On an ironic note. When completing journalism training, one of the guest lecturers was Sam Smyth, really nice guy and very interesting. But I remember him being very critical of letting opinion get in the way of a story. We're just there to report the facts.
Funny, the opening paragraph is full of emotion and opinion "Gaffe-prone", "plum job" "ignore an agreement". It get's some stick for being dull, but the Times does still stick to the old fashioned principles.
Anyway. I'm not saying she hasn't considered this, but there's little substance to the article. After "The Irish times has learned..." there's nothing else to back it up, just a description of the old system, the pay and how much of a disgrace it would be if she did do this. Yet nothing actually concrete just yet.
She may want to and she may have raised it, but it's unlikely she'll be allowed to. So what's the drama?