I've been reading this board for a while and reading the Citadel news has intrigued me. What makes no sense is how can Kicks/Eagle fire well known and well rated personalities for budget cuts and in 6 months replace them with people who have to cost the same amount of money? In the "real" corporate world the HR community calls this "bumping"....is radio exempt from the legal realities of cost cutting?
-
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
How Can Citadel Get Away With It
- Thread starter BobCarman
- Start date
B
Biz Listener
Guest
Perhaps because entertainers can be hired and fired "at will". And though few DJ's are actually entertaining, they are, technically, entertainers.
BobCarman said:
Like who?
Imus is already bought and paid for by Citadel; Citadel syndicates him. His being on in ATL brings in more listeners (=ad dollars). All marginal revenue for Citadel with no marginal overhead.
Ditto for Scott Shannon.
That just leaves PM drive as the only locally-staffed shift.
The intent of bringing on Randy and/or Spiff is to add a known personality to the only other shift where one matters. And if they don't bring in listeners, out they will go.
While I am not an expert, I would guess most radio personalities are contracted, and the terms of the contracts are usually pretty explicit about when and why and how that person can be let go. I would guess the contract would say something to the effect that if we fire you not for cause, and we can do so at any time we feel like it, we have to pay you X (and X could be small or zero), and that's it-have a nice day.
This isn't like a 9-5 job where you can sue for age discrimination, etc. If my radio station WTF? flips from nostalgia to CHR, and I let all of the on-air staff go and replace them with younger folks, I will have to buy out some remaining contracts but everyone is considered to have been made whole at that point.
I'm guessing on this one. Freddie Brooks was a Kicks part-timer so he probably is considered a part-timer at 106.7, meaning no benefits, which cost stations as much as a salary. I heard (but don't know for sure) that Scotty O'Brien at Kicks was hired back as a part-timer--same story. I don't know about Spiff, but I'm sure this was the only radio job available to him.
As far as a legal case, I guess the plaintiff would have to prove the cuts (or cut of a specific individual) were not really made for the purpose of saving money.
As far as a legal case, I guess the plaintiff would have to prove the cuts (or cut of a specific individual) were not really made for the purpose of saving money.
RoddyFreeman said:
Completely irrelevant. If there was a contract and the company satisfied the terms of it by paying off any monies due - there is no course for legal action. No court would allow it to be filed.
- Status