This could be the unkindest Conde Nast cut of all: A tipster tells us that "as of Monday, Glamour will no longer have a receptionist." And this may be only the beginning.

In late March, Conde purged its receptionist ranks of those not on the "editorial floors"—taking receptionist staffing levels as low as they could reasonably go. Or so we thought. Our tipsters say that not only is Glamour laying off its receptionist (who's been with the company for more than 20 years); they also tell us there are rumors that Conde Nast is going to lay off "all" of its receptionists.

Is such a thing even possible? Can America's most glamorous magazine publisher function after laying off all receptionists? We've contacted Conde and we'll let you know what they say. We hear that Glamour staffers have been told that "Managment or editorial staff will be in touch about what procedures for visitors will be going forward."

Editors running out to fetch visitors themselves? This is your future, Conde Nast.
[Now that McKinsey's ended Conde's newspaper subscriptions and laid off the poorest-paid employees they should have the company just about profitable again! Pic via.]