CTV News Lisa LaFlamme has been let go

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by Azure

Are you really cutting costs if you lay off a high profile anchor that many people watch even if he / she makes $500k per year? $500k is a drop in the bucket compared to what Bell spends every year.

Sounds like the Bell exec, Michael Melling wouldn't even pay for hotel rooms for the Queen's Jubilee in London. He also introduced new models where the on-camera reporters also filmed and edited their own segments.

It sounds like Bell was trying to save money in every facet of the news organization. CTV News is still the #1 national broadcast but they are probably facing dying ratings lower ad revenues for years like all traditional news media.

Bell certainly makes money in other areas, but unlike CBC, if the news becomes unprofitable, you know that Bell will cancel it.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Doesn’t matter what Bell makes or spends elsewhere. CTV news is likely responsible for their own P&L. Comparing to other parts of Bells business is irrelevant

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Doesn’t matter what Bell makes or spends elsewhere. CTV news is likely responsible for their own P&L. Comparing to other parts of Bells business is irrelevant

Even within the CTV business, I'm sure a high profile anchor isn't the place to cut costs first.

Legacy media is dying. We all know that, but you still have millions of people watching the news, and with Lisa specifically there were lots of eyeballs paying attention to what she says.

Hard to believe if 'cutting costs' is the mandate, that this is where you need to cut them first. I'm sure one could find another part of the CTV umbrella that is bleeding money a lot worse than your #1 news anchor that millions of Canadians enjoy watching.

[RedHot25]

More troubles and potential collaboration as to systemic issues.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1560966239048048643

https://twitter.com/user/status/1560617540564426753

[TheoFleury]

Originally Posted by MoneyGuy

My cousin is boycotting CTV News for this. She boycotts anyone at the drop of a hat that she disagrees with. She’s far left and is a vegetarian; maybe neither is relevant but she’s very political and likely has a list of companies as long as her arm that she won’t deal with. Many of them are animal-related.

I'm sure they are all devastated

[curves2000]

I believe Danielle Graham has a current lawsuit filed for wrongful dismissal from Bell as in her case, she claims she was fired when she objected to discrimination and past over for promotion in her role as an entertainment reporter.

Bell Media claimed that it was following the previous host, Ben Mulroney's hope that the position was to be filled by someone who was a visible minority, person of colour or indigenous background. If some recall, at the time, Ben's wife was involved in some claims of racism or bullying some activist who was black and that was a bad look for the company.

I do think that some people are confusing mass layoffs in the industry with what may or may not be gender or race based discrimination for whomever.

Interesting times and I can see this potentially expanding with more stories and more beef with people who worked for Bell and feel they were wronged. It wouldn't be shocking to me to see the VP in charge of some of this mess be let go as a clean slate.

Just an observation.

[Shazam]

Sounds like Graham was laid off, not fired. Probably had to sign a release to get that severance, that’s a very tall wall to climb in court.

[Mull]

Originally Posted by Shazam

Sounds like Graham was laid off, not fired. Probably had to sign a release to get that severance, that’s a very tall wall to climb in court.

So I assume you mean terminated without cause, and not laid off? Everyone gets the two confused, and from what I understand, Lisa was also terminated without cause.

We were told by our lawyers that the employee signing off on the severance may not offer the assumed protection one would think, even more so if the human right commission gets involved.

We didn't proceed down the path of getting sued or anything, so I don't know how good of advice we were getting to be clear. I always respected our lawyers however.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by Shazam

Sounds like Graham was laid off, not fired. Probably had to sign a release to get that severance, that’s a very tall wall to climb in court.

Laid off a day before a scheduled hearing/meeting about a formal complaint?

Convenient timing….

[Shazam]

According to a news article, she never took the offer, which was absolutely the correct thing for her to do (that is, not taking it).

Bell dumb. Man they did everything wrong lol.

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by Shazam

According to a news article, she never took the offer, which was absolutely the correct thing for her to do (that is, not taking it).

Bell dumb. Man they did everything wrong lol.

Bell does this because they can and know they can. Even this backlash will eventually dissipate with no lasting effects, and every executive will stay onboard.

And let's not pretend this is a Bell only issue. Systemic discrimination is embedded as part of Canadian culture and is socially accepted...until it goes public at which point everyone plays the outraged moral police for a moment only to slide right back in the accepted systemic discrimination.

We are a society that is told to keep things bottled up in the workplace, as speaking out can be career suicide. You have to deal with the harassment, bullying and discrimination in order to be a 'team player', and eventually you still get fired as your hair was too grey one day or your dress was not adequate.

Just take a look at Danielle Graham's tweet on the day she got wrongfully terminated. She speaks out now, but how many women like her are fired every day as a company's HR scrubs harassments and discrimination complaints under the table with legally vague "business decisions" and "not a fit", and all the legal stuff gets dealt behind closed doors with NDAs and settlements, while the victim must put a fake smile in front of the public that everything is ok?

https://twitter.com/user/status/1502405516928167943

https://twitter.com/user/status/1560966239048048643

Quite the contrast. We would not have seen her true story if not for the current backlash, but what about those who were not former employees at Bell and don't have this current social out to speak out?

You can unknowingly be sitting next to someone who they or a spouse may have of be experiencing discrimination, harassment or worse in the workplace. And that's how our progressive social Canadian culture is.

[nik-]

I'm sure this is all a giant misunderstanding and this toxic company will resolve it all by having one more Bell Let's Talk day.

[TorqueDog]

Bell: "Hey everyone, it's Bell Let's Talk day! Let's talk about ment-..."
Everyone: "Let's talk about how you're a sh-tty, toxic employer."
Bell: "When we said 'let's talk', we didn't mean like that."

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by Firebot

Bell does this because they can and know they can. Even this backlash will eventually dissipate with no lasting effects, and every executive will stay onboard.

And let's not pretend this is a Bell only issue. Systemic discrimination is embedded as part of Canadian culture and is socially accepted...until it goes public at which point everyone plays the outraged moral police for a moment only to slide right back in the accepted systemic discrimination.

Just putting aside the issues of systemic discrimination, they did the whole "how to punt someone while covering our asses" all wrong.

[KelVarnsen]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1562802911142219777

[Torture]

Originally Posted by KelVarnsen

https://twitter.com/user/status/1562802911142219777

You know it's bad when Wendy's social media is dunking on you.

[Azure]

Bell Lets Not Talk About It Day.

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by KelVarnsen

https://twitter.com/user/status/1562802911142219777

discrimination against gingers!

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by KelVarnsen

https://twitter.com/user/status/1562802911142219777

CBC journalism at its finest of course posting this ridiculous story and bashing Wendy's for their 'grey stunt'.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/bra...amme-1.6562973

"There could be some blowback if there's anything hidden in the closets as it relates to anything both companies have done, so it's a real high-risk move."

Joanne McNeish, an associate professor of marketing at Toronto Metropolitan University, felt Wendy's campaign didn't make much sense, because the brand has never been associated with ageism or grey hair.

"With Wendy's, it'll just sink like a stone," McNeish said. "It doesn't cost them much to give it a go, but they could have been so much more clever in how they did it."

It's not a campaign, it's a symbolic show of support. Looking at Wendy's facebook and twitter comments from women in full support, I would say it's quite successful.

Bell Media is really trying to kill this but it's not going away like they wish. These types of blow ups eventually always die out as I stated before, but I don't think this one will, if anything it's picking up steam. Pissing off your largest viewing demographic and who has the highest buying power has to be one of the biggest corporate blunders I have ever seen.

For his part Lloyd Robertson also spoke out against the firing in support for Laflamme

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/lloy...-lisa-laflamme

[Shazam]

LaFlamme is suing Bell for $1.2million, so no, it's not going away anytime soon.