T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
814.2 | I work for a DSWM ... | YUPPIE::COLE | I'd rather be burned out than RUSTED out! | Tue May 16 1989 17:29 | 2 |
| ... with open PSS jobs into which we had hoped to hire! This is the
first I have heard of an "official" freeze!
|
814.3 | | LESLIE::LESLIE | Andy ��� Leslie, CSSE | Tue May 16 1989 17:44 | 6 |
| Additionally, Field Service have frozen International Relocation
Hirings "until further notice".
This has also affected CSSE as we are part of FS.
Andy
|
814.4 | Object: avoid making # of DECcies tomorrow > today | WHYVAX::DELBALSO | I (spade) my (dog face) | Tue May 16 1989 20:20 | 22 |
| In defference to .2, and on the positive side of the posting in .0, it doesn't
seem to say you can't fill req's - it just says you can't fill 'em with
external hires. Oh, I know, I've crusaded this issue too long in this
conference and others but the point is still (ahem, read my lips, if necessary)
"DON'T INCREASE THE CORPORATE HEADCOUNT IF YOU WANT TO SEE THE NO LAYOFF
TRADITION UPHELD!! GET THE PICTURE?"
I'll betcha you can find internal people with the skills you need for your
PSS committments - perhaps your DSWM should go back to corporate and ensure
that they'll guarantee relocation or whatever is necessary to cement the
deal.
However, on the negative side of .0, why is it that these things are worded
using such terms as "Dept: US Management" and "All US employees", when what
they really mean is "FIELD", or "SALES", or whatever organization it is that
Dave is responsible for? The problem is that unaffected people (i.e. those of
us not directly or indirectly responsible to Dave's organization) often
feel that "he means us" - when he doesn't.
-Jack
(Sorry, Dave - I know your heart's in the right place.)
PS. I _DO_ believe the external hiring freeze applies to all of _US_.
|
814.5 | What about college kids for the summer? | ELWOOD::BERNARD | | Wed May 17 1989 12:20 | 9 |
| How do you think this will affect the College summer hiring program
for temporary positions? My son was interviewed last week and has
been waiting anxiously by the phone for a call. He was told that
there were openings to be filled, so can I assume that the company
still plans to bring in some summer help?
Paul
|
814.6 | Summer hires probably NOT affected | DR::BLINN | Bashed but unabashed | Wed May 17 1989 14:32 | 6 |
| The summer hire program is probably independent of this, since
summer hires are "temporary" help, and the program is, I believe,
funded already. Why don't you call the Corporate Employment
Manager's office at DTN 251-1401 and ask (and report back)?
Tom
|
814.7 | Some restrictions this year | STAR::MALONEY | | Wed May 17 1989 15:47 | 16 |
|
I just called the Corporate Employment Manager's office as
suggested. They referred me to the College Relations office,
who told me that there is a freeze on summer hires. Students
who are in the Minority and Women Scholarship program may
still be hired for summer openings, however.
I had to check, because my brother was a summer hire in the
Ultrix Engineering group last year. They wanted him back,
but were told that there was a freeze. He has taken another
job to earn money, and is looking for an internship opportunity
at Digital to continue learning. If you know of such a program
for someone with C and Unix experience, let me know.
Jim
|
814.8 | | MAAFA1::WYOUNG | Yow! Lemme outta here! | Wed May 17 1989 16:25 | 11 |
|
re: .0
According to what I have been told, what this means is that if I
find a position elsewhere in the company, I cannot be replaced.
So, if I find another position, it is up to my manager as to whether
or not I may take it.
Warren Young
MAA USIS
|
814.9 | Something is amiss.... | GRANPA::MZARUDZKI | It's HOT DOWN here..... | Wed May 17 1989 16:47 | 7 |
| re -.1
So if it is up to YOUR manager you are NOT going anywhere. Now
what manager in their right mind would let people go KNOWING
they cannot be replaced? This is not right.
Mike Z.
|
814.10 | | LESLIE::LESLIE | Andy ��� Leslie, CSSE | Wed May 17 1989 17:40 | 8 |
| A Manager mandated with the reduction of his group. There are quite a
few such groups, especially in Manufacturing right now.
I hope this explains the aims of .0 more clearly.
..and no, I don't like it much either.
- Andy
|
814.11 | but does this apply to the entire US? 'tis unclear.. | TROPPO::HENRY | | Wed May 17 1989 21:51 | 6 |
| as far as i can tell, it stil isn't clear if this applies to the
entire US or just to grainger's operation. any clues?
-- henry
--------
|
814.12 | | LESLIE::LESLIE | Andy ��� Leslie, CSSE | Thu May 18 1989 06:31 | 4 |
| It applies to US *AREA* functions. Not Corporate, as far as I know.
Although there is probably a very similar scheme for corporate groups.
Andy
|
814.13 | Ho hum. More manager bashing, huh? | WHYVAX::DELBALSO | I (spade) my (dog face) | Thu May 18 1989 07:05 | 16 |
| re: < Note 814.9 by GRANPA::MZARUDZKI "It's HOT DOWN here....." >
> So if it is up to YOUR manager you are NOT going anywhere. Now
> what manager in their right mind would let people go KNOWING
> they cannot be replaced?
C'mon, Mike. Give management a little more credit than that, will ya?
A _lot_ of responsible managers transcend the immediate problems of
attrition with concerns for the welfare and career opportunities of
good employees that they care for both personally and professionally.
Letting a good employee make a good move is far better for the employee
and DEC in general, than trying to hang on to them when they don't
want to stay, which smacks of anal retentiveness.
-Jack
|
814.14 | DEC should come 1st, Dept/Org thereafter ! | LLOYDJ::OSTIGUY | Oh Sugar | Thu May 18 1989 09:26 | 13 |
| Right on Jack (.13) re. .9
Many of us do believe that our first Support is to the COMPANY
before it is to our particular Department (unfortunately not all
of us) and as Jack says, if you do not support your people you
are not a good manager. Good managers know how to pull up there
socks and adjust etc. Certainly cruical positions and personnel
will be looked at very closely but in truth how many cruical
positions exist in organization with multiple personnel...? One
or two perhaps but every move is an opportunity for growth for
someone else into crucial positions etc.
Lloyd
|
814.15 | I agree completely, however... | MAAFA1::WYOUNG | Yow! Lemme outta here! | Thu May 18 1989 11:35 | 16 |
|
Re: Last 2 -
Well, as no one here has found another position since the memos
came down, the actual policy has not been tested. Time will tell...
Be aware I speak with 2 years' experience under my current manager,
and that management philosophies may vary greatly throughout
different areas of the company - what is obvious to you as the
"right thing" may not be top priority to the powers-that-be here.
Warren Young
P.S. to Mike Z. - 'Bout time to change yer personal_name, innit?
;')
|
814.16 | Always company/employee employee/company 1ST! | GRANPA::MZARUDZKI | So this is DIGITAL!, I like | Thu May 18 1989 11:45 | 14 |
|
re -.1
The company is better off letting the employee move on. After
all it is in the Orange book. I.e. A manager works with their
employee to scope a path. If the manager is unresponsive the employee
should scope their own path. Of course you should let the manager
know of your plans.
You can get what you want if you want it BAD enough.. Warren. Keep
trying. Hang in there. Every DOG has his day. etc. etc. etc.
-Mike Z.
|
814.17 | Some summer hires apparently | ISTG::ENGHOLM | Larry Engholm | Fri May 19 1989 01:30 | 9 |
| Re .7
> They referred me to the College Relations office,
> who told me that there is a freeze on summer hires.
We supposedly have a summer student starting in the next two weeks. He
worked with us last year and doesn't seem like a member of an obvious
minority group. (This is in the US.)
Larry
|