Conference 7.286::digital

    If it is a corporate policy it is not uniformly applied.  I know
    of at least one person who continued to work for several weeks
    after it was know to management he would be leaving DEC.  If it
    matters, he was going to work for a customer, not a competitor.
    
    	- Jerry

I've always understood it to be a decision made on the basis of the
individual, what they worked on, what they were leaving to work on,
and who they were going to work for.  The choices I've heard of consist
of either letting the person work out the n weeks notice, or of arranging
for 2 (or n) week's severance pay and having a security guard watch them
empty their desk immediately, taking their badge and walking them to the
door.  (After the exit interview, I assume).

I've never seen the bum's rush applied to anyone who's quit any of my
groups, but I've heard of it happening to those in other groups.
				/AHM

    
    When I got my present job at DEC, and told it to my then boss, he
    told me to leave with one (1) days notice. However, I got 3 months
    pay as a consolation...
    Bo

    DEC Germany requires 3 months notice *before calendar quarter end*.
    
    So, in the worst case, they can keep you for almost 6 months.
    
    On the other hand, I know that depending on the position, you may
    walk away immediately.
    
    DEC still has to pay, though...
    

    P,P&P Sect 6.01 Pg4
    
    Occasionally, there are situaions where an employee gives proper
    notice of intent to terminate, but after the counseling session,
    the supervisor and the personnel representative determine that
    it is in the best intrests of Digital to have the employee
    terminate immediately, or be temporarily assigned to another
    area for the duration of the notice period.
    
    
    Looks like its up to the supervisor's discretion.
    
    Bob Mc

What I've seen happen in Engineering and some marketing groups, is that
if the individual is privy to "sensitive" information regarding new
products under development and if the individual is going to work for
a firm directly in competition with the business area the person works
in/on, then the person is generally invited to leave immediately. It's
not necessarily a "bum's rush", simply a good business practice to not
keep people around who can learn too much and take it with them when
they go. No one making these decisions is either stupid or naive enough
to expect that someone going to a competitor isn't likely to carry some
of what he knows along with him. And it's not always as easy to prove
as it was in a recent case involving a former DEC employee who took trade
secrets to a competitor.


-Jack

It might also be pointed out that, having decided to move to a different
company, the employee would naturally have divided loyalties.

In my years at Dec, I've seen all manner of leavings, from a direct
firing of someone who tried a coup d'etat on his manager to someone
who left a senior position at Dec to go to a senior position at a
direct competitor, but who worked a final week at Dec to make sure all
his responsibilities were handed off correctly.

So, the policy is, as always, "do the right thing."

Martin.

    I sat in a meeting where a personnel person was informing managers
    how to handle this situation. Note: These were WC4 Software Services
    personnel that were being discussed. 
    
    The managers were told that an unwritten policy existed that employees
    that were leaving under good circumstances to a customer or unrelated
    business should usually work out their notice. Employees that were
    going to competitors or were leaving with a bad attitude or if the
    manager felt it was needed for any good reason, the day they put
    in their notice is the last day they work. They would be paid for
    their entire notice period in these cases. It was asked how to handle
    an employee that notified their manager that they had taken a job
    with a competitor but would not start for two months and that they 
    would be putting in their formal notice in six weeks. The personnel
    person said that they should be asked to leave that day but the
    issue of how long they would be paid was open and they might have
    to be paid for the entire two months. I said at that point 
    that I believe I will be taking a job with IBM two years from now :-).

    				Dick
    

    I have seen various cases. In one case, I had someone that was going
    to Data General. Because he was critical to a project and the project
    was in an area not related to DG's business, he stayed out the month
    notice. This paid off when two years later at DG, he sent an unhappy
    employee to Digital as a good career move. This employee is now
    a development manager responsible for several of our most critical
    projects!
    
    I saw another example in which the individual had high personal
    integrity but recommended that he leave the premises and get off
    all sorts of highly sensitive distribution lists. He worked out
    his month at home as co-author of a book which has since received
    critical acclaim.
    
    So, in both cases, DEC won by applying rule 1.

    Having security watch an employee empty his/her desk and then walk
    them to the door seems like an empty formality.  It seems to me
    that anyone with truly devious intentions would collect whatever
    information/printouts/documentation they wanted, and give their
    notice the next day.
    
    I don't understand what this is supposed to accompl.  
    
    For my own info...are employees expected or required to say where
    their next job will be if they are leaving DEC?  
    

re: .11

It's not an empty formality.  Firstly it sends a message.  Secondly
I've observed that it a common human behavior that loyalty to a
company decreases over time as you 1) think about leaving,
2) start looking, 3) accept an offer, 4) announce your intentions,
and 5) approach your termination date.

In particular, some people (not all) experience a change-of-heart
at step #4 when they are finally committed to leaving and can no
longer easily change their mind.

So the employee that was "not devious" prior to #4 may feel
differently at that point and start thinking, "gee, I really
ought to grab a copy of that listing", or, "this manual might
come in handy".

I believe 90%+ of folks would _not_ do that, but security needs
to be pessimistic about the possibility, and since the employee
usually gets the equivalent of a free vacation, it is not objectively
harmfull (but I imagine it hurts some people's feelings if it
is poorly done).

- greg

	Re .11

	You certainly are not expected or required to say where your
	next job will be!!

	One likes to think that relations with ones coworkers and
	employer will remain amicable, even beyond changing job.
	After all, there are always unexpected synergisms which
	could be profitable to either party.

	But what you plan for your future is no one's business.

	Regards, Robert.

    First, realize how lucky you are, that resignation here is such an
    unusual event.  Over the ten years where I worked before, I saw
    literally *hundreds* of resignations and layoffs, under circumstances
    ranging all the way from "employee moonlighted for a month after taking
    new job to finish old task" to "employee taken into custody by police
    and committed to asylum."  My observation is that the incidence of
    larcenous employees, even counting the worst case cited above, is only
    one or two percent. 
    
    My viewpoint is that my particular profession (technical communication)
    has a small fraternity.  If I took a new job and stole from my old
    employer, or took trade secrets along, I would not only be compromising
    my personal ethical standards, and not just be violating the terms
    of my previous employment, but also be poisoning my reputation in the
    industry.  I know word would get out, and then my name would be
    mud.
    
    I guess I am disturbed by the (few) cases I've seen of resigning
    employees being sent home.  Working on a sensitive project is not a
    sufficient justification; only a pathological case is.  It goes against
    the grain of treating employees well. As a policy, it strikes me as
    undignified, unproductive, and unprofessional, and explicitly based on
    the assumption that the employee is dishonest, but not bright enough to
    do the devilment *before* turning in his resignation. 

    I haven't seen lots of people resigning, but the ONE I did get involved
    with walked away with computer tapes, etc. of internal software.
    Seems this person new for weeks they were leaving and took advantage
    of that fact. They went to a customer and started using the software
    they had pirated there. 
    
    Needless to say, Corp. Security got involved and almost went to
    the point of getting a court order to enter the former employee's
    home, etc.
    
    The really amazing part of all this was that when this person gave
    their notice, they were allowed to finish out their time with the
    company. And we're talking about a system manager type here who
    had pilfered software from "friends" in the software development
    group.
    
    The moral of the story is 1) KNOW YOUR EMPLOYEE'S CHARACTER and
    2) IF THE EMPLOYEE IS AT ALL QUESTIONABLE, ASSUME THE WORST (i.e.
    they were smart enough to already do the damage before the
    announcement) AND REMOVE THEM FROM THEIR NORMAL RESPONSIBILITIES.
    
    While I have no experience or stories in this area, I have always
    heard it through the grapevine that employees privy to special
    things should automatically be given a "vacation" at notice time.
    As a system manager of several machines, I would expect this to
    occur for me if I announced my resignation. If my character was
    suspect, I would expect an investigation into my past activities
    on the system. Better that than have something blow up six months
    from now. 
    
    Personally, I believe it all boils down to who the managers are
    (do they really KNOW the employee?), and who the employee is
    (does the employee have a good sense of professional ethics?).
    
    If I were a manager and had a GOOD employee I would permit them
    to stay to the end no matter what. But that is assuming/risking
    a lot depending on the job.
    
    							Warren
    

    Sometimes, the act of "premature" termination of the employee has
    more to do with that employee's contacts with other employees than
    with possible damage done either by physical means or by theft.
    The conditions leading to the termination may envolve emotional
    and psychological conflicts/etc with others that could lead to further
    disruption of the environment if not terminated quickly and cleanly.
    Both management and peer workers can be envolved.
    
    Jack

    I left DEC some years ago to go to work for DG when they were still a
    real computer company and a competitor.  I gave notice, and fully
    expected to be escorted out the door.  I had access to a great deal of
    sensitive information, much of which would be of benefit in my new job. 
    
    I was asked to stay the full 4 weeks.  I was even asked to attend and
    present at DECUS.  In order to minimize disruption to my current group
    I agreed not to tell anyone that I was leaving, and that a week before
    I departed a mutually acceptable form of notification would be worked
    out. 
    
    My manager, however, called a meeting the day after I left for DECUS
    and announced my intentions.  Some of my direct reports were with me at
    DECUS and heard the news second hand.  I heard of my own departure
    third hand, and in a rather uncomfortable manner. 
    
    Needless to say the downfall of DG was quite apparant during my breif
    stay and I left. I pocketed some nice consulting money for doing next
    to nothing for a few boring months and returned to DEC within a year. 
    

Well that blows away another one of those rumors. :-)

It had been reported somewhere that if you ever went to DG, you wouldn't be 
welcome back at DEC.

Also, I didn't know DG was dead yet as you indicate in your last paragraph.

        Mike

    
       Both parents of a friend work for DG and they were saying the
    other night that the times are getting scary over there.  Not that
    they would lose their jobs, just that they need to stay afloat and
    be innovative enough to compete in the market.
    
                     Debbi

re Note 387.19 by DISSRV::LAVOIE:

>        Both parents of a friend work for DG and they were saying the
>     other night that the times are getting scary over there.  Not that
>     they would lose their jobs, just that they need to stay afloat and
>     be innovative enough to compete in the market.
    
This applies to us, too.  We too need to "be innovative enough to compete in
the market".  It's just that it's easier to be aware of the danger of icebergs
when your ship starts to sink.

Bob

    [Re: .20]: Yes, most companies need to be innovative.  However,
    it's a lot easier for a big corporation to "stay afloat."  IBM,
    for example, could survive if any one of it's product lines were
    to be declared illegal or sell zero units or something.  Digital
    is, I'd judge, on the verge of that status too.  None of us is
    working on a "you bet your company" product.  But I have elsewhere!
    The pressure is no fun...

To get back to the original question, there is issue that nobody has addressed
yet.  It really upset me to see a (perfectly good) fellow employee 
given the "bum's rush" because she decided to better herself elsewhere
in the world.  The damage is not just to the employee him/herself.... (after
all, who wouldn't like extra vacation pay?)... it's to the group that's
left behind.

One thing that happens during the notice period is that the group has
a chance to absorb the impact of the loss, to say goodbye to the person,
resolve any personal issues, hand over business in a non-disruptive way.
The group needs the "grieving" and "healing" process in order to get on 
with things properly.

When a friend of mine was kicked out one day after she gave notice, it
upset me a lot.  I didn't have time to get used to  her being gone.  She
was not on any kind of top-secret project.  It just made me feel that 
I was walking on thin ice--that there's a "you're either with us or 
AGAINST us" attitude.  It wasn't comfortable.  People were left confused
and feeling cut-off, wondering what had happened.  

When I left my previous employer, I worked 10-hour days for weeks to finish
up.  I cared about my project, and even though I was going to a competitor 
to do the same type of project, I didn't want to leave dirty laundry behind (so
to speak). I'd have been really upset if my boss had suspected me of lower
motives than I really had.  

Nina

Re .22:

An employee who is not permitted to work out their severance period may
have been thrown out for insubordination during the act of giving notice
("Take this job and shove it").  Or some other factors may have come into
play which are not general knowledge.

How does the average employee know whether something like this has happened
in the case of any particular colleague?  They may not.  I would not be
surprised if evidence of insubordination would be considered information of
a personal nature that coworkers have no right to be told of.  How would
you like a system where you are not only thrown out of the plant, but where
you manager has the right to tell anyone they meet about the reasons for it
(especially since it is harder for you to present your side of the case
once you are off the property)?  The concept of the "Digital Personal"
security classification exists for a reason, and I would hope that it has
some analogue in verbal communication within Digital.

A consequence of this is that you don't really know if a "(perfectly good)
fellow employee" is in fact "perfectly good" or not.  And given any
employee's right to privacy, it's not management's job to tell you whether
they were a "perfectly good" employee or not.
				/AHM

    .22 .23
    
    Typically a person who goes to a competitor will be ushered out
    the door the same day as their notice is given. This has been the
    case at DEC for as long as I have been here and I believe that it
    is not only fair to the employer (DEC) but to the employee as well.
    
    Digital must legally protect itself and also the employee leaving.
    
    

    [Re: .23]:  Your reply is, I feel, the best argument for a manager
    to be very cautious about using the "bum's rush" tactic.  Given
    that the people whose departure prompted my to enter the base note
    were no DeCastros, I now must wonder what they did to deserve such
    an exit.
    
    [Re: .24]:  You referenced .22 and .23.  Did you read the first
    21 notes?  Based on the ongoing discussion, I would have to say
    the policy seems neither typical, fair, nor reasonable.

< Note 387.23 by DENTON::AMARTIN "Alan H. Martin" >

>(especially since it is harder for you to present your side of the case
>once you are off the property)?  The concept of the "Digital Personal"

This is a good argument against indiscriminate use of the "bum'r rush". One's
coworkers will assume you did something wrong and you are not there to defend
yourself. .22 is right about the adverse effects of not having a chance to say
goodby. One of my coworkers got the bum's rush 4 years ago and had two hours
to get his tail out of here. He was not a good friend but I always had a bad
feeling because I didn't have a chance to say goodby. His manager said he left
in "good standing".

I can think of a number of good reasons for early departures. I prefer that 
term to "bum's rush"!

On the other hand, I have known of some bums who got and deserved a rush.

If I had a reason to ask, I think I would have to believe it if I were told 
someone left in good standing.

I think it is a fairly common practice in any industry where inside knowledge, 
and I am not referring so SEC type of inside knowledge, could be damaging. It 
might also unnecessarily place suspicion on a former employee.

When I left one former employer, I made it a point of asking if they wanted me 
to stay for my full notice period or accelerate my debriefings.

>This is a good argument against indiscriminate use of the "bum'r rush". One's
>coworkers will assume you did something wrong and you are not there to defend
>yourself.

I hope they would know me better... defend myself against what?