Forced to resign, sacked over phone during Covid-19: Journalists depose before panel

What is worse, most often, journalists were unceremoniously shown the door by being forced to resign or opt for voluntary retirement or were terminated without prior notice. In nearly 75 per cent of the cases, the communication from the HR department regarding the retrenchment was oral. Few even got their severance pay from their companies.

The HR departments of major news organisations would badger the employees, calling them multiple times on WhatsApp ("to avoid being recorded") to remind them to quit. Essentially, nearly 2,500 journalists lost their jobs during this period, according to independent estimates.

Impact of mass layoffs

These are some of the shocking revelations of the plight of Indian journalists that appeared in a study titled the Report on Retrenchment of Journalists by Media Groups during the Covid-19 Period, conducted by the Press Council of India (PCI).

This was put together by a PCI sub-committee formed in September 2023 to study the impact of the mass layoffs of journalists that happened during the pandemic. In all, 51 journalists from 17 news organisations across English, Hindi, Marathi, and Bengali languages and 12 journalist unions and associations, deposed before the committee.

English language news media based in New Delhi and Mumbai made up a majority of those who deposed before the committee.

Forced to resign

A critical common complaint in the report is that the journalists had no choice and were forced to resign.

Eighty per cent of the journalists who deposed claimed they were "forced to resign" and had no advance notice or formal communication about salary cuts and retrenchments. Or, they had to opt for voluntary retirements, and were terminated from their positions by their news organisations. The threat of withholding the severance pay was often made to ensure they toed the line.

The report cites the example of Kavitha Iyer, currently working as an independent journalist. She was retrenched from The Indian Express’s Mumbai bureau on July 27, 2020.

"A little less human"

Iyer had worked in the organisation for 18 years and she has poignantly written in an email to the sub-committee that if she had been informed even a few days in advance, “explaining that the inevitable is about to happen” and this is a "business decision" with no bearing on her work, she would have been unhappy to exit, but would have retained her pride in the organisation and its commitment to humanity.

“Sadly, we are all now a little less human and a little more virus,” she wrote. Notably, Iyer was informed of the organisation's decision to let her go during a meeting at the office, and the HR manager told her she would "have to resign" and accept the relieving letter that was in the brown envelope in his hand. Or else, she would be terminated.

“In any case, there was no need to apply any thought to the decision itself. Resign or be terminated is not really a choice once Option A and Option B for severance pay are explained," she wrote. Most journalists in the report narrated similar experiences.

What is worrying is that only 37 per cent of the journalists who deposed before the committee received a severance pay according to their contracts.

"No method in this madness"

Another example cited in the report is that of Ashish Rukhaiyar, former markets editor with The Hindu.

Rukhaiyar was terminated from his position on June 19, 2020. In an open letter to news organisations on August 3, 2020, he wrote on LinkedIn, "Reporters were sacked over the phone. Some were called to the office and told to submit their resignation on the spot. News about discontinuation were pasted on notice boards. They were threatened that if they do not resign, they would lose out on payouts they are entitled to under law. There was absolutely no method in this madness. No memos, no performance related warnings, no red flags in appraisal etc."

The report also noted that most of the journalists who deposed before the committee "felt that they were personally attacked for their work."

Financial implications

Among those who deposed before the committee, 44 or 80 per cent reported that they were affected financially. In addition, another 34 said that they had to fall back on their family savings, 17 were forced to take loans, and 12 journalists were forced to relocate.

Deepak Turbhekar, a photographer, who had been with Mumbai Mirror for 16 years, was impacted financially. His deposition is also listed in the report.

He was asked to resign in January 2021 over a WhatsApp call after the organisation closed down the publication in December 5, 2020. Turbhekar was threatened that if he did not resign, he would be terminated and his provident fund, gratuity, and other benefits would be held back.

The report noted that Turbhekar broke down before the committee as he explained that he has been struggling financially for three years. The company just paid him one month's salary on his resignation. He had to dip into his PF money to repay his home loan in Mumbai, forced to sell his wife’s jewellery to support his elder daughter's education. He has a younger son studying in third standard.

He quit journalism since he did not have money to buy equipment for photography. Also, freelance news photographers are paid Rs 100-125 per photo, which is not sustainable.

Mental health

The sudden loss of a livelihood has also taken a toll on the mental health of journalists, noted the report. Prashant Barsingh, political reporter at Sakal newspaper in Mumbai, was terminated from the organisation on August 14, 2020 by an email. At the time, he had an outstanding home loan of Rs 29,00,000 which he had taken for a government-allotted flat.

Barsingh suffered a brain stroke due to the financial stress since he was not able to pay the monthly instalments of the loan.

Depression was reported by 30 (60 per cent) journalists and 27 (54 per cent) experienced social withdrawal. Senior journalists, in particular, were emotionally most affected. At the physical hearings, the report noted, many senior journalists were emotionally troubled and moved to tears.

Essential workers

According to the report, news media organisations did grave injustice to journalists by not following the Union government's directive listing media professionals as "essential workers" in the face of the pandemic.

The reasoning for including the news media in the "essential workers" category was to recognise that the circulation of news and information is critical during a crisis when people are struggling to cope with the changing situation on a daily basis, especially when rumour mills over the unofficial channels of information were making matters worse.

However, the report pointed out that this "essential workers" directive was completely 'ignored' by most of the media companies. "They showed scant respect to the Union government’s directive, firing and retrenching journalists at will,” the report stated.

Need to map retrenchments

According to data collated by the Network of Women in Media, India, 626 journalists from India died on the line of duty during the period, as the COVID-19 infection affected newsrooms and journalists.

The panel has noted that though the print media is going through a disruptive time and has its own challenges, there is a need for the Union government to continue the mapping of journalist retrenchments annually.

“As we have seen an unnaturally high level of job losses has an adverse impact on the quality of our information ecosystem and freedom of expression; and regular monitoring will help us deal with the problem more effectively,” it said.

"If journalists do not have job security then at that very juncture the freedom of press is compromised," the report observed. The report then goes on to give some recommendations to create a safe environment for journalists to work.

Recommendations

Pointing out that the key problem faced by media professionals with regard to job security stems from the existing contract system and "casual" system of employment, the report urged the Information and Broadcasting Ministry and the Ministry of Law and Justice to draw up a "Model Contract" with certain mandatory clauses.

The clauses must include a minimum tenure of service (7 to 10 years), provision of giving PF, gratuity, ESI in applicable cases, provision for leave, yearly increment in salary, etc. The report has also pushed for a severance payout of a minimum of six months of salary in the case of termination or retrenchment.

The report also highlighted the need for news media companies to "ensure journalists are insured against force majeure events such as global pandemics and natural calamities".