Welcome to SPJ Blogs Sign in | Join | Help

40 hours

Q.

Like many young reporters, I'm starting at a small daily.
My newspaper has a policy of setting a limit of work hours at 40 hours a week for reporters who are not on salary, which includes me.
I have aspirations to work at a large metro paper one day.
I'm wondering if working 40 hours a week is really enough experience to prepare me for a demanding position in the future.

A.

Well I'll tell you the on and off record answers.

On the record: If they don't want you to work more than 40 hours, don't.

Off the record: I think it sucks that they are not willing to pay over time. This is because any true young and hungry reporter will work more than 40 hours. You have three options.

1. Only work 40 hours - but work like crazy. This would protect your integrity of being paid for the hours you work.

2. Work more than 40 hours - but only write down 40 hours. I know, I know editors and especially HR DO NOT want to hear that but it's the truth. I'm not saying that you always need to work more than 40 to do a good job, but it happens to most of us.

3. Find a different job where they understand that you will work over sometimes and that they should pay you for that.

At my job I am allowed to clock over time. My policy is that if I work an hour over - in order to do something not required for my job I don't put it down. But, if I work late (like when I covered a 17 hour City Council meeting) I put down almost all the time because it was required for my job.

I'm sure others out there have different policies - I really think that this is not an HR issue, but is an ethical issue. As young journalists just starting out we face the issues of working hard to improve our skills and being taken advantage of. I think the best rule in this fine line is to get a job working for an understanding editor. My editors, for example, understand that fine line and help me juggle it. And after weeks where my editor knew I worked way over he told me to clock it. A tip to editors: that made me feel super good - I then didn't feel guilty clocking over time (which young journalists feel sometimes) AND it made me feel good that he noticed how hard I had worked.

Please, everyone, share your advice!
Published Friday, April 20, 2007 3:54 PM by SonyaSmith
Filed Under: , ,

Comments

# re: Q and A: 40 hours

Friday, April 20, 2007 4:45 PM by ElysseJames
Hm. This is a tough question. It's great you're willing to put in as many hours as necessary to make you a great reporter, but if the company is not willing to pay you for those hours then it becomes an HR problem, like Sonya said.

I think if you stay only a half hour or so extra each day it's not enough to become a problem and would give you a little extra time, and you can always work from home, just stay around the office for the 40 hours.

I think the best advice up there is to work the 40 hours but to make the most of it, work like crazy and show them what you can do in that amount of time. And in your time off look for a job that will let you work to your potential.
Anonymous comments are disabled. Please log in or create an account to comment on this article.