| Back to Home > Bulletin Board > Media Issues > Topic: mastheads and leaves of absence |
Topic: mastheads and leaves of absence
| Author | Message |
| editornotinchief | Posted – 2/16/2006 10:12:06 PM | show profile As part of my Communications position, I'm the editorial assistant for my nonprofit organization's quarterly magazine. We have a very small editorial staff of two. The managing editor, my boss, has taken a lengthy leave. In her absence, her duties as ME have fallen upon me. I suggested to the Exec. Director, who I now report to, that we update the masthead and that my title be changed to reflect my greater level of responsibilty. I was told that no title changes would be made at this time because the ME is still on staff. As you can imagine, I am extremely frustrated I'm not going to be, I believe, adequately credited for my work on the issue (and subsequent issues until my boss returns). So, my question is: is this sort of thing standard when a senior editor takes a leave of absence? Has anyone else had similar experiences? |
| Hannah | Posted – 2/17/2006 8:25:30 AM | show profile I've never had a manager take a leave of absence, but I can tell you this: My boss quit months ago. The company is not replacing her, and I'll be performing her duties indefinitely. Still, I'm stuck with the same old job title and salary. |
| mehean | Posted – 2/17/2006 11:25:20 AM | show profile In my experience, the employee was still credited in the masthead as their title/position because they are still on staff. So, unfortunately, I think this type of thing is standard on leaves, etc. |
| slink | Posted – 2/17/2006 3:55:17 PM | show profile When the ME took a maternity leave at my last job, they hired a temporary ME in her absence. I can't remember how the new gal was credited on the masthead, but she was definitely credited and the ME on leave was not. It costs nothing for them to give you a stupid title change on an issue, and it takes nothing away from the person who is on leave. I would fight if I were you. |
| pentup | Posted – 2/17/2006 4:19:38 PM | show profile Are you asking that your title be changed to managing editor? If so, maybe suggest a less dramatic title change -- like assistant editor, associate editor or maybe even assistant managing editor. I can see why they might object to changing your title to ME (the ME who is taking a leave might object, for example), but it seems silly to even have an editorial assistant title at a publication that only has two people on staff. Most importantly, are you getting compensated for your extra work? I hope so. They might not want to change your title because they worry that you will then ask for a raise. Good luck! |
| clairezulkey | Posted – 2/17/2006 4:50:07 PM | show profile | email poster Do you have a list somewhere of your job responsibilities? It seems that if you can point out that you are being asked to do things that fall outside your realm (more than just occasionally) for no extra pay you should be able to say something. But I am definitely not an expert. ------ Editor of MBToolBox |
| kalin | Posted – 2/17/2006 9:27:19 PM | show profile Although I don't know why your ME is on leave (health reasons, family crisis, etc.) obviously your employer felt it reason enough or the law did. And if I were your employer I would think you were rude in the first place for asking for your title to be changed if the ME was out for a valid reason. It would bother me that you are more worried about your title, than your co-workers or your publication. I was once told by one of the great CEO in publishing that ''Titles mean *%&^.'' He was right. Your co-workers, your company and your readers don't value you for your title, but for what you help them with, what you bring to the table and how you pitch in when things are tough. That's what will get you an ME title! I do agree that you should be compensated for the extra work during your ME's leave. ------ A creative bundle of joy. |
| editornotinchief | Posted – 2/18/2006 1:31:04 PM | show profile Thank you for your responses! Your comments are very helpful. I'm sorry to hear that several of you have been in similar situations but it helps to know I'm not the only one. Hannah, that's terrible - it sounds like it's time to move on from that job! To answer your questions: pentup, I wasn't asking to be managing editor. I suggested a lower level title. Actually, I didn't even suggest anything in particular, just that it be changed from Editorial Assistant to something more reflective of my work. I'm not getting compensated for my extra work though the ED said in our meeting, after she told me that titles would be remaining the same, that I would be compensated financially. How and when remains to be seen. I'm concerned that they may wait until my yearly review which isn't until June. clairezulkey, yes, I intend to do that because I am doing much more than is in my list of responsibilities, not just on the magazine but in other areas as well (managing the web site, for example). kalin, it is maternity leave but due to complications it became an extended one (she left in December and we don't expect her back until July at the earliest). I agree that in the grand scheme of things titles aren't that important (and I have decided to let this go for now and focus my efforts on getting a raise and a promotion). But I wasn't asking for a title change for my overall job title, only as pertains to the magazine (we have a separate staff masthead listed in the magazine as well). I also framed the conversation as ''I'm updating the masthead with staff changes - by the way, what would you like to do about our titles? I suggest we change my title'' not ''I demand a new title.'' I don't think it came off as me being more concerned about my title than the issue - this arose after I developed and edited the whole issue, and received praise in a staff meeting for all my hard work (we're going into final stages of production now). I have been pitching in a lot - everyone at my office, including the ED, knows that I work extremely hard (I did before my boss left too) and that I have taken on a greater level of responsibility in my boss' absence. I'm concerned though that they will take my willingness as compliance. I was told when my boss left that ''nothing would change.'' I would now be reporting to her boss but my responsibilities would be the same. Clearly, that hasn't happened. To my mind, it's a matter of principle: keeping the masthead as is means that I'm basically ghostediting the issue for my boss. I don't think it's fair to give credit to someone who hasn't been involved in production at all. All that said, I am picking my battles carefully. Thanks again, everyone! |
| kalin | Posted – 2/18/2006 7:32:00 PM | show profile It sounds like you are handling the situation great. Just look at it this way, while you may not have the temporary title, you are getting the experience you will need for your future and your company is seeing it. :) Best of luck. Kalin ------ A creative bundle of joy. |
| joyeuxnoelle | Posted – 2/18/2006 8:12:11 PM | show profile acting managing editor ...might be a decent compromise. The person in charge of making the descision might be worried about the perception that they have demoted the ME, leaving them open for a lawsuit? That's the only thing I can think of. Even if they don't give you anything, I'd try and get to the bottom as to why. Whatever they decide, you can still put that some of your duties included acting as ME for whatever length of time. It'll certainly be helpful when you want to start loking for a better position elsewhere and given how things are going in your current position, that might be sooner rather than later. |
| editornotinchief | Posted – 2/25/2006 11:31:37 AM | show profile Thank you, kalin! Joyeuxnoelle, I don't think they're going to give me any further reasons but you're right, it may be time to look elsewhere, and I am actually applying for another communications position. I figure it doesn't hurt to explore my options. I will let everyone know how it goes. Thanks again! |
| editornotinchief | Posted – 3/15/2006 4:30:09 PM | show profile update They gave me a bonus today. I've never received a performance bonus from any job so I'm not sure if it's a good amount but it is more than enough to compensate the extra hours I've worked at least. Of course, I'm excited to get some money (can't complain about that) but I would rather the financial recognition have come in the form of a raise. But perhaps they figure (and rightly so) that I might not stick around that long unless they keep me happy with some cold hard cash. Meanwhile, I applied the other job and am keeping my eye out... |
