So angry are they that they have taken their complaints external to social media like Twitter and Facebook, reports FISHBOWL LA.
Their beefs are two-fold. The first is that Hearst has switched health insurance plans which require a larger employee contribution. That, contend workers, ends up being a $3,000 pay cut. That's the thank-you they get for doing more with less staff after the layoffs of 2009.
The other problem is that the newspaper has established a pricey paywall for premium content. Those wanting access to that have to pony up $14.99 monthly. Anyone who has worked as a content-provider understands how such an expensive mechanism can slash traffic as well as comments, likes, shares, and tweets. Reporters and editors in the loop for those articles could find their jobs in peril because no one seems to be bothering with them.
When I was a contract blogger at AOL those all important numbers were continually updated. And as a contract blogger for Motley Fool, the numbers were posted twice a day. In the latter situation, a certain amount of sustained traffic could double compensation for all the posts. Also, you have to factor in the content-provider's confidence. When my numbers were low so was my self-assurance. Also I feared, of course, being canned.