I hEAR THAT CLEAR CHANNEL IS ON A FREEZE AND CANT HIRE ANYONE DURRING THIS PERIOD OF TIME IN ANY MARKET ANYWHERE! My question is why the freeze and does anyone know how long this normaly will last?
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
cc on a freeze
- Thread starter latino2008
- Start date
It's called The New Reality. They imposed it back in late January because revenue was not meeting expectations. It will probably last until that changes...or until the company goes private...or both...or neither...or longer.
B
BACKnUSSR
Guest
Although its typical of any business slowing new employees prior to a proposed sale,
there is no actual "freeze"
Lester St. James (Omaha), Jill Devine (St. Louis), Lunchbox (Nashville),
Andrew Jeffries (San Francisco), Candi (Chicago) are all among new CC programming
hires in just the last week.
there is no actual "freeze"
Lester St. James (Omaha), Jill Devine (St. Louis), Lunchbox (Nashville),
Andrew Jeffries (San Francisco), Candi (Chicago) are all among new CC programming
hires in just the last week.
A freeze is a funny thing...
Can they "Unfreeze" if, for example, a cc station offers to let full timers go in exchange for hiring part timers?
Or is that not actually helping the situation?
Can they "Unfreeze" if, for example, a cc station offers to let full timers go in exchange for hiring part timers?
Or is that not actually helping the situation?
ok but alll those names are in the programming department how about dj's and other posicions why inpose this kinda freeze are they not risking not hiring some new fresh talent and then the competicion getting them?? who has the most power when it comes to management in CC lets say in the hispanic department who calls shots? alfredo?? Jim? cc san antonio?
latino2008 said:ok but alll those names are in the programming department how about dj's
CC hired Rover in Cleveland and Brother Weeze in Rochester NY since the freeze.
i just left a station here in San Diego and cc wants to hire me but their telling me management has told them they cant hire anyone should i try to get ahold of some one up in power or just wait it out?
B
BACKnUSSR
Guest
indydood said:grow up, boys & girls. There are exceptions to EVERYTHING. If you lose a major talent (for whatever reason) and have a chance to fill that position with a big name, you do it, *freeze* or not.
The point is....with "exceptions" happening nearly everyday in markets across the country. Their isn't actually a "freeze".
Part-timers, fill-in's small market talent and off-air positions are still being filled, but managers trying to save a bit of payroll cash is nothing new in business.
It's very commonplace for a corporation, when a sale is pending, to try to "freeze" hiring, until the new regime has taken over.
The idea is to keep the expense sheet as "constant" as possible throughout the transitional period. Suppose a sale takes a full year from start to finish, and within that year, your payroll expenses increase by 10 or 15%. The buyer would not be pleased, and could very well cut people once they're in control. It's better for both the buyer -- and the people who "could" be cut after the fact -- to institute a "freeze" until the sale is complete.
However, as many replies have stated, there are always exceptions. And in almost every case of a corporate-level sale, it's usually OK to replace people who leave, especially important positions. If a GM leaves, they'll replace the GM. If a key on-air talent leaves, they will be replaced too. But let's say you've got a station where only mornings and afternoons are live. It's doing pretty well and you've been thinking it's time to add a full-time live middayer. Not anymore!
Or let's say you have a sales "assistant" who leaves. They did basic crap like PowerPoint slides and other presentational materials... stuff the sales reps COULD do themselves, but it saves them a lot of time when someone else can do it for them. Well, those sales reps better get familiar with PowerPoint again real fast. Non-essential folks like this are among the types who may not be replaced during a hiring freeze. Same goes for the "remote gophers" who set up the cheesy tents, the Martis or Comrexes, prize wheels, banners, etc. If jocks can set up their own remotes in small markets, they can do it in big markets too... and there's another $20,000 salary restored to the bottom line.
To recap, if it's a job that could disappear without directly impacting the on-air image of the station, it will probably remain vacant during a hiring freeze. But obvious vacancies (like on-air talent) will usually be filled, especially if the station is doing well, and has a direct competitor in the same format. Same goes for major managerial positions which are essential to daily operations, like General Managers and the like.
The idea is to keep the expense sheet as "constant" as possible throughout the transitional period. Suppose a sale takes a full year from start to finish, and within that year, your payroll expenses increase by 10 or 15%. The buyer would not be pleased, and could very well cut people once they're in control. It's better for both the buyer -- and the people who "could" be cut after the fact -- to institute a "freeze" until the sale is complete.
However, as many replies have stated, there are always exceptions. And in almost every case of a corporate-level sale, it's usually OK to replace people who leave, especially important positions. If a GM leaves, they'll replace the GM. If a key on-air talent leaves, they will be replaced too. But let's say you've got a station where only mornings and afternoons are live. It's doing pretty well and you've been thinking it's time to add a full-time live middayer. Not anymore!
Or let's say you have a sales "assistant" who leaves. They did basic crap like PowerPoint slides and other presentational materials... stuff the sales reps COULD do themselves, but it saves them a lot of time when someone else can do it for them. Well, those sales reps better get familiar with PowerPoint again real fast. Non-essential folks like this are among the types who may not be replaced during a hiring freeze. Same goes for the "remote gophers" who set up the cheesy tents, the Martis or Comrexes, prize wheels, banners, etc. If jocks can set up their own remotes in small markets, they can do it in big markets too... and there's another $20,000 salary restored to the bottom line.
To recap, if it's a job that could disappear without directly impacting the on-air image of the station, it will probably remain vacant during a hiring freeze. But obvious vacancies (like on-air talent) will usually be filled, especially if the station is doing well, and has a direct competitor in the same format. Same goes for major managerial positions which are essential to daily operations, like General Managers and the like.
- Status
- This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.