Opinion ID: 578618
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: George H. Laird, III

Text: 18 George H. Laird, III was employed at the Dispatch from September 16, 1963, to January 17, 1989, when at the age of 50 he ceased working for York. During his last 11 years at the Dispatch, Laird was a copy editor, writing headlines and editing stories for spelling, grammar, punctuation, content and factual discrepancies. He also edited errors from the newspaper's early edition to prevent their appearance in the final edition. Additionally, Laird laid out certain sections of the paper, and selected stories for print from the wire services. A former editor of the paper described Laird as quite competent ... dependable and precise.... A co-worker stated that Laird had demonstrated knowledge and skill in the use of the Atex computer system. Sacks stated that Laird was a brilliant man and an excellent and hard-working copy editor. He was such a perfectionist in his copy editing that he was sometimes referred to as a nit picker. Katherine Searle, a librarian in the editorial department, stated that she knew Laird to be a very thorough and proficient copy editor, and that [h]e was regarded by me and almost everybody in the newsroom as a perfectionist, and was very hard working. Laird alleges that, until the last week of November 1988, there is no record of any blemish on his service to the Dispatch. 19 According to York, however, the new management at the Dispatch viewed things differently. Shortly after York bought the Dispatch, it implemented a number of changes to improve the newspaper's quality and appearance. Nelson Lampe, the deputy managing editor of the Dispatch, distributed a five-page memorandum to the editorial staff outlining the paper's new look, and announced that the paper was adopting new styles for headlines, bylines, photo captions and jump lines. Additionally, York adopted the Associated Press Stylebook (AP Stylebook) to achieve clarity and consistency in writing style. 20 Lampe reviewed the paper on a daily basis, making editorial comments with a grease pencil and providing daily feedback by leaving the marked-up pages, or tear sheets, in the news room for the staff to see. There is no dispute that Lampe had made numerous corrections to Laird's work. Laird would review the tear sheets with Donna Miskin, the day news editor and Laird's immediate supervisor. Additionally, on two or three occasions Lampe met with Laird to discuss Laird's performance. Lampe expressed dissatisfaction with Laird's attitude and ability to adapt to the format changes. 21 Laird was responsible for several errors that appeared in the Dispatch in late 1988 and early 1989. For example, in the November 30, 1988 edition of the paper, Laird incorrectly edited an obituary. The first edition of the paper stated that funeral services were scheduled for 2:00 p.m., but failed to indicate the date. Laird added the word Friday, but this turned out to be erroneous as the service was to be held on Saturday. Laird's correction indicated that the funeral would take place before the viewing. 22 The next day, Laird failed to notice a misspelling of the word gauge in a front-page headline that read Indicators Guage Up. 4 Two days later, Laird overlooked a misspelling of the word noble in the headline stating Dog with a nobel lineage sparks events. 23 On December 1, 1988, Lampe orally warned Laird that York could not tolerate such mistakes and that Laird should not let such mistakes happen again. Laird was given a formal letter of reprimand on December 8, 1988, which stated that [a]ny further such errors on your part could lead to further disciplinary action, up to and including dismissal. Following this reprimand, Lampe continued to observe deficiencies in Laird's work, including improper punctuation, improper capitalization, improper layout, misspelled headlines, failure to follow the AP Stylebook, poor allocation of space, poor news judgment, and misspelled names. 24 Lampe expressed concern about Laird's attitude, and again met with Laird on January 5, 1989. Lampe discussed Laird's recent editing errors and his accrual of what Lampe considered to be unnecessary overtime. On January 11, 1989, Laird was asked to complete a self-evaluation, which involved rating himself in nine categories relating to work performance, capacity and attitude toward job. There were five possible ratings: outstanding, above average, satisfactory, below average and unsatisfactory. There was also a question and answer portion. Laird rated himself satisfactory in all categories and gave terse answers in the question and answer portion. For example, in response to the question Briefly appraise this employee's potential and future, Laird responded limited only by my circumstances, and in response to the space for performance objectives, he stated personal satisfaction. 25 On January 16, 1989, Lampe evaluated Laird and rated him unsatisfactory or below average in all but the category for attendance, in which he rated Laird satisfactory. In particular, Lampe gave Laird a below average rating in the areas of quantity of work and judgment and an unsatisfactory rating in the areas of quality of work, dependability, initiative, interest and cooperativeness. Lampe listed [a]ttendance as Laird's only strong point, and listed as Laird's weak points: Lack of self-direction. Inability to lay out pages following our typographic style. Failure to perform duties in a professional manner. Failure to adhere to widely known and distributed stylistic guidelines. Lampe also stated that, [l]ike other desk members, George has had 4 1/2 months to bring his performance and skills up to acceptable levels. He has not. 26 After evaluating Laird, Lampe determined that he should be terminated, and discussed this decision with Miskin and Bhatia, who both concurred. Laird was given a formal notice of termination on January 16, 1989, but was given an early retirement offer [b]ecause of [his] 25-plus years with the Dispatch ... which was contingent on Laird's submitting a letter of resignation the following day, which he did. York initially did not hire a replacement for Laird but instead assigned Edward Turk Pierce, who was then 49 years old, and who held a similar position on the night shift, to replace him. Approximately three and one-half months later, York requested resignations from three other copy editors who were ages 33, 38 and 31. 27 Laird does not dispute that he made the errors to which we refer. Rather, he produced an affidavit from a former reporter at the Dispatch who stated that [a] copy editor's failing to catch errors in copy is an almost everyday occurrence. Errors in headlines and introducing an error into copy, while not everyday occurrence[s], were still quite frequent. Additionally, the reporter stated that all copy editors regularly made such errors but, with the exception of Laird, none were disciplined or reprimanded. The deputy news editor who, as a union official, is familiar with disciplinary matters, similarly stated that, [f]rom September of 1989 to January 15, 1990, such errors were called to a copy editor's attention in a friendly, informational and usually off-handed manner. No copy editor was disciplined during that time frame for copy editing errors, of which there were many.