Allison Walzer can't get a job at the Times Leader. Wow. Former TL editor Allison Walzer alleges in court papers that Connor is retaliating against her, continuing a course of conduct that started with Pat McHugh -- who favored Catholic charities over Jewish ones, Walzer claims. She alleges that McHugh traded favors with a Catholic charity to get his son a job and his wife a board position. Good stuff.Saturday, February 17, 2007
Walzer: Connor won't hire me, McHugh has it out for the Jews, etc.
Allison Walzer can't get a job at the Times Leader. Wow. Former TL editor Allison Walzer alleges in court papers that Connor is retaliating against her, continuing a course of conduct that started with Pat McHugh -- who favored Catholic charities over Jewish ones, Walzer claims. She alleges that McHugh traded favors with a Catholic charity to get his son a job and his wife a board position. Good stuff.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
27 comments:
But how did this have an impact on the books in the library?
You gotta love it. When all else fails, claim discrimination and sue. Talk about stereotypes, we got a couple of different levels of that going on here.
O'Connor assumed the liabilty of the case when he bought the paper. This person used a subordinate staff employee for a personal task plus there isn't a position for this person at 200K. Yeah sounds like an anti-semite female discrimination suit if I ever heard one. Why can't someone be fired for plain old poor performance? Tell em': "Get weavin' and stay weavin'. It's MY company."
hopefully this case will go to trial where under oath testimony drawn by subpoenaes from both sides will show a dysfunctional management sideshow that took place for many years, hurt too many good newsroom grunts and destroyed the great times leader of old.
Kudos to Janoski? Are you kidding me? He didn't even report the aspect of the story that you point out - that she's accusing McHugh of favoring Catholic charities over Jewish charities. He may have had it first, but his story was very incomplete. By the way, where was Janoski and the rest of the CV on the McDade story. TL had lots more details on that one that good ol' Dave had to follow the next day.
Paying attention to Catholic charities over Jewish charities merits a "tsk tsk" at best.
Truth is, Alison is just a nasty woman. Her manner of managing, or lack of, caught up with her. His visciousness caught up with her. This suit is nothing but sour grapes.
Oh yeah, people pull all kinds of strings to get unpaid board positions with NEPA nonprofits (insert sarcasm face here).
Say goodbye, Allison.
There's a new stereotype: Catholics control the media
"...destroyed the great times leader of old."
Oh great ones please inform this newbee when ANY of the newspapers your speak of were great. I will then try and get copies of the TL and CV from that era so that I may be informed.
Put personal feelings regarding Allison aside for a moment. Do you people really think management was not anti-women?
She's only acting on what a number of people already knew.
Personal feelings aside I don't believe any 21st century management would ignore the competence of more than half the population. I do believe that any management would actively rid itself of a toxic individual. Acting on what people already knew? You act on what you experience!
I'm not sure if I agree with 4:25 p.m., but I think 4:48 p.m. is quite naive. That's the nicest explanation I could think of for a person who thinks that "more than half the population" is always treated as equal as the remaining segment of the population. Really, do you honestly believe what you wrote?
She's a bitch. She got what she deserves.
Sadly, in today's legal climate, a lawsuit does not have to have merit in order for the plaintiff to prevail. Civil rights suits are extremely expensive to defend because plaintiffs attorneys get their full fee (not a contingency) if the plaintiff prevails. It doesn't matter how much the plaintiff gets. It could be a dollar, but the defendant would be on the hook for ally atty's fees, billed usually at $200 plus per hour. That equals tens, of not hundreds of thousands of dollars. So what does this all mean. Connor will settle this suit rather than take it to trial, even though it is total bullshit.
I think "total bullshit" isn't correct. There's merit to the claims. It's just a shame Allison's the one bringing them before the court, and not another of the women who were discrimated against during the McHugh reign.
Allison Walzer is Jewish? That I didn't know.
SHREW-ish, I knew.
"Do you people really think management was not anti-women?"
4:25 PM, February 18, 2007
And who was top management for lo, those many years? Why, Allison Walzer. T-L staffers, you can come forward now, you can tell the truth. You don't have to fear Walzer any more. A house fell on her and the Ruby Slippers are gone.
I find the anti-woman bias almost ridiculous. At one time, McHugh's top managers were Kahlu, McCarthy, Wateski and Walzer.
If there was an anti-woman bias anywhere, it was in the newsroom.
If anything McHugh was pro-women.
Walzer was intimidated by smart women in the newsroom. Those who had know backbone she just shoved around some more.
Walzer was intimidated by smart women in the newsroom. Those who had know backbone she just shoved around some more.
Wow, the same can be said in the CV newsroom. Anyone with brains and brawn in the (rank and) file is shown the door.
"would ignore the competence of more than half the population."
""more than half the population" is always treated as equal"
Nice connotation twist there but hardly accurate. Ignoring the COMPETENCE is really quite different than being treated as equal. Crap is crap on both sides of the fence. It just smells better on one side.
11:22 says "At one time, McHugh's top managers were Kahlu, McCarthy, Wateski and Walzer."
Lets look at this. Walzer he inherited, McCarthy he canned, Wateski he put into a position he knew she would fail at so he had a reason to can her.
McHugh wasn't pro women in power, he was pro cuties in his staff meetings. If anyone wants to argue that point, explain to me how Laura Walinskas was the Weekender GM? She's as intellegent as sandpaper (no offense to sandpaper).
good point
Couple observations:
-- Does no one have a problem with Janoski reporting on this? Btw, his story did blow, first or not.
-- Walzer's expectation of being invited back to a $200K + job is just silly. She obviously was grossly overpaid. Her efforts to reapply at the paper were clearly done for litigious purposes.
-- Walzer had no comment to Janoski? That also strikes me as absurd. Once again a TL exec applies the "do as I say" rule. Instead of hiding behind legal papers Walzer should have the guts to speak out publicly. Is it because she knows her lawsuit is frivolous and is hoping to extort a settlement?
-- It strikes me that Walzer is conveniently Jewish for the purpose of her lawsuit. One might also suggest that she is conveniently female, but that would be just plain mean.
Roooooowwwww!
Post a Comment