Regarding my post about non-newsroom job cuts at The New York Times, I received the following via a reader:
The current layoffs are a sign of an unhealthy company because they are clearly cutting MUCH deeper than the 100 positions that keep making headlines in the news. News Service's cuts, advertising cuts, biz-side cuts are all going on without being included in the tally. I also understand that Editorial has been ordered to cut 8% just as the newsroom is cutting 8% (which is equal to 100 jobs). So Editorial has to lose 3 jobs and they still don't know who is being affected. I just know that nobody volunteered for the buyout. I think it's just awful.
Please post your replies in the comments section, below. To e-mail confidentially, write jimhopkins[at]gmail[dot-com]; see Tipsters Anonymous Policy in the green rail, upper right.