-
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
Sam And Lissa FIRED
- Thread starter 1069_KIFR
- Start date
Unfortunately, many talent changes in large markets take place during the PPM "Holiday" survey period which is amply ignored by media buyers. In addition, listeners are in a period of less predictable behavior so changes are not noticed nor felt as deeply.
Very sad for the talent, but it is the way the game is played.
Actually according to Sal Pizzaro at the Mercury News, Lissa was terminated but Sam had decided months ago to retire at the end of this year due to health issues. What I find refreshing about this is that KBAY general manager John Levitt let the two do a final show to say goodbye to their listeners. That's something talent rarely gets to do. http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/12/...how-team-signs-off-with-bittersweet-farewell/
landtuna
Walk of Fame Participant
All too many times it seems that employer and employee in radioland are at odds with each other and there is a severe lack of trust between the two. I would think that an otherwise "good" on-air employee would be allowed to say goodbye to his/her fans if only to continue the good relationship the station has with its listeners. I can think of very few other events that would turn loyal listeners into dial-switchers than the sudden and unexplained disappearance of long time talent.
I can clearly remember that weekend daypart in 1966 when KEWB flipped from rock to talk. They gave each daytime jock the ability to say goodbye and play some of their favorite songs in their abbreviated last show(s). Although it was a major shock to those of us who didn't know the change was coming it was the mature way to go and should be the standard any time a major change in the station or talent happens. I mean, we all know that change is inevitable but it doesn't have to be an in your face event.
There is a big difference between changing formats and letting go a particular staff member.
In radio, people are generally let go for performance issues such as low ratings, disciplinary causes or other character related matters. Those are not people that the station wants to maintain a "good relationship" with and they represent a big danger in terms of performing a "swan song" once they know they have been fired... right down to potentially endangering the license.
In today's radio, the other main reason for firing is costs. Fewer live on-air staffers, more voice tracking. People who become unemployed this way are understandably bitter or angry. Saying "goodbye" is generally an opportunity to express their feelings about the company.
Even when someone leaves for another job, it's often because they did not like the station, the PD, the manager or the owner. I've been in two situations where I shudder at the way the station ownership treated people, and could have ranted for an hour about it. But, instead, I just moved on. Still, given the chance, I would have said things I would have later regretted.
And today, that's why most companies have a rule about someone who is let go clearing the building immediately,generally under supervision. We have all heard enough stories from the "old days" about someone opening the board in the production studio and taking a wiz in it or bulk erasing all the music and commercials for us to have any other position.
landtuna
Walk of Fame Participant
I understand that difference which is why I used the term "good employee". The same issues hold true outside the radio industry when less-than-satisfactory people are let go.
Unlike most other careers I would think anyone getting into the radio business over the past 50 years would understand they will not be employed at one particular station forever. Turnover is a recognized fact of life in any profession where personality is such a large part of the job.
It seems there are just tons of stories out there by former air talent (and engineers) about cheapskate owners. I can't recall that kind of assessment in any other industry. Must be a reason.
I can understand the position particularly where the employee has access to trade secrets or other proprietary data - especially at a public company where senior management is held responsible for trade or security breaches. Still, it is a kick in the teeth to the loyal employee who has done their very best over a long period of time and has never had a hint of unsatisfactory performance. The only people I let go and physically walked out were contractors (company policy). I found if I could not trust a permanent hire they would not have been there long enough anyway.
It depends on the "employee." In the case of major market talent, which is what we're talking about here, they're typically not standard employees. They are independent contract workers, which means they're not necessarily under the employee umbrella. A lot of talent do that because they can make more money, and have more independence from internal management. It's a relationship that's similar to major contract athletes. Certainly in a lot of major markets like San Francisco, there's also the union involved. I don't have to explain the relationship between union and management. That's been somewhat adversarial for over 100 years.
Having said that, you grew up at a time when SOME radio stations were run differently. Until they weren't. One of my favorite stories about San Francisco radio was the Big Daddy, Big Tom Donohue. He was no doubt a legend in the city, who helped promote The Beatles 1966 concert in Candlestick Park. Not long after that, Big Tom grew tired of the music policy at KYA, and sought out a place where he could play some of the more underground music that was exploding in San Francisco. He managed to find a low rated small FM station, KMPX, and talked the owner into letting him hire his own staff and play whatever he wanted. It turned out to be a great success. Unfortunately the owner got a little greedy (and so did Tom), so one day Tom took his staff over to KSAN, and the rest is history. It was no doubt an "in your face event." But that's one example of the relationship that exists between radio talent and ownership.
Last edited:
The keyword here is "talent".
Whether on the air or in programming, "talent" in radio tends to be ego-driven and we often believe that sales-driven management does not appreciate our skills and abilities. That ego factor is part of what makes a "personality" or a good PD, but it makes it very likely that the perception of being under-paid quite vivid.
You must have a short memory. Consider the debate we've had in this country about raising the minimum wage. That's not a radio issue, but covers most menial work. Consider the very public battle WalMart had with its employees about full and part time employees, and the benefits they receive. Consider all of the labor strikes we've had over the past 100 years, in the auto, coal, and steel industries. Certainly one of the reason so many jobs have been outsourced to other countries. In all cases, the "enemy" has been "cheapskate owners."
On the radio side, talent gets paid very well, especially talent that is directly associated with revenue, like talk show hosts, morning teams, and syndicated talent. They all get paid very well, and for the most part, have a pretty good association with management.
Last edited:
landtuna
Walk of Fame Participant
In most cases pay scales are directly related to the abundance, or lack, of desired skills. People who produce valuable revenue tend to be much better paid than those that have skills that are more common. Automation in certain industries like coal and auto assembly have greatly reduced the number of people jobs but increased the number of skilled jobs making those machines and associated software. We don't tend to hear about those. Retailing has always been a relatively low paying job whether you are selling clothes or hamburgers. Those conditions have nothing to do with cheapskate owners but profits do. As you already know there are multiple ways to increase profits (or returns) to stockholders and paying the help is one way. The companies who truly value their employees and pay at least the going wage will have better results retaining talent/skill than those that try to get by on the cheap.
My old company, Intel, was an excellent example of what I am talking about. In many employee benefit meetings they stressed their goal was to be in the middle group of companies paying salaries and benefits although in the highest group when it came to productivity and revenue. Because they sold a relatively rare product and had massive market share it was doable for many years. As soon as their products became commodities that business model failed and as a result they suffer employee turnover and dissatisfaction today. And, if you will note, their stock price hasn't moved in almost 20 years. They are essentially a utility attracting stockholders by paying good dividends instead of stock appreciation.
Radio isn't much different except that air talent is their only important product. They obviously need sales and management to keep the business alive but if their on-air talent doesn't attract and keep listeners everything else won't matter. That, to me, is why voice tracking and syndicated shows are so distasteful. Radio was for so long live and local and that business model has largely been broken except for AMD. The exceptional talent is relegated to big markets that can afford them or gone on to vanilla voice tracking gigs where they can earn a better income.
Last edited:
That's a rather simplistic view of a very complicated issue. Talent is a function of format and market. The format you like is very talent oriented. But there are other formats that aren't. Listeners demand less talk and more music. For them, VT is perfectly acceptable. I find it ironic that the company that some call "cheap channel" pays multi-million dollar salaries to top talent, including Rush, Ryan, Sean, and Elvis. These are people who have been offered other jobs from other companies, and have chosen to remain where they are for a long time. I read where Cumulus, also a company that some call cheap, gave all their employees a 3% raise this year. That's not including what their contract employees got, which is likely more.
Conversely, there are stations where they don't have a lot of local talent. That's not a new thing. There were automated radio stations in the 1960s. I saw somewhere that over 1/3 of all radio had no local talent in the 60s. And quite often they weren't necessarily low rated stations. Once again, we're talking about formats where automation makes sense. I can give you lists of small market stations (those under market #100) that have local staffs. So it's not a small market thing at all. There are stations in Flagstaff AZ and Reno NV that have local talent. Even smaller places than that. So to generalize and lump all of radio as one thing is wrong.
Last edited:
No. "Entertainment" or "content" is the product. With music stations, the most important ingredient is the music mix, blend and flow. The personalities are the glue that holds it together, and only attract audience if the music itself is on target. Other ingredients include the staging and imaging of the station, promotions and contests and today, new media supplements and streaming options.
A Disk Jockey with out the right disks will fail. The right music, but with poor flow and rotation, will fail. A station that is not "together" in overall sound will fail. The Program Director is generally the biggest star of all, even though the audience often does not know who they are unless they have an airshift.
TeaPartyDude
Banned
I was fired once while on vacation. When I returned from vacation I was met by the security guard who directed me to a cardboard box containing my personal possessions. Sometimes life sucks.
landtuna
Walk of Fame Participant
This should be unacceptable in any business. Any firing manager worth his salt should have met face to face with the employee and explained what was to happen and why. They could then be escorted out of the building securely but maintaining the employee's dignity. Unless the firing was the result of a moral letdown or legal issue there is no reason whatsoever to treat any employee this way. And yes, firing people is part, and a distasteful part, of management. But it can work both ways.
Back in the early 70's I worked for a company that had a nasty reputation for blowing people out the door if they heard you were looking, or had accepted, another job. So I took what was my final vacation and removed all my personal effects slowly over time then submitted my resignation via letter while on vacation. The nasty manager asked that I come in for an exit interview after my termination date, which I did. In that meeting he asked me why I had resigned the way I did so I told him his employees could not trust him. He was less than happy with me but I heard later that he had changed his ways ever so slightly.
Over my long career I was fired only once and that coming after I had told my manager in confidence I would be moving to another company. I was trying to give him, and the company, time to assign my replacement and me to finish up work that couldn't realistically be assumed by one of my peers. That wasn't important to the boss as I apparently had damaged his ego and he wanted me gone. Years later I ran into a similar situation but this time with a much more professional boss. We parted on good terms and about six months later he rehired me with some new job opportunities. I gladly went back to work for him because I knew we had a great working relationship and I could trust him.
HenryOchs
Leading Participant
I didn't see this coming, but according to KBAY's Facebook page, they plan to re-brand as 94-5 Bay-FM and asked listeners to tune in Christmas night at 5pm for "One Last Present from KBAY" Could this mean that the station will go into stunt mode at that time? HMMMM!
- Status