Sinclair Fires Washington Bureau Chief

[kskiska]

BALTIMORE (AP) - The Washington bureau chief for Sinclair Broadcast Group said he was fired Monday after he criticized the company's plans to produce a news program based on a documentary critical of John Kerry's Vietnam-era anti-war activities.

Jon Leiberman said he was fired by Joseph DeFeo, Sinclair's vice president for news, and ``escorted out of the building.''

``I was told I violated company policy by divulging information from a staff meeting to The (Baltimore) Sun in this morning's edition,'' Leiberman said late Monday.

That staff meeting took place Sunday at Sinclair's headquarters in Hunt Valley, Leiberman said. It was announced that the news division would produce an hourlong special based on the documentary ``Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal,'' he said.

more…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-4560280,00.html

[Zorra]

1. This man stood up for us, and for America. I salute you, Mr. Leiberman.

Thank you for doing what is right.

[Julian English]

19. God bless him!

That's sort of courage that Bush lacks.

[VolcanoJen]

32. Didn't take long, did it? Predicted in the earlier LBN thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=913817&mesg_id=913817&page=

Thank you, Jon Lieberman.

[struggle4progress]

61. <snip> "I know I stood up for the principles of objectivity.

In journalism, all we have is credibility and objectivity." <snip>

[TahitiNut]

2. "compassionate conservatism" in action

Jon Leiberman said he was fired by Joseph DeFeo, Sinclair's vice president for news, and "escorted out of the building."

<snip>

The reporter, who was tapped by Sinclair last year to start the company's four-person Washington bureau, said he had a contract that ran through next August. Sinclair told him that he was fired for cause and would receive no severance and his benefits ended immediately, Leiberman said.

He added that Sinclair would not waive his noncompete agreement, which means he cannot work for a broadcast outlet in any market that has a Sinclair station.

<snip>

---

Ya really gotta love that "compassionate conservatism." :puke:

[Dogmudgeon]

5. Looks like a big ol' lawsuit is coming their way

Hopefully a big ol' high profile wrongful termination lawsuit to give Sinclair a big ol' black eye.

"Non-Compete"? Doesn't that infringe on the Right To Work ... ?

--bkl

[0007]

12. Bring on the trial lawyers!

[napi21]

14. Non-compete agreements are legal, however, Sinclair violated

his contract by firing him. The non-compete is usually part of the employment contract, so I would think the non-compete is gone too.

[Dogmudgeon]

17. "Non-Competes" ought to be illegal

It's an adhesive part of a contract that restrains trade. No company would stand for it if the shoe was on the other foot.

After all, isn't competition supposed to be an integral part of our sanctified Free Enterprise System?

Firing "for cause" is similarly spurious.

In spite of what businessmen whine about, there are enormous violations of workers's rights that remain uncorrected.

--bkl

[napi21]

18. You don't understand non-competes,

All the ones I've seen are for senior mgmt and research people. They are instituted so that someone who has inside information on the planned strategies, or formulations of company products, cannot take that information to a compeitor company. If you think for instance, you were a formula researcher for a company who makes toys, and the co you work for has designed a new toy for Xmas. You could damage that company if you left before the copyright had been filed, and gave that info to a competitor co.

It has nothing to do with restraint of trade, but primarily keeping co secrets.

Non-competes are always for a specific amount of time. If you're a CFO, your agreement would probably be 6 months to a year. If you're in research, it could be as long as 5 years. The assumption is that after a certain lapse of time, your information wouldnt matter.

[Dogmudgeon]

20. Actually, I DO understand non-competes

I have not been in a job since I was 24 where I didn't have to agree to sign one to get the job, and I have never been in senior management or research. (And I'm 46 now.)

I've signed NCs as a salesman. As a programmer. As an EEG tech. It's ludicrous. What the hell kind of business damage could I inflict as an EEG tech?

My last NC was for a job as an interface designer for a medical software firm that was (unknown to me) in the process of sinking. The NC was for an entire year. I left the job after 6 weeks and considerable shenanigans on the part of my employers. A week after I left, I received a very nasty lawyer's letter warning me not to get another job in the industry for a year, or I'd be sued.

Non-compete "agreements" are used to restrain trade; to make it more painful for an employee to seek a job elsewhere; to give Management that all-important "leverage".

They are similar to drug screens -- tremendously abused. No chance exists, however, of reining them in.

--bkl

[TahitiNut]

25. I agree. They're now used as punishment - a kind of 'blackball'.

They've become very popular at the same time companies have gotten more oppressive and operating over the edge of law and ethics. They're more like SLAPP suits or gag orders than having anything legitimately to do with intellectual property or trade secrets.

[NashVegas]

45. Non-competes Are Fightable and Winnable

"Signed under duress"

In regards to media no-competes, they are especially fightable in the age of consolidation. At the very least, if you don't have something in your contract that says your employer will pay you to sit on the beach, it's not going to be enforcable in the long run.

In his case, the no-compete is ridiculous beacuse it restrains not just where he could work in the town he lives, but also across country. If you wanted, you could try to use that as a violation of the 14th (interstate commerce) Amendment.

[lil-petunia]

50. i don't think so

OK, you spend 100,000 hiring, training, and educating someone for a specialty position. Just as they are about to become useful, another company comes in, and seeing that they can steal him/her for 100,000 less than developing someone new on their own, they offer to increase the salary by 30,000.

They get a fully trained person, they saved 70,000. the worker gets a huge bonus.

It simply is not fair.

Under some, limited circumstances, non-competes make perfect sense. They just have to be limited.

[Dogmudgeon]

64. Are businesses so averse to risk?

They make us workers take enormous risks in the pursuit of their profit. Is it so unjust that businesses should take a risk now and then?

"It simply is not fair" could be said about a lot of conditions workers find themselves in. But in those situations, Personal Responsibility and the Work Ethic are trotted out.

My own personal point of view is that the strong don't need help. Yet almost all employment and labor law is slanted toward Management, and the more money involved, the fewer rights the workers have.

My point about non-competes isn't absolute. Of course I understand situations where an NC would be a good idea. But non-competes are routinely used in the "white collar" world as instruments of intimidation. The field is tilted badly toward the corporation, toward management, and against the individual. Non-competes are part of that problem.

--bkl

[tsuki]

41. I don't think so...

here, if you are fired for cause, the non-competes can be enforced.

[Dogmudgeon]

49. Next issue -- What is "Cause", anyway?

Doesn't "Cause" really mean "The Whim of Management" ...?

It is understandable to terminate an employee whose behavior materially interferes with business operation. But I would say that close to 90% of cases where someone is "fired for cause" are actually based on the whim of one or two people in Management.

Like non-comepete contracts. Truly necessary in rare cases, usually with plenty of safeguards and at least a method of internal "due process".

But, again, most occasions where someone is "Fired For Cause" should read instead "Fired On Whim".

--bkl

[tsuki]

62. I agree...

but I did have a friend in sales that was fired for a "bad attitude" that was held to the no compete for two years.

[trapper914]

46. Non-Competes Are Hard To Enforce

Although many potential employers will shy away from a worker because of the non-compete, they don't normally stand up unless the worker is compensated in full by the original employer throughout the non-compete.

Really, that's the way it should work. When I left a radio station a few years back, that was how it was structured, although they opted not to enforce it. I still have a lot of respect for that company....Clear Channel, on the other hand....

[GainesT1958]

21. It does...and I'll lay odds that contention will be in Lieberman's suit...

Against Sinclair.

(Repubs supporting "right-to-work" laws but opposing a worker's right to nullify "non-compete" clauses reminds me of their kind declaring they are "pro-life", but favoring the death penalty.)

I understand (from Josh Marshall.. www.talkingpointsmemo.com ) that Sinclair's stock went down 8% today. I'll wager it will decline further tomorrow, as well.

Jon Lieberman stood up for what was right; he noted that "..at the end of the day, your integrity is all that really matters". And that's integrity that no one leading Sinclair has.:mad:

Here's hoping he gets a good job with a network--a REAL one, not Faux--and he returns to a job leading a bureau; his integrity under fire shows he deserves such a post!

B-)

[TahitiNut]

26. I think a decent lawyer could make a good case. Wrongful termination.

A company cannot use such policies to cover up acts which are "against the public interest." Even in "fire at will" states, if it can be shown that the termination was retaliatory for behavior which is protected or behavior which is in the public interest, then the damages can be huge.

Sinclair, as a licensee to use the public airwaves, is in a particularly tenuous position, I think. I'd like to see Jerry Spence take the case.

[Mike Daniels]

52. Wrongful termination?

I'm sorry but if you bad mouth your employer in a public forum you should expect to be fired.

The failure to waive the non-complete is utter BS but please name "one" company that won't fire you for making comments against them in a public forum.

The guy had to know that he basically submitted his resignation when he made the comments.

[UpInArms]

6. if Sinclair invalidates his contract and has issued "immediate

termination" of such, the non-compete would also be terminated in the process.

Thank you Mr. Lieberman for your courage and integrity.

The world could do with a few (many) more just like you.

:yourock:

[SemperEadem]

29. if he's got a good lawyer, the non-compete will be squashed

[gatlingforme]

42. The employee broke the contract by firing him. The non-compete is

superfluous at this point I would think?

[grytpype]

3. How many millions in stock value has Sinclair lost already?

[gavodotcom]

27. Assuming the market cap is 554.42 million,

You simply divide that by the stock price, and you have your number of outstanding shares. Multiply the outstanding shares by the loss of stock price, and you have your loss.

Doing the math, Sinclair has 85,426,810 (rounded) public shares. Multiply this by the $0.55 loss it took today, and you have a $46,984,745 loss on just today's trading.

Sinclair's stock price on Oct. 8 or 9, the day they announced their intentions to show the 'documentary,' was around $7.75.

This means that since their announcement, they've lost around $107,637,780.

Quite the political contribution.

[Eye and Monkey]

4. Can a journalist with integrity get a job these days?

I bet he can.

[bvar22]

24. YES!

...but only on the Comedy Channel!

[kskiska]

7. I like this part:

He added on Monday: ``I really feel like I can sleep at night and I can be OK with my decision'' to criticize Sinclair publicly. ... I know I stood up for the principles of objectivity. In journalism, all we have is credibility and objectivity.''

[aquart]

8. We saw that coming.

[pfitz59]

9. Is Sinclair linked to Moon?

Just curious. I know the "documentary" was done by a Moonie. Is Michael Powell a Moonie?

[54anickel]

10. I don't believe the noncompete clause would be enforceable, I hope

someone scoops him up quickly. The free "advertising" from the media coverage could be lucrative for any broadcaster that picks this guy up. :evilgrin:

[young_at_heart]

11. Sinclair must REALLY want Bush to be president

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

13. No free speech for him

[truthisfreedom]

15. somehow i have a feeling this guy will be hired soon by someone else.

just an inkling.

[Divernan]

16. He should be appointed to the FCC!

nt

[truthisfreedom]

23. watch Kerry hire this guy. 8^) funny!

the Kerry camp might just do that. this "punishment for disloyalty" thing does have its drawbacks, huh bushco?

[eeyore]

22. Noncompete clauses are really common

I used to work freelance for Nike doing design. All of the product designers who work in that industry have to sign noncompete clauses, essentially keeping them from going across town to Adidas with sensetive info.

The funny thing is that both companies would hire people away from their competitors, and part of the agreement would be to pay the salary of the person until the noncompete clause expired. So essentially these designers would get paid to sit around and not work for months, and sometimes years.

It gets really strange when companies try to hire away their competitors' really innovative employees, strategically taking them out of the business environment. That way their competitor doesn't get the benefit of the innovative employee's good work, thus keeping the playing field level. So they strategically pay their competitors' employees not to work. Crazy shit!

This guy should and will do just fine. I really admire him standing up to Sinclair!

[OutsourceBush]

28. Bastards, I hope Jon Leiberman finds a job with

a reputable group soon. It is a rare individual who is willing to risk his entire livelihood to speak out about an injustice. I feel very bad for him.

[Zhade]

30. Wow - a J. Lieberman who stands up for principle!

Can we trade him for OUR Lieberman?

[EST]

36. Cool idea!

n/t

[illuminaughty]

31. Leiberman is on Paula Zahn

and just crucifying Sinclair. Wow! I hope he makes all the rounds (of course he won't be on Fox).

[genius]

33. Let's send him a thank you.

[Robbie67]

34. It's good to know that there are some in the media

with conviction and integrity

[antonialee839]

35. "We are disappointed that Jon's political views

caused him to violate company policy". This statement would be hilarious if it wasn't so freaking sad and scary. I can't believe these jokers said this with a straight face.

[saigon68]

40. Thugs & Criminals

They would make Goebbels proud.

[EST]

37. How do we get a petition up

to deliver about a million signatures to the FCC to deny Sinclair 62 broadcast licenses this November? Most of those stations are up for review.

[donheld]

38. Jon Leiberman is an American Patriot

IMHO we need many more of his kind
:yourock:

[Robert Oak]

39. the DVD Outfoxed, tons of fired people who had ethics

He is a hero, but look at this in the media..

him, the sexual harassment case, the numerous firings and use of BS
confidentiality agreements to intimidate them into being media whores..

gee...it's like...dare i say it...being treated like an American engineer!

[wishlist]

43. Why isn't this story being covered by U.S. media today, this article is UK

I have emailed my newspaper and I am emailing my Sinclair TV station too because they have failed to mention this story today in their news coverage.

[cybildisobedience]

54. exactly...

first thing I thought of as well -- why do we have to go OUT of the country to read this?

[TahitiNut]

56. It has been covered ... albeit with a low profile.

The Guardian article is from the AP wire service. The story has been carried by the NYTimes, the Washington Post, the Columbus Dispatch, the Boston Globe, and many other media outlets. As is so often true, however, their coverage is muted.

[Timefortruth]

44. Man the truth scares the right.

But what is really creepy is that they don't bother to hide their outrages anymore.

[wishlist]

47. Here is link to CNN's story about this today

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/10/19/sinclair.kerry/index.html

Headline is "Sinclair fires reporter who criticizes anti-Kerry program"

I have emailed to my newspaper and TV station (in Sinclair area) to demand they cover the story

[NashVegas]

48. Hooray for People With Spines

This is how the media world attempts to yoke those people who have a need to be publicly recognized / famous / what have you.

"He added on Monday: ``I really feel like I can sleep at night and I can be OK with my decision'' to criticize Sinclair publicly. ... I know I stood up for the principles of objectivity. In journalism, all we have is credibility and objectivity.''"

Even more significant, IMO, than his public criticism was his refusal to take part in the panel discussion that supposedly would put this broadcast under the news umbrella.

[wishlist]

51. Jon Leiberman was great on CNN last night standing up for journalism

He repeatedly called the film one-sided and propaganda designed to sway the election on CNN with Paula Zahn last night. He said that there is no way anyone will be able to verify or confirm the accuracy of the film and they aren't giving John Kerry equal time. He did not mention Mark Hyman by name, but said that the person who forced the decision on the news department had a strong anti-Kerry agenda and was not a journalist.

Thank God there still are some people in the media with a conscience to not submit and just go along when those with power go totally over the line of fairness and decency.

[MarkTwain]

53. HELLO! Seantor Kerry's Staff Reading This...

....Hire this dude. Don't even give it a goddamn second thought.

And then, spend the next news cycle or two doing NOTHING but putting this guy out front - hollering loud and long.

Do it. Do it now.

[moggie]

59. Don't think so

Given his statement about objectivity, I don't think he'd want to work for a politician.

[Tracer]

55. I was sued by a former employer ...

... under the "non-compete" clause, even though ....

I HAD NEVER SIGNED ANY CONTRACT!!! Nope. Not a "non-compete" nor an "employment" contract.

They sued out of plain maliciousness, and to "punish" me. They also dropped the suit, but only after I had spent several thousand dollars on lawyers.

[jdj]

58. that really sucks.

so not fair. I wish you could sue to recoup losses, on the grounds that that they "competed" with your bank balance.

[Supersedeas]

57. When your personal opinion BELONGS to the company - divulging is human

[sr_pacifica]

60. "Feo" in Spanish means "ugly" n/t

[cap]

63. he can beat the non-compete...

a person can not be denied the right to make a living. Basically, they can't deny him the right to make a living. It's a long the lines of "restraint of trade" but not exactly.