Conference 7.286::digital

        Start by getting the U.S. Personnel Policies and Procedures manual
        (you can access it via VTX using the keyword ORANGEBOOK) and read
        the sections on relocation and business travel.  There are several
        policies that cover this. 
        
        In a nutshell, if you claim you don't need relocation because you
        have a local address in California, so the hiring manager doesn't
        have to justify the relocation, then that's why the hiring manager
        (i.e., Digital) doesn't have to pay for your travel and other
        expenses for the interview.  It's a two-edged sword -- you can't
        have it both ways.  You see, the justification for paying your
        interviewing expense is exactly the same as the justification for
        paying your relocation expense.  (This is my interpretation of the
        policy; you might find a manager who is willing to interpret it
        differently, but I doubt it.) 
        
        As for filling jobs with "out-of-state" people without providing
        relocation expenses, that's hardly relevant.  Most states are big
        enough that DEC might be expected to pay relocation when
        transferring someone *within* the state, from one office to
        another.  For example, moving someone from northern California
        (say, the San Francisco bay area) to southern California (say, San
        Diego) is as far as or farther than moving them from, say,
        Marlboro, MA to Merrimack, NH.  It isn't the state boundary, it's
        the distance involved.  The underlying rules are due to I.R.S.
        rules about what business expenses are deductable (basically, DEC
        can deduct relocation costs as an expense of doing business, as
        long as they are done within I.R.S. rules). 
        
        Now, when you try to get a manager to transfer you to a new job
        *without* providing relocation, they still have to buck the system
        (the official policies), and they run into the extra problem that
        you perhaps can't really "sign away" the relocation benefit. After
        all, the policies spell out, in detail, when it must be offered,
        and in your case, the policy is pretty clear that it *must* be
        offered, unless the job is pretty close to your present job (which
        is not what you want). 
        
        Once you've read the policies for yourself (there are several that
        apply), if you still have questions, why don't you talk to your
        local Personnel Services Administrator and/or your manager? (I
        trust you have already told your manager that you are looking for
        a new job in California.  If he or she is a good manager, he or
        she will be helpful in your search.) 
        
        Good luck!
        
        Tom

    
    
    I've heard of a situation where an employee said he wanted to move
    and was willing to foot the relo costs on their own.  The hiring
    manager agreed and the process began.  The employee called personnel
    to get their recommendation on a moving company. 
    
    Personnel said why do you need that - it's all done for you.  So
    personnel realized what was going on they said it was against policy.
    The hiring manager had to pay relocation for the employee after
    all.  (don't know the end of the story - seems like that manager
    would not have been to happy with his/her new hire)               
                                                       
    So, it seems that either you have to find a job with relo available
    or convince the manager that he/she needs to assign relo benefits
    to the job you want.                               
                                                       
    Good luck.
    
    JO'R
    

    
    re .2
    
    I could be wrong, but if a hiring req is filled out, and the hiring
    manager checks the appropriate block stating that no relocation
    will be paid, then the employee makes the decision on whether or
    not he will apply for the job and cover the expenses himself.
    
    
    Lou

        Re: .3 -- I know it sounds simple, but it may not BE simple. Once
        the manager decides that the job *can* be filled from the local
        labor pool, the manager may very well be in violation of corporate
        policy in accepting a transfer of an employee from outside the
        local labor pool.  I don't personally know the rules well enough
        to be able to say with certainty whether this is the case, and I
        doubt that *most* of the respondents in this conference know,
        either (although there have been some replies, from time to time,
        from people who are recruiters and *might* know the rules better
        than you or I). 
        
        It's fun to speculate, however..
        
        Tom

	To my knowledge, the only criteria a cost center manager looks at when 
making a position relocatable is his ability to absorb the expense hit of a 
full internal relocation - house buy, closing costs, temporary living,
household goods, etc.  An internal reloc can hit a cost center for $40-50K in
ONE quarter! Otherwise, the hiring manager can hire anyone, local pool or not.

	The biggest no-no about internal relocation that I have heard from
Personnel is the offering of PARTIAL reloc, say, household goods only, or
"I'll sell my house on this end, you pick up that end" even though the
employee is eligible for the full freight.  It has to be all or nothing,
apparently, for internal moves.  EEO folks probably drive that policy.

	New hire moves are another matter.  They get at least temporary living
at the hiring site, maybe household goods too(?).  I have known more than one
case where an external hire from outside the geography was made over an
internal reloc due to cost considerations, even though the position had reloc.

	When the Florida District fired up 2 years ago, the SWS manager had NO 
internal reloc on any new positions.  His philosophy was that moving to 
Florida was a benefit, so you can foot the freight!  He got at least two 
internals I know of, maybe more.  A number of outside hires, also.

	I will admit, this business of not reimbursing for interviews if there 
is no reloc is new to me.  Does that apply to outsiders who have to travel to 
the interview, too? 

        The rules for people who are already DEC employees are different
        from the rules for people who aren't.  And there are rules that
        say a manager has to try to fill the job via internal transfer
        before he or she can hire outside. 
        
        If you'd start by reading the policies in the Orange Book, you'd
        see that many of the questions that are being asked are already
        answered there. 
        
        Tom

    I am a Canadian Employee who is facing a group relocation from 
    the Ottawa office to the Toronto office. Based on the following
    criteria I would like to solicit opinions on wether the relocation
    policy as it stands seems equitable.
    
    1)The median price of a home in Ottawa is $128,000
    2)The median price of a home in Toronto is $256,000
    3)Toronto is the 5th most expensive location in the world 
      to find a home.
    4)Since 1986 the price of a home in Toronto has increased by
      81%.
    5)The relocation policy covering Toronto relocations was compliled
      in 1984 and hasn't been change since.
    
    After consultation with a Toronto firm that specializes in relocation,
    they informed me that at least 75% of the companies who relocate
    employee's to Toronto are offering either interest free loans
    of up to $100,000 for 5 years or are covering the interest on the
    extra $100,000 mortgage that an employee must assume in order to
    be able to buy a home in Toronto.  
    When it was decided that my department was to relocate, 70% of
    the employee's said no. Of that 70% a majority left the company
    for jobs elsewhere. The primary reason for their decision was
    due to the fact that the way the relocation policy was setup
    would make it impossible for them to find affordable housing
    within a 60 mile radius of the new office. 
    
    My questions are
    
    1)If you were asked to relocate knowing that you would have to
      effectively double your mortgage payments (+ $100,000) with no assitance
      would you do it?
    2)Would a refusal rate of 70% indicate that there may be deficiencies
     in the relocation program?
    3)Would the loss of 70% of your experienced employee's be justified
      by the savings resulting from an incomplete relocation policy.
    
    

    If that happened to me, I believe I'd seek employment elsewhere
    within Digital.  There are plenty of Digital organizations that
    need good people, and many of them are in affordable locations.
    
    To answer your question, I agree that the relocation policy could
    use some changes, and your example is certainly one of them.  But
    there are other alternatives to consider when faced with such a
    situation, and a transfer to a more affordable location is one of
    them.
    
    						Pat

    Ottawa use to be the Canadian Regional Headquarters, now the HQ is being
moved to TO. There aren't that many jobs available.

DEC in NE is big, thus no problem moving around within digital, should one
facility move. If DEC decided to move all of it's facilities from NE to
California, and housing there is double the amount, what can u do? 

 If you can't afford the housing there, then you start looking elsewhere,
as 70% of the people did.


 - carmelo

    RE: Ottawa'a move to Toronto...
    
    Believe it or not, its not really much difference from an office
    moving from Manchester NH to say Sudbury, Mass...
    
    The housing is expensive in Toronto, and I know several people who
    are not pleased about the proposed move back to Toronto.. Last I
    talked with the people I know up there, the move was not totally
    100% an actuality... Has that edict actually been announced yet?
    
    Have you looked at the other jobs that are available?.. How about
    Phase 2 across the lawn?... Or the field service office in Ottawa,
    or even Hull?...
    
    Have you looked at jobs in Mass? (The housing is just as bad in Mass
    as in Toronto though)...
    
    Was just wondering...
    
    Gale