NYT executive editor reportedly canned in part because … she wanted to be paid as much as her male predecessor

NYT executive editor reportedly canned in part because … she wanted to be paid as much as her male predecessor. “…if you’ve been wondering what that mysterious smell is this afternoon, there’s your answer: It’s a Category Five sh*tstorm on the horizon, moving at ferocious speed towards America’s most famous liberal newspaper.” The world awaits Barry’s tweet on this…

This post was last modified on April 10, 2021

Bonfire of the Absurdities: After 35 year career writing software for IBM mainframes, am now self-employed contractor thinking of joining a union and striking for higher wages. Cured morbid fear of heights when I learned to look at them as lengths standing on end. Uncompromising in refusal to accept browser cookies. Amateur investor who has accumulated a small fortune in the market after starting out years ago with a large one. For recreation, I run, hike, kayak and play tennis but will not consider synchronized swimming under any circumstances.

View Comments (29)

  • When she was hired she should have gotten the same amount he got paid anyway so not sure why she waited until now to ask for a raise, she undercut herself already by accepting less money than her predecessor, however of course she had the right to eventually, ask for the same pay as the guy before her, if she felt that her work was competent and she proved her mettle.

    Unless they hired her for the amount that he started with and after a while his salary went up and she believed the same should have happened with her (which is of course fair).

    Either way the fact that she got FIRED after asking for a raise to equal her predecessor is just disgusting. If she didn't deserve it because she hadn't proved her worth or achieved goals set up for her, they could have stated so and maybe raise it to half of what she wanted and ask her to achieve a few goals first before getting the full amount. So OBVIOUSLY something is wrong. They didn't like her anyway, so this was just some excuse, or they simply don't want to pay a woman that much which makes them sexists.

    • Maybe when she was hired, she wasn't paid what he was making when he left, because he had much more experience, and time in the job, than she had. But in the King Barky world, that doesn't matter, all women should be paid what men make, regardless of experience or time in the job, unless you work for Obama, then you make less than the men, regardless.

      • Poppa, The NYT are champions of equal pay for equal work. If they believed their own bullsh*t she had a right to ask and they should have given it to her regardless of the other guy having more experience. Right?

        Yes I hear you but the point here is the hypocrisy.

      • Corporate compensation is based on ranges for a specific job title. The industry "midpoint" of the range is the benchmark most companies use when determining pay. She undoubtedly was in the range and probably above the midpoint. Her predecessor may have had different jobs and pay plans that created a different salary trajectory than hers. It's not a conspiracy.

    • I do note, however, that money wahat is the res ostensibly part of the reason she was fired. What is the rest?

  • And the bastion of liberal stupidity eats one of their own because they dared ask for a raise.

  • Thanks feminists of the last half century! We have lost most of the respect and mannerly deference and we are STILL getting screwed in pocketbook!

  • How dare she do such a thing. Demand equal pay for equal work. Boy those dim wits just don't get it do they?

    I'll say it: The Dim Wits are the ones creating war on women.

Related Post
  1. DALLAS POLICE SHOOTING: ‘ZOMBIE APOCALYPSE ASSAULT VEHICLE AND TROOP TRANSPORT’
  2. Kim Jong-un was a child prodigy
  3. Top GOP Leader Promises Total Amnesty In 2015