T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
1618.1 | TFSO3: I think this is still valid | IMTDEV::BRUNO | Father Gregory | Mon Sep 30 1991 18:19 | 110 |
| Jan. 9, 1991
Worldwide News LIVE WIRE
New phase of U.S. downsizing announced
Increasingly intense competitive pressure within the computer industry --
business practices, technological advances and manufacturing efficiencies --
are placing added pressures on the company's cost structure, in spite of
ongoing cost reduction efforts that focused on increased productivity and
efficiency and two voluntary downsizing programs.
An analysis of the results of these efforts has been completed and was
reviewed this week by the Corporate Operations Committee and the Executive
Committee. This analysis shows that those cost reduction efforts, while
impressive, have simply not been enough, in light of the increased pressures
applied by economic conditions.
As a result, a new phase of the U.S. downsizing effort, involving involuntary
selection methods, has been approved effective immediately. The decision to
move into a new phase was finalized yesterday.
Worldwide News LIVE WIRE
New phase of U.S. downsizing announced
Increasingly intense competitive pressure within the computer industry --
business practices, technological advances and manufacturing efficiencies --
are placing added pressures on the company's cost structure, in spite of
ongoing cost reduction efforts that focused on increased productivity and
efficiency and two voluntary downsizing programs.
An analysis of the results of these efforts has been completed and was
reviewed this week by the Corporate Operations Committee and the Executive
Committee. This analysis shows that those cost reduction efforts, while
impressive, have simply not been enough, in light of the increased pressures
applied by economic conditions.
As a result, a new phase of the U.S. downsizing effort, involving involuntary
selection methods, has been approved effective immediately. The decision to
move into a new phase was finalized yesterday.
Worldwide News LIVE WIRE
New phase of U.S. downsizing, cont'd
As we move ahead into this phase, it is critical for everyone to try to
grasp the full impact of the intense competitive and economic forces at
play. Those pressures are driving fundamental changes in this company and
this industry. And even as business improves, we can no longer expect things
to "return to normal," as many of us assumed in past economic downturns.
This phase is different in two ways from prior phases. It will involve
involuntary methodology, and while a financial support package will be
offered, it will be somewhat less generous.
While we need to move ahead quickly, we also intend to proceed in a rational
and orderly way that will not disrupt business. This program is a U.S.
program. Other downsizing programs will continue to be implemented outside
the U.S., based upon business conditions, local laws, customs, and
traditions, on a country-by-country basis.
Worldwide News LIVE WIRE
New phase of U.S. downsizing, cont'd
Regarding methodology, two primary factors will determine whether an employee
is selected: 1) his or her work has gone away; 2) he or she is selected from
a larger group being reduced based on performance (i.e., the last documented
performance rating, as indicated on the employee's most recent performance
evaluation). If additional selection steps are required, they will be based
on additional performance criteria (those details are being further refined
and will be finalized shortly.)
The elements of the financial support package include a lump sum payment
based on years of service to the company; maintenance of medical, dental,
and life insurance coverage for a period represented by the total payments,
not to exceed one year; formal outplacement/employment assistance;
and, where applicable, five-year acceleration of any restricted stock
options. This latter element is subject to approval by the Compensation
Stock Option Committee (CSOC). There is no open-window period as before.
Worldwide News LIVE WIRE
New phase of U.S. downsizing, cont'd
Though the manner in which the payment will be made has been structured
differently than in previous programs to accommodate certain legal
requirements, the total payments will be as follows:
0 - 2 years of service 13 weeks of pay
3 - 10 years of service 13 weeks of pay, plus three weeks
of pay for every year of service
between three and ten years.
11 - 20 years of service 37 weeks of pay, plus four weeks
of pay for every year of service
between eleven and twenty years.
77 weeks of pay will be the maximum
financial bridge available.
Worldwide News LIVE WIRE
New phase of U.S. downsizing, cont'd
The progress of this program will be assessed periodically, and we will
endeavor to communicate relevant information to managers and employees as
quickly as possible through the appropriate communication channels.
|
1618.2 | RUMOR | GSMOKE::GCHARBONNEAU | | Mon Sep 30 1991 18:29 | 2 |
| The new rumor is 13 plus 2 for every year.
I HOPE THIS IS WRONG.
|
1618.3 | | IMTDEV::BRUNO | Father Gregory | Mon Sep 30 1991 19:15 | 31 |
| The package in .1 is indeed still valid. The way it is paid-out is this:
1. Everyone chosen is paid weekly for 9 weeks, even though they are
not coming to work. They remain on the books as active employees
(this means that they are also in ELF for those 9 weeks).
2. Then, they are paid a lump-sum according to this schedule.
Years of Weeks of Pay
Full Time in Lump Sum
-------- -------------
0-2 4
3 7
4 10
5 13
6 16
7 19
8 22
9 25
10 28
11 32
12 36
13 40
14 44
15 48
16 52
17 56
18 60
19 64
20 or more 68
|
1618.4 | | MCIS5::PAPPALARDO | A Pure Hunter | Tue Oct 01 1991 15:55 | 11 |
|
RE:3
So the 9 weeks are subtracted from the total?
Examp::;; 14 years = 40wks...you subtract 9-40 and you get 31 weeks as
a lump-sum????????/
Also, you subtract from the lump whatever you pay per week for medical?
|
1618.5 | Give it to me ... Please! | PEACHS::ADAMS | | Tue Oct 01 1991 15:57 | 13 |
| I WANT THE BUYOUT!!!!
Any idea on how one gets their name on the "list"?!?!
I have approached my management regarding my interest in the buyout,
and they have (in typical Digital style) tabled it ... even though
I have little to keep me busy.
Funny ... I thought Digital was serious about down-sizing.
Suggestions?
Regards,
Teresa Adams
|
1618.6 | | ICS::CROUCH | Sugar Magnolia blossoms slowly | Tue Oct 01 1991 16:00 | 5 |
| If you really want to leave then just pack your bags, turn in
your badge and leave.
Jim C.
|
1618.7 | | IMTDEV::BRUNO | Father Gregory | Tue Oct 01 1991 16:06 | 18 |
| RE: <<< Note 1618.4 by MCIS5::PAPPALARDO "A Pure Hunter" >>>
>So the 9 weeks are subtracted from the total?
No, it is paid to you on a weekly basis for the first 9 weeks.
>Examp::;; 14 years = 40wks...you subtract 9-40 and you get 31 weeks as
>a lump-sum????????/
Right. The 9 weeks has already been paid to you before you get
the lump sum.
>Also, you subtract from the lump whatever you pay per week for medical?
I don't think so, I believe that you will be billed by the
insurance company for your premiums.
Greg
|
1618.8 | DEC's a great company ... Few WANT to leave! | PEACHS::ADAMS | | Tue Oct 01 1991 16:34 | 11 |
| Re. 6
Perhaps you miss the point .... leaving per say is not the issue.
If an organization has several under utilized employees in senior
positions due to lack of business, it would behoove Digital and its
stockholders to let any interested party take advantage of a buy out.
It makes sense ... its the right thing to do for the company ... but
for political reasons it probably won't happen.
|
1618.9 | What happens to OPT OUT? | DECWET::MONTOYA | | Wed Oct 02 1991 18:38 | 5 |
| RE: .7
What happens if you are in the "OPT OUT" option for health insurance?
Do you get a lump sum payment on the "OPT OUT" option equal to the
number of weeks of your separation package?
|
1618.10 | | IMTDEV::BRUNO | Father Gregory | Thu Oct 03 1991 01:12 | 13 |
| RE: <<< Note 1618.9 by DECWET::MONTOYA >>>
>What happens if you are in the "OPT OUT" option for health insurance?
>Do you get a lump sum payment on the "OPT OUT" option equal to the
>number of weeks of your separation package?
According to the TFSO-3 pamphlet, you will be paid the Opt Out
payment weekly, for the 9 Week period, but the Opt Out amount will
NOT be included in your lump sum. You will, however, have the
opportunity to change to any of the other Digital-offerered health
plans, at the end of the 9 Week period.
Greg
|
1618.11 | Can you double dip? | KARHU::TURNER | | Thu Oct 03 1991 10:50 | 4 |
| How does the buyout affect your legibility for unemployment? Are you
inelgible until whatever number of weeks? Or?
john
|
1618.12 | Yes | SAURUS::AICHER | | Thu Oct 03 1991 10:58 | 4 |
| This is considered an INVOLUNTARY separation. Therefore you
should be eligible after the nine weekly checks.
Mark
|
1618.13 | What are the facts? | SA1794::MOULTONB | | Thu Oct 03 1991 12:50 | 9 |
| Theres alot of rumors and mis-information regarding unemployment
benefits so I went directly to the unemployment office to ask them
directly about this. I was told that regardless of the type of termination
ie; plant closing, individual layoff, firing, in general, if you were
paid a severance package or buyout, you ARE NOT entitled to unemployment
benefits. But I hear different versions of this from different people.
But anyways, that the official word directly from the unemployment agency.
I'd appreciate more input on this subject.
|
1618.14 | | BAGELS::REED | | Thu Oct 03 1991 13:02 | 11 |
|
Re: .13
That is how it was explained to a friend of mine that was also
"rewarded" by Digital for 10+ years of labor with never a rating
less than a 2! He can apply when his "x" weeks run out. (He was
given his 10 year Certificate of Achiivement along with his
"package" documentation.)
|
1618.15 | | IMTDEV::BRUNO | Father Gregory | Thu Oct 03 1991 13:30 | 11 |
| The official position in Colorado is different. As long as it was
involuntary, you are eligible for unemployment compensation AFTER the
X-number-of-weeks have expired. If you got a lump-sum equivalent to
37 weeks of pay, then you are eligible after 37 weeks.
The only thing I'm not sure of is whether or not the agreement one
must sign in order to get the severance package specifically waives
their ability to get compensation. That is the only complication I
can think of right now.
Greg
|
1618.16 | Be extremely careful! | BTOVT::GREGORYJ | Welcome to the Grand Illusion... | Thu Oct 03 1991 13:42 | 12 |
| re .13
It was explained the same way to a friend who "volunteered" for the
involuntary, but evidently a key point was left out. According to my
friend, the people in charge of the package at the particular DEC site
in which he worked, left out the fact that he would be deemed ineligible
for unemployment for up to 2 years (so he says)!
I kinda feel sorry for him, he should of checked out everything with the
unemployment people. Then again hindsight is 20-20!
Jim.
|
1618.17 | | SMOOT::ROTH | Do not hold in hand. Light fuse and run!! | Thu Oct 03 1991 14:19 | 8 |
| I think it all depends on what DEC tells your state unemployment
folkes your status is.
One fellow here a while back 'took the package' and had to do battle with
DEC & the state board... he finally was able to get himself classified
as a laid-off worker instead of a I-left-voluntarily worker.
Lee
|
1618.18 | | NEURON::VIOLA | it ain't paradise, but it used to be | Thu Oct 03 1991 14:19 | 15 |
| Re: DECwrecks
According to a friend who got the 'package', if you have a Plan A
car, you can keep the car for one month for $30.00/week or tell DEC
to come and pick it up.
At the end of the month, you either buy the car, or have DEC come and
pick it up.
Re: Unemployment
This varies from state-to-state. In Georgia you are eleigable immediatly,
others after 9 weeks, others after x weeks payout....
-Marc
|
1618.19 | Please clarify your requests and answers | A1VAX::BARTH | sometimes the dragon wins. | Fri Oct 04 1991 11:02 | 10 |
| RE: unemployment
Would all further discussions in this stream relating to unemployment
benefits in the U.S. please list the STATE for which information is
desired/relevant?
Thanks. It's much easier to tell what's already been discussed that
way.
Karl B.
|
1618.20 | | WKRP::LENNIG | Dave (N8JCX), MIG, Cincinnati | Fri Oct 04 1991 14:28 | 10 |
| I'm just curious if Digital has shown any flexability in the timing of
the payouts...
What with the impending next round, when you take the 9 weeks and look
at where that puts you in the calender year, I suspect many people would
get to keep a lot more of the lump sum payment if it was paid after Jan
1, rather than being added on top of CY91 income. Can people request
the lump-sum be deferred?
Dave
|
1618.21 | no choice on payout timing | POBOX::KAPLOW | Set the WAYBACK machine for 1982 | Sat Oct 05 1991 12:54 | 3 |
| I've asked this question of personnel and was told that this was
NOT an option :-(
|
1618.22 | Able to collect in Mass. | CIMNET::WOJDAK | Rich Wojdak DTN:291-7787 | Mon Oct 07 1991 13:13 | 5 |
| A guy here got the package and after his package ran out (in his case
it was only 13 weeks) he was able to collect unemployment.This is in
Mass.
|
1618.23 | How is vacation pay figured into the package formula? | MAATJE::JANSEN | | Tue Oct 15 1991 16:54 | 8 |
| A rumor I heard is that accumulated vacation is not paid out, but just taken
as part of the nine weeks during which a person is still on Digital's payroll.
Can anyone confirm/correct this?
Thanks,
Frank
|
1618.24 | | BAGELS::REED | | Tue Oct 15 1991 16:58 | 6 |
|
.23
That'd be tacky! Hope that's wrong.
|
1618.25 | | SMEGIT::ARNOLD | Some assembly required | Tue Oct 15 1991 21:37 | 4 |
| re .24, since when did "tacky" become an attribute to be avoided in
this whole process? :-(
Jon
|
1618.26 | full vacation pay is at end of 9 week period | POBOX::KAPLOW | Have package, will travel | Tue Oct 15 1991 22:14 | 4 |
| You are paid for outstanding vacation on the last week of the 9
week period. You continue to accumulate vacation time during those
9 weeks. I do not know what happens if you are at or near your
vacation limit at termination.
|
1618.27 | Why isn't TFSO in VTX somewhere? | POBOX::KAPLOW | Have package, will travel | Tue Oct 15 1991 22:16 | 5 |
| Actually, I don't know why they just don't put the TFSO
information in the orange book or VTX somewhere, so that everyone
in the company has access to it. It would eliminate many
questions, and properly make the information to ALL employees.
|
1618.28 | | JUMBLY::DAY | No Good Deed Goes Unpunished | Wed Oct 16 1991 20:06 | 5 |
| ... or even in that pretty little folder you (used to ?) get on
joining Digital ..
m
|
1618.29 | the warm fuzzies | CSC32::K_BOUCHARD | Ken Bouchard CXO3-2 | Fri Oct 25 1991 15:49 | 4 |
| Hmmmm...imagine getting information about TFSO when you start work at
DEC. Really gives one that secure feeling!
Ken
|
1618.30 | ending and beginning... | WLDWST::EVANS | | Tue Oct 29 1991 12:07 | 6 |
|
When exactly does TFSO 3 end .....and TFSO start??. I'm real curious !
thanks,
j
|
1618.31 | ?? | PCOJCT::REIS | God is my refuge | Tue Oct 29 1991 13:56 | 9 |
| I have a question that maybe someone out there can answer.
Isn't it against the law for a company to offer a package that starts
out as one thing and as time passes becomes less? I'm talking about how
it started as 13 weeks pay plus a lump sum and it's now 9 weeks plus
the lump sum? Is this allowed? Or grounds for a class action suit?
Just curious,
Trudy
|
1618.32 | not a lawyer but ... | CVG::THOMPSON | Radical Centralist | Tue Oct 29 1991 14:12 | 16 |
| > Isn't it against the law for a company to offer a package that starts
> out as one thing and as time passes becomes less? I'm talking about how
> it started as 13 weeks pay plus a lump sum and it's now 9 weeks plus
> the lump sum? Is this allowed? Or grounds for a class action suit?
It's not very likely that our offerings are against the law. After all
there are a lot of people who have gotten these packages and a lot of
lawyers out there. I have heard talk that making the package *better*
can cause some legal problems. That was the reason I was told the
packages would only get less generous. I also believe that the legal
people have been very involved in the design of all these packages.
In the US one can sue for almost anything. Winning is a separate issue
though.
Alfred
|
1618.33 | | IMTDEV::BRUNO | Father Gregory | Tue Oct 29 1991 14:39 | 15 |
| RE: <<< Note 1618.31 by PCOJCT::REIS "God is my refuge" >>>
>I'm talking about how it started as 13 weeks pay plus a lump sum and
>it's now 9 weeks plus the lump sum?
You have a misconception. It is not less money, it is merely
being distributed differently. The real drop in money took place
between TFSO 1 and TFSO 2 (from 40 weeks + down to 13 weeks +). The
difference between TFSO 2 and TFSO 3 (where we are now) is the benefit
changes.
The actual amount being paid out is listed in 1618.1, but the way it
is paid-out is listed in 1618.3.
Greg
|
1618.34 | Unreasonable expectation | CORREO::BELDIN_R | Pull us together, not apart | Wed Oct 30 1991 06:20 | 14 |
| re .31
It is unreasonable to expect a law to control how a company runs a
program that, for the company, is purely voluntary! In most companies,
you are told that two weeks from now you will have no job. Period. No
package, no chance to look for another job, no nothing!
In contrast, there is a story going 'round that IBM improved its
package and was sued by those who had taken the earlier one.
Of course, as Alfred commented, you can sue for anything.
Dick
|
1618.35 | | PCOJCT::REIS | God is my refuge | Wed Oct 30 1991 11:40 | 6 |
| I wasn't looking to sue anybody. Just trying to find out if they could
legally reduce the package. The reason I asked was out of curiosity
because it had been mentioned to me that it was illegal!! My questions
have been answered, thanks to all who replied.
Trudy
|
1618.36 | Better or Worse? | EN::LAMBARTH | Dave Lambarth | Wed Oct 30 1991 14:40 | 20 |
| re .34
The reason that IBM was being sued by those who had taken an earlier
package that was not as generous as a later one was that they had been
told that the one they took was the best that they would get. That
was not true. Undue pressure was also brought to bear to have them
take the earlier package. Also, the difference between the packages
was quite large.
In order to avoid this problem, Digital has stated that subsequent
packages will be less generous that previous ones, as well as to
very clearly state when each phase of transition begins and ends.
Thus, they state that each phase will be based on the business
conditions that exist at the time the proposed phase was decided
upon.
Bottom line: I'd bet quite a lot that the packages won't get
better, but may be different.
|
1618.37 | Once out, can you come back? | INFACT::HILGENBERG | | Thu Nov 07 1991 13:42 | 5 |
| Are there any rules about re-hiring a person who has been given the package,
either directly or as a third-party contractor? Can they be re-hired... ever?
Is there an amount of time in which they cannot be re-hired?
Kyra
|
1618.38 | About being re-hired... | WMOIS::BALSAMO_A | The Rock that is higher than I | Thu Nov 07 1991 14:30 | 14 |
| RE: 1618.37 <INFACT::HILGENBERG>
>Are there any rules about re-hiring a person who has been given the
>package, either directly or as a third-party contractor? Can they be
>re-hired... ever? Is there an amount of time in which they cannot be
>re-hired?
I just attended an information meeting to answer concerns about the
TFSO Phase III package. One of the questions asked and answered was can
you be re-hired after being laid off if things got better in the company
and they started hiring again. The answer was that there is a 1 year
waiting period required before you can be re-hired.
Tony
|
1618.39 | | WKRP::LENNIG | Dave (N8JCX), MIG, Cincinnati | Thu Nov 07 1991 18:28 | 5 |
| re: Back as a contractor...
I know of two people in my field office that were back almost
immediately as contractors. Of course, how long they'll be around
is another question...
|
1618.40 | | ASICS::LESLIE | Andy Leslie | Fri Nov 08 1991 02:24 | 5 |
| .37 The package differs the world over - in the UK people are rumoured
to have been back in the office as a contracto the week after they
left, clutching a fat brown envelope...
- andy
|
1618.41 | practices and policies | CORREO::BELDIN_R | Pull us together, not apart | Fri Nov 08 1991 06:52 | 8 |
| Regardless of how or why one leaves, there is a waiting period before
you can be rehired as a regular employee. There is also a waiting
period before Digital may do any business directly with you. As a
contractor, represented by another company, these limitations don't
apply. Digital has been known to request that contracting companies
not bring in previous employees.
Dick
|
1618.42 | 6 months or TFSO length | POBOX::KAPLOW | Free the DCU 88,000 11/12/91! | Fri Nov 08 1991 13:04 | 3 |
| The TFSO material I got says that I cannot work for Digital,
either as an employee or a contractor, for a period of 6 months,
or the length of your TFSO package, whichever is greater.
|
1618.43 | | MIZZOU::SHERMAN | ECADSR::Sherman DTN 223-3326 | Fri Nov 08 1991 13:12 | 6 |
| Isn't it ironic? "Layoff" was a term used instead of "fired" because it
meant that you were not employed but that your employer would hire you
back once things got better. Now, it means that anyone BUT your employer
can hire you back once things get better! ;^)
Steve
|
1618.44 | I don't believe it foor a second... | CSC32::K_BOUCHARD | Ken Bouchard CXO3-2 | Fri Nov 08 1991 17:07 | 5 |
|
If you get layed off and there is a business need for your services,you can be re-hired
one day later. Don't forget who made the rules...
Ken
|
1618.45 | | BSS::P_KABBE | | Mon Nov 11 1991 16:12 | 10 |
|
My husband took the package and personnel said 2 years, that is
either as a contract or regular employee, I didn't believe local
personnel so I called corp and got the same story. Yet I know people
who've been hired back into teh same job as a temp.
PKB
|
1618.46 | loophole...naturally | DENVER::DAVISGB | Jag Mechanic | Mon Nov 11 1991 17:19 | 6 |
| Can't be an employee?
Can't be a contractor?
That's OK, become the EMPLOYEE of a CONTRACTOR, and you can be hired.
|
1618.47 | is 9 weeks > 60 days??? | KOLFAX::WHITMAN | Acid Rain Burns my Bass | Fri Dec 06 1991 12:47 | 12 |
| Please excuse me if this has been covered before:
I believe a federal law was recently passed (at least it was proposed) which
requires companies to notify employees at least 60 days in advance of any
"layoff". I wonder if the 9 weeks (63 days) pay continuation, as opposed to an
immediate lump-sum, isn't DEC's way of getting an ex-employee off the job right
away, yet still meeting the 60 day notification requirement?
Any thoughts???
Al
|
1618.48 | | NOTIME::SACKS | Gerald Sacks ZKO2-3/N30 DTN:381-2085 | Fri Dec 06 1991 12:54 | 2 |
| I believe the proposal was about plant closings, not all layoffs. And I don't
believe it became law.
|
1618.49 | It fits with the toughest sate law | DENVER::SHAWS | | Mon Dec 09 1991 18:21 | 3 |
| Nine weeks is about 3 days longer than the longest requirement under
state laws. Probably not by accident.
|
1618.50 | differences? | CSC32::K_BOUCHARD | Ken Bouchard CXO3-2 | Thu Dec 12 1991 13:59 | 4 |
| Could someone maybe post the differences between all the packages
offered so far?
Ken
|
1618.51 | | SSDEVO::EGGERS | Anybody can fly with an engine. | Fri Jun 12 1992 17:05 | 2 |
| The fake notice posted in 1618.1 is still making the rounds.
I got another copy today.
|
1618.52 | | HELIX::KALLIS | Pumpkins ... Nature's greatest gift. | Fri Jun 12 1992 17:14 | 5 |
| Re .51 (Tom):
When there's no solid information, rumor rushes in to fill the vacuum.
Steve Kallis, Jr.
|
1618.53 | Anyway, it's 1 1/2 years old | HOTAIR::INGRAM | That was then, This isn't happening. | Fri Jun 12 1992 19:25 | 9 |
|
> The fake notice posted in 1618.1 is still making the rounds.
> I got another copy today.
I read every reply since .1. There was not one mention of the post
being fake. Did I miss something?
Larry
|
1618.54 | there is no news, is what | SIMON::SZETO | Simon Szeto, International Sys. Eng. | Fri Jun 12 1992 23:42 | 7 |
| > I read every reply since .1. There was not one mention of the post
> being fake. Did I miss something?
To answer your question, let me use your topic title:
> -< Anyway, it's 1 1/2 years old >-
I understand that it is being circulated now as current news!
|