello

Unknown said...

Same with me worked 35yrs was hurt on the job due to working conditions tried to return 4 times with a doctor note was told I got a little to old for the job block my return for 6 months then fired had no metting just letter from company