FL paper asks staff to use their own cell phones for business calls

[BurtWorm]

Will this be a trend? Maybe use of your company's phone will be a new kind of benefit, replacing the old kind of benefit (pension plans and health insurance)?


http://poynter.org/forum/view_post.asp?id=10877


TUESDAY, JANUARY 10, 2006
Naples Daily News asks staffers to avoid using desk phones
Romenesko Memos

Scripps newspapers took in $65 million in November, but the company apparently doesn't want to waste any of those bucks on phone technology. The Scripps-owned Naples Daily News sent this memo to staffers today: "In an effort to free up more incoming phone lines for customers calling in to start the paper, and placing classified ads, we are asking that ALL employees immediately refrain from using the desk phone (land line) as much as possible. If you must make business calls please use your cell phone."
Posted at 11:48:46 AM

[Atman]

1. Sure boss. As long as I can make my biz calls between 9pm and 6am.

Otherwise, pay for my fucking minutes, you corporate dickwads!

[MuseRider]

2. WTF?

Seriously? Wow, just wow.

[MercutioATC]

3. I hope they plan on reimbursing for those calls...

[ladjf]

4. Greed has no limits.

[Demit]

5. If you "must make business calls"?

Yes, if you feel you really must do what we hired you for, do it on your own dime. Ohmigod, that's rich. That's gonna make lots of reporters just climb all over themselves to work at that paper.

[FSogol]

6. Does the paper pay for the cell phones?

My company does for management.

[MADem]

self delete, my dupe

[MADem]

15. The memo is TOTALLY UNCLEAR ON THAT

By "your cell phones" they could well mean the cell phones the paper provides. One can't assume everyone has a PERSONAL cell phone. I don't! We have a family prepaid tosser, that anyone going out in a car grabs for emergencies, and that's that. I refuse to be tethered to a fucking phone 24-7, plus, I don't think they are all that healthy to use on a regular basis.

[Lerkfish]

7. could pave the way for business expense deduction

[LisaM]

8. What if you don't have a cell phone?

I don't have one, and don't intend to get one anytime soon. I'm so over them.

[purduejake]

10. If you want the job...

you will get a cell phone. I just love ultimatums from companies today.

[FSogol]

16. I'm guessing most journalists carry cell phones. n/t

[BurtWorm]

23. What about the nonjournos who work at the paper?

The memo says ALL staff. Not ALL journalists.

[purduejake]

9. I have to pay for my business calls...

It shouldn't be surprising since I work for a bankrupt airline, but the expectation is that I have my phone on and answer while I am at work.

[enlightenment]

11. I don't have a cell phone -- and I'm not the only

one (there's at least two of us . . .)

Will Scripps buy me a cell phone to use at work?

idiots.

[Love Bug]

12. NBD if the paper provides the cell phones. Otherwise, no way

[calico1]

13. Since this is from a post on another forum and not

an article, I can't tell if the company provides cell phones for its employees. Mine does for a number of employees. If that is the case, then it looks like they are asking them not to tie up landlines so that incoming calls can get through. Which would be no big deal. I can't tell from the post if what the company is asking is to use your personal cell phones and not get reimbursed, which seems to be how most people are interpreting it.

[BurtWorm]

17. Does any company provide phone for employees other than managers?

I don't know. Mine doesn't.

[LisaM]

20. Cell phone companies do!

I know someone who works for one.

[calico1]

21. Mine does.

Probably more people than need them but its a big company. I imagine some companies because of the business they are in (like newspapers) would provide phones because the phones would be a very necessary part of the job.

[BurtWorm]

22. The memo says ALL employees

which presumably means more than journalists.

What seems odd, too, is that classifieds and subscriptions usually have their own extensions, don't they? If the company is too cheap to afford extensions for ads and subs, how is it able to afford phones for ALL employees? And vice versa. Do the classifieds salespeople have to use cells to call ad buyers?

The whole thing seems weird to me.

[calico1]

24. I don't work for a newspaper so I can't

answer your question. I am just pointing out that some companies do pay for cell phones for employees.

[BurtWorm]

25. Then why can't they afford a separate land line for all employees?

I don't get it.

[YDogg]

14. Personal cell phones, or business-supplied cells?

This is not clear to me, but it does not say personal cell phones.

[meganmonkey]

18. Nothing indicates this is referring to PERSONAL cell phones

:shrug:

[BurtWorm]

19. It's a memo sent to Romanesko, presumably by an employee.

That doesn't mean it actually is referring to personal cells, but I took it that way, given the source.

[donco6]

26. It doesn't say personal cell phones.

It's just asking them to keep the land line free by using their business cell. What's the problem?

[BurtWorm]

27. It doesn't say business cell either.

Do you know of any other business that has restricted use of the landline?

[donco6]

28. Yes.

I used to work at a place where you couldn't make any outgoing calls on the landlines at all - similar to this situation. It was a catalog order firm and the phones were linked to 800 number call-ins. Anytime a phone was used making an outgoing call, a potential buyer couldn't get through. It made more sense to pay the cell charges than lose the sales. Simple.

[BurtWorm]

29. Telemarketing firms and newspapers use phones differently.

This seems like an unusual policy for a newspaper. A cheap policy, if they're making employees use their own cells for business calls.

[donco6]

30. Ah, the crux of the matter.

I don't believe the email is implying people have to use their PERSONAL cell phones in place of the land lines. You do. Until that's cleared up, there's no real discussion is there?

[BurtWorm]

31. Why would an employee share the memo with Romanesko

if it were as simple as you say? Three possibilities come to mind:

a) the employee misunderstood the policy;
b) the employee maliciously tried to make it look bad for the employer even though there was nothing unusual or unfair about the policy;
c) the employee thought Romanesko publishes memos from employers just for the sake of sharing memos.

I think of the three a) is most likely (though if the employee had a company cell phone, why would he or she have misunderstood the policy?). But I think it's a given that Romanesko is not interested in memos unless there's something fucked up about the policies they represent. My reading seems to be the one Romanesko, at least, intended.