Conference 7.286::digital

    Could someone post the Gullotti memo?  I've not seen it.
    
    Chris Lane
    Digital Services
    

    I don't have it anymore....everybody and his brother was forwarding
    it around on Monday.  Basically said that planned lay-offs for December
    had been postponed....and that given the expected bad Q2, they would
    start the downsizing machine in January at a faster rate than planned
    for December.  Think the grim reaper will be cutting another swath thru
    the CSC's.  Said Europe was in pretty good shape, by the way.  

I'm not worried... some old timer named COOKIE::LENNARD said about a week
ago in the DIGITAL notesfile that he believed that DEC had 'turned the
corner'.... this is just a low before our giant comeback.

Lee 

    Ooff!!! That hurt!!

Copyright � Dow Jones & Co. 1991
Source: Professional Investor Report
Headline: Stocks To Watch - (DEC) Sees 'Probable' 2Q Operating Loss
Time: Dec 18 1991 0919


Story: 
  DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORP.:  Digital Equipment said today that preliminary 
indications for the second quarter ending Dec. 28 point to a probable loss 
from operations.   
  In a press release, Digital said that the probable loss is due primarily to 
reduced customer demand for larger computer systems resulting from weak 
worldwide economic conditions as well as competitive pressures.   
  Also, the company said several recently announced products are not yet 
shipping in significant volume due to ''normal volume manufacturing ramp-up.'' 
  
  Digital Equipment said it expects all products to be fully available during 
the March quarter.   
  The company said it expects to release its operating results for the quarter 
on Jan. 16.   
  First Call, a unit of Thomson Financial Networks, shows a mean estimate of 
15 analysts of 41 cents a share for the second quarter.  However, as reported, 
Digital's investor relations director told PIR on Dec. 2  that several 
analysts had reduced their estimates to a range of 20 to 25 cents a share.  
  In the 1990 second quarter, Digital Equipment reported net income of $111.1 
million, or 92 cents a share, on revenues of $3.4 billion.    
  Digital slipped 1/2, or 0.9%, to 56 1/2 yesterday on NYSE-composite volume 
of 385,100 shares, compared with average daily volume of 574,800.  
-0-  9 19 AM EST 12-18-91}
    
Copyright � Dow Jones & Co. 1991
Source: Professional Investor Report
Headline: (DEC); Merrill Sees Sharper Fall In Hardware Gross Marg -3-
Time: Dec 18 1991 1340


Story: 
                By Laurie DeLater Weeks  
  
  NEW YORK -(DJ-PIR)- Analysts interviewed by PIR are now projecting an 
operating loss for Digital Equipment Corp.'s fiscal second quarter of as much 
as 60 cents a share.  
  Their adjustments follow the computer maker's announcement this morning that 
preliminary indications for the quarter ending Dec. 28 point to a probable 
loss from operations.  
  ''The Street realizes what we realize: That it's totally unpredictable,'' 
says Mark Steinkrauss, investor relations director for Digital, who says he 
has also seen a new estimate of a loss of as little as 30 cents. Before today, 
the Street earnings consensus appeared to range from break-even to about 20 
cents, he says.  
  Steinkrauss declines to be more specific about the probable operating 
results. He says the company has indicated to analysts there will be pressure 
on the product sales line, which means pressure on gross product margins.  
  Analysts at Dean Witter Reynolds Inc. and Cowen & Co., each of whom now 
looks for a loss of 60 cents, say they doubt the company would have issued a 
news release this early if it foresaw a loss of only a nickel or a dime.   
  As reported, Digital attributed the probable loss primarily to reduced 
customer demand for larger computer systems resulting from weak worldwide 
economic conditions as well as competitive pressures. The company also 
indicated that several announced new products weren't yet shipping in 
significant volume.  
  The analysts acknowledge that Digital has been discussing those issues for 
months, although they hadn't anticipated the impact would be as severe as they 
now forecast.  
  Merrill Lynch analyst George Elling tells PIR that his previous 
second-quarter estimate of 25 cents had assumed gross margins on hardware 
would decline slightly from the first quarter level of 51.3%. But he now 
thinks those those margins will fall below 47%, and he looks for a second- 
quarter loss of 40 cents to 60 cents, he says.  
  Dean Witter's Stevens adds that the company also indicated to him that two 
acquired businesses - the Kienzle computer division of Mannesmann AG and the 
information processing group of Phillips N.V. (PHG) - are operating on a 
roughly break-even basis. That means the problems are in Digital's basic 
business, he says.   
  After a trading delay for an order imbalance, Digital Equipment is down 5 
1/2, or 9.7%, at 51 on NYSE-composite volume of 1.27 million. Average daily 
volume is 574,800 shares. 

    re. .4
    
    Eating a litttle crow once in awhile is a good thing. Keeps your
    attitude in proper perspective. Got some services type folks around
    here that have said for that last couple of weeks the "had writing is
    on the wall". It's pretty much not a matter of when or if the coming
    month is going to be painful. But just HOW painful.
    
    Gene.

    re .3
    
    Is not a severe downturn the same thing as "rounding the corner"?
    
    :-)

re: 1701.4                     Bloody January???                         4 of 6
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>    Ooff!!! That hurt!!

Oy vey .. 

Don't be dismayed. The only people who can't be criticized, or wrong, or
help accountable for what they say .. are the ones who espouse no ideals,
stand up for their beliefs, or speak out when the time to do so is at hand.

We may be wrong ocasionally (ok, John .. jump on it !) ... but its better
to be wrong occasionally than never right ... ;^) 

Bob

    
     Has the company spent any of the 1.2 billion it set aside for 
     restucturing two quarters ago?? There have not been that many
     cuts since then that I know of.

    Are the losses we expect to post for Q2 reflecting any more
    monies set aside for downsizing, or is is truly a loss indicating
    expenses exceed profits?  Our local public relations person sent
    a memo stating that if any inquiries came to us from the press, we
    were to say, "no comment" and direct the caller to her.  And, as the
    previous reply asked, has Digital spent all the 1 billion dollars 
    
    which was already set aside for downsizing?

    I'm sure that this does not include any set-aside for more layoffs.
    The memo's I've seen are very specific about lousy business conditions.
    
    Keep in mind that on the billion bucks, not all of that was for
    "packages".  I think a significant piece was and is going into other
    forms of restructuring...like closing plant, buying out leases, mundane
    things like that.

re .10:

It's an *operating* loss.  That means we're spending more than we're bringing
in for normal operations.  I believe it's our first operating loss ever.

    The whole thing is kinda too bad.  From my personal observations, and
    daily contacts....the battalions, regiments, yeah ARMIES of staffees
    are still there, drawing their high salaries, and earnestly engaged in
    very sophisticated anus-protectus operations.
    
    I won't comment about the ten new vice-presidents appointed last week.
    
    Would somebody please explain this to me.  If we are consistently
    losing money on our hardware operations...and I believe we are, when
    are we gonna pull the plug?  Why continue to pretend that we are a
    hardware vendor when the losses from that business are pulling us all
    down?
    
    BTW, I don't think we're doing that great on software either.  Services
    and services alone are keeping us afloat.

re .13:

If we don't sell VAXes, how are we going to sell VAX software or VAX services?

Would someone please post or mail me the memo's which are being discussed. 
They haven't quite made it down here to ALF yet...
 

Cheers,

JK
 
              --==++    "CARPE DIEM - Sieze the Day!!"    ++==--                

    Today's Minneapolis Star Tribune states.
    
    Digital Equipment Corporation will post it's first ever operating loss
    at the end of this month. The is expected to be in the $18 to $75
    million...
    
    The article further states:
    
    Digital will lay off 4-5,000 more employees during the first 6 months
    of 1992...
    
    Digital spokesman states "we are not losing business to our
    competitors. People are just not buying".
    
    

    
       John Chancellor stated a report the other night that came out of
    Japan or was related to how they do business. The main point was US
    corporations have far too many managers/supervisors. It went on to say,
    they do not need that many, one does his work and does it well without
    supervision. 
    
      I see this manager/supervisor thing as nothing but politics. So I
    have to agree. Here at Dec, and other places I have worked it is the
    sop.
    
     

    re .16....yeah and the scary thing is that it will be almost all U.S.
    layoffs.  I wonder now what TSF04 will look like??
    
    On the manager issue, I agree.  While I have no specifics, and I know
    managers have been laid off, my gut tells me they are floating to the
    top as usual.  If one agrees that we were top-heavy with managers,
    then logic would seem to demand that they get hit proportionately
    harder.  Instead, I think we're dealing with a form of tokenism.
    
    I'm very familiar with one organization that seems to grow them (mgrs).
    Many have lost their titles/employees through various shuffles, but
    they reappear as "Program Managers", etc.
    
    Also, that secret incubator buried deep in the bowels of building #21
    that grows vice-presidents seems to be working overtime {:^)...
    
    
    Oh well, keep hoping.

    
    	Just a quick note on the speculation brewing here at the CSC in
    Colorado. TFSO will DEFINATELY hit those on the phones delivering the
    service that is generating revenue.
    
    	Mark_riding_the_TFSO_wave_in_CS

    Mr. One-note Lennard, did you happen to notice that as a result of the 
    "10 VP Announcement" that those 10 VP's (most of whom were already
    VP's) are now doing the jobs that 20 used to do?  And that the displaced 
    people are (apparently) without portfolio?
    
    We may well have too many VP's, but a hint of honesty in your reporting
    might be a refreshing change for the better.
    
    Al
    

re: .17

>					The main point was US
>    corporations have far too many managers/supervisors. 

Believe that i've heard that Japanese companies typically have a ratio
of 1 manager/supervisor to somewhere around 30 direct reports.  In
contrast, at DEC as recently as 5 years ago i heard of ratios in the
1:7 to 1:10 range as being considered normal.  The main difference is
that the Japanese managers were pure "people managers" whereas the
typical DEC manager is > 80% an individual contributor who focuses on
"managing up" and < 20% on people management and leadership of direct
reports.  So, in spite of the ratios, which might at first suggest
that we're 3-4 times more "over-managed" than the Japanese, we may in
fact be up to twice as "under-managed" when you look at the time that
we can expect our managers to devote to us vs. the time they devote to
THEIR managers.  Not very intuitive, i know!
								paul

    Re .20
    
    How are we meant to know that VPs are losing their jobs if it is never
    announced. I think it would greatfully help morale if the announcement
    was something along the lines of:
    
    The following 10 VPs will do X
    The following 20 VPs are no longer VPs because of Y
    
    When all we see is new VP announcements the natural conclusion is that
    there are more VPs than there were yesterday.
    
    Dave

Ahhh Gi'day...�

    Ahh, but  the  people on the phones are an EXPENSE! If we could get rid
    of  them  all,  then the business would be MUCH more profitable, and we
    could  relax  all  the  travel  and expense conditions for managements,
    program managers and marketeers to develop the business further.

  
  Re .20 (Al)
  
  > ... that those 10 VP's (most of whom were already
  > VP's) are now doing the jobs that 20 used to do?  And that the displaced
  > people are (apparently) without portfolio?
  
  This implies :
  
  1) For the last n years we have had 20 people who were very highly paid for
     doing half a job ;
  2) There are now 10 people being very highly paid for doing their job ;
  3) There are now 10 people being very highly paid for no apparent reason ;
  4) This situation is seen as a step forward.
  
  By the way, DEC are to report an operating loss because expenditure is
  higher than income.
  
  Re .19 (Mark)
  
  Maybe you can transfer into one of those really useful jobs in "account
  management" or "services planning" or "strategic programs" instead of
  just sitting around on the telephone all day ?  That should help the
  company to get moving again ... and reduce expenses by cutting down the
  phone bill a bit.
  
  Frank (UKCSC Basingstoke)

>   harder.  Instead, I think we're dealing with a form of tokenism.
>    ...they reappear as "Program Managers", etc.
    
    You bet Dick.  It is indisputable that there is alot of that 
    going on, and it's blatent.
    
    Many "bag jobs" being created for favored few. 
    Principle engineers getting laid off in favor of insiders
    who don't even possess good basic writing skills. 
    A lot of titles shifting...and on and on.
    
    The message I'm getting about what is "valued" is 
    absolutely, positively PERVERSE.
    Maybe I'll hear something about my notes too, but 
    if anything, I'm honest.
    
    Mark

    
    re:  .23
    
         Last I knew, "Services" were returning more than 50% revenue
    to this company. Who do you think is keeping this boat afloat?
    When was the last time you needed to look like an expert  in front
    of a customer and didn't have a clue to the product?
    Don't get me started...  I've gotten many a survey stating that
    CE's wouldn't be cutting it, if it weren't for the "phone support"
    and they sorely appreciate our business.
    
    "...get rid of those on the phones..."  
               
                               Geez...

    re .26 .... the 50% margins are correct for Software Product Services.
    Hardware Product Services margins are lower (25-30??), but against a
    much larger revenue base.  I don't believe that many of the smaller
    service businesses are doing that well.  Just the same, services is the
    ONLY source of green folding money the company has now.  I don't
    believe the software thing.  Last slides I saw David Stone use showed
    marginal profitability for Software....BUT, if you looked closely, he
    had service revenue folded in.
    
    Even though SPS delivered through the CSC's is very profitable, we are
    still supporting many products which are losing money.  I have one
    software product which will remain unnamed, that is running at a -200%
    margin on remedial support.  I'm in the process of fixing that.
    
    What SPS is trying to do is identify losers, and pass responsibility
    for support back to the creating engineering organization.  A very good
    move in my opinion....they should live with some of the junk they
    create!  SPS wants to reduce headcount at the CSC to where people are
    supporting profitable products only.  This will of course be painful
    for the guys on the phone in many cases.
                                          

    
    	re .26
    
    	I believe that .23 said what he did with his tongue planted
    	firmly in his cheek...

    
    
       I thought I'd throw my 2 cents in here, I'm sure it will get a lot
    of response.
    
       I truely believe we engineer and manufacture one of the best, if not
    the best, peices of hardware in the industry. Look at what IBM has been
    pushing the last X years. I believe we lack the ability to market these
    great products, which include software and services, that we have.
    
      I saw a great line in one of the "rags" a few months back. It was 
    talking about our NAS strategy/products. The article spoke very highly
    of what we have to offer, and how far ahead of the competition we
    really are. Then it said how well we sell each other internally but
    needed to get the word out to the public. The line that was used was,
    "DEC has a tremendous product here, but they need to market it. I
    would suspect that if DEC sold Sushi, they would market it as dead
    raw fish."
    
      I think that hits the nail right on the head. 
    
      Now my next point is just an opinion, but I've been around long
    enough (eleven years) to know that you don't hold a major trade show
    at the end of Q3 into the begining of Q4, unless you have something
    you want the world to see. It doesn't make any sense to pull your
    sales force away from closing year end business, espeically at DEC
    where 85% of our orders come in then, without a good reason. I believe
    we are going to have some major ALPHA announcements at DECWORLD. I 
    also believe they will catch the analysist by surprise. Which doesn't
    surprise me, in my opinion these so called industry experts/analysists
    are no different then movie critics. They get paid to give people their
    view of the world, and no two are ever the same. But they do a great job 
    at jumping on the bandwagon. Now what do you think will happen when they
    see ALPHA in action months before it's suppose to be ready?
    
      I remember, quite vividly, our struggles in the early 80s, I also 
    remember the mid 80s, and how stock split then went back over 100
    again in no time. Now I'm not saying this is what will happen, the
    economic situation is far different. But I do believe that the storm
    is at it's end, and things will turn around (dramaticlly) within the
    next 8 to 10 months. I just hope there are some of the "good" people
    left to share the good times.
    
    
    
                                                  Phil...

    I think we'll turn things around too, but slowly.  I also agree we
    build world-class hardware.....the problem is nobody gives a damn
    anymore (to a large extent), and we apparently haven't heard it, or
    don't believe it.  Those days are gone forever.  Customers talk
    "platform" now, and the computer is seen mostly as a tool, period.
    
    Unfortunately, our engineering and marketing communities are still in
    love with a ten year old message, and it's killing us.
    
    Some of the best transportation "platforms" ever built in this country
    were Packard, Studebacker, LaSalle, DeSoto, Kaiser, Frazer....should
    I go on??
             

>       <<< Note 1701.23 by DCC::HAGARTY "Essen, Trinken und Shaggen..." >>>
>                                  -< Services. >-
> 
> Ahhh Gi'day...�
> 
>     Ahh, but  the  people on the phones are an EXPENSE! If we could get rid
>     of  them  all,  then the business would be MUCH more profitable, and we
>     could  relax  all  the  travel  and expense conditions for managements,
>     program managers and marketeers to develop the business further.

According to what Don Z. said last week in Atlanta, SPS (Software Product
Services, a large portion of which are the people on the phones) produced 1
billion dollars in REVENUE!!  
 
Which part of that Billion dollars do you think we don't need?!?!

Cheers,

JK
 
              --==++    "CARPE DIEM - Sieze the Day!!"    ++==--                

  
  Re .28 (Dick)
  
  > What SPS is trying to do is identify losers, and pass responsibility
  > for support back to the creating engineering organization.  A very good
  > move in my opinion....they should live with some of the junk they create!
  
  This bit I agree with ... it will bring a sense of responsibility to
  certain product groups [ where it's sorely lacking at present ].
  What worries me are the sentences that followed it :
  
  > SPS wants to reduce headcount at the CSC to where people are  
  > supporting profitable products only.  This will of course be painful   
  > for the guys on the phone in many cases.                               
  
  There are a number of points here :
  
     i) It assumes that the above transition of grot software will go through.
    ii) It assumes that the above transition of grot software will go through
        on schedule and without any hitches affecting either new releases
        of the products or the support of the existing releases.
   iii) It assumes that the current response/solution times on all other
        products are better than satisfactory [to the customer], ie., that
        all the non-grot product support teams are suitably staffed, have
        the required skill levels and the desired support from the
        respective engineering groups.
    iv) It works FROM the premise of reducing headcount TO the range of
        products that will be supported. This is bean-counter driven rather
        than customer driven [or, dare we say it, business driven ?].
     v) It runs the severe risk that the cuts will be approved by one manager
        [the one who'll feel the benefit] while the compensating adjustments
        are being rejected by another [the one who'll feel the pain].
    vi) It assumes that the support of grot products from the engineering
        group will continue to keep the customer satisfied and not require
        any backtracking, "call-screening", "manning assistance" from the
        CSCs as they will no longer have the spare heads to help out.
  
  In short, it expects to be the first time a sensible idea has been
  implemented smoothly and successfully in this company.  After it has
  been achieved, the headcount will be lower, the productivity of support
  specialists on all other products will be the same or higher and customer
  satisfaction will be higher.  Good luck.  I'm glad that you acknowledge
  that it "will, of course, be painful for the guys on the phone in many
  cases".
  
  Frank

  
  Re .32 - see .29
  
  Looks like Mr. Hagarty was a touch too subtle for some readers.
  
  Frank

        

>Believe that i've heard that Japanese companies typically have a ratio
>of 1 manager/supervisor to somewhere around 30 direct reports.  In
>contrast, at DEC as recently as 5 years ago i heard of ratios in the
>1:7 to 1:10 range as being considered normal.  

           From what I've heard, Digital Services is moving towards 1 mgr
           per every 15-20 people.  I would expect Mgrs to "fall out",
           after this process is gone thru, RIGHT?  :)
        

>we can expect our managers to devote to us vs. the time they devote to
>THEIR managers.  Not very intuitive, i know!

           This is very tricky... Good mgrs shouldn't have to have THEIR
           mgrs for "tons" of their time... I guess it depends upon the
           individual's own confidence level, managerial abilities,
           business knowledge, etc, etc... but REAL employee empowerment
           should take care of that, right?
           
           Steve

    I guess I don't know what a "grot" is, but other than that I follow
    you.
    
    I agree that to a large extent things are increasingly bean-counter
    driven.  Last time I checked, the beans were what were paying us
    all{:^).  The impression I get is that headcount control is becoming
    increasingly important.
    
    The program I talked about is called the "pass-through" program.  Idea
    is that SPS still sells a contract, the customer still calls the CSC,
    but is routed directly to an engineering support group.  SPS keeps some
    of the services revenue and passes the rest on to the engineering
    group.  It has already happened with one new product in my space.
    SPS looked at the forecast, my proposal, my pricing, etc., and passed
    on it!!!  Needless to say the engineering group is not pleased, but I
    think we are gonna see a lot more of this.
    
    I think the emphasis on headcount is correct....while painful.  I have
    a product right now that is losing about 6 million a year delivering
    remedial services.  There is a fairly large group supporting this
    product....and the customers are very happy...but we're losing our
    ---'s.  The thinking is that this group of specialists would be better
    employed supporting a profitable product......that's hard to argue
    with.  I am preparing a proposal as we speak to increase service
    pricing by over 500%, which will:
    
                1 - Restore acceptable margins.
    
                2 - Outrage the customers.
    
    I think there is a good chance that this product may well be handed
    back to engineering........and probably should.
    
    Anyhow, I think we are beginning to see some of the practical aspects
    of how services is going to implement NMS.  Things are gonna get tough
    at the CSC's.  For years they have serviced anyone who called in
    whether they had a contract or not.  All of this was done in the name
    of customer satisfaction.....and that was what the CSC's measured
    themselves on, almost exclusively.  Personally, I predict we are gonna
    see a sudden end to that.  When we are growing like crazy, and the
    bucks are flowing in, I guess you can do that.  These are hard times
    now, and we have to get more business-like.
    
    This whole thing also meshes very well with David Stone's thinking that
    engineering must take responsibility for their products.......period.
    If they create a real turkey, they're gonna spend all their time
    supporting it, at the direct expense of any new-product development.
    This is turn will severely limit their future revenue, and if they
    don't clean up their act, they WILL be out of business.  Overall, IMHO
    it's goodness.

If we are managed like most of the "experts" in this notes file think we 
should be managed - will that give our customers money to buy our products?

If we announce at the end of Q3/beginning of Q4, will those customers that 
buy at the end of what is our fiscal year have time to digest what they 
hear?

If they let VPs go and don't tell me will my quality of work decrease?

If they let VPs go and DO tell me will my quality of work increase?

===============
I think what needs to be understood is that the industry is changing.  The 
way the industry does business is changing.  The customer base is changing. 
There are new "economies" that are being formed; existing "economies" are 
changing.

The whole WORLD is in the middle of a revolution of sorts and most of it
was brought on by technologies developed primarily in the US. We may not
have exploited the technologies but we surely were part of the development.
Communications and travel effectively shrunk the world.  Medicine has
advanced to where the demographics of old are no longer valid.  Computers 
have changed many, many areas of life.

What digital has to do is chart this new world and plot our course through 
the changes.  It's up to each and every one of us to ensure that we are not 
as short-sighted as the blacksmiths of a century ago who refused to 
recognize that automobiles would be so prolific.  The company has given 
each and every employee ample notice that things are about to change.  
You don't have to change if you don't want to but don't be surprised if 
you've sat around for the last XX months waiting for digital to realize it 
can't do without you.

Have at me!

Bruce

	Yep, the whole CSC product support thing is upside-down.

	Engineering gets to throw whatever crap they want out the
	door.  WE get signed up to support it by doing (partly)
	the following:

	1) Make patch tapes on $95 (?) TK50s
	2) Spend 15 minutes/specialist/patch.
	3) Spend $20-30 for Fed-X shipping

	Wow !  Engineering feels NO PAIN !  CSCs must staff up,
	buy tape drives, tapes, pay Fed-X charges !

	This ain't gonna be fixed -cuts or no- until engineering
	writes the checks for support of their turkey-droppings...
	and pockets the profits from support of their jewels.

	But, since the CSCs are "services" and Engineering is
	"engineering", our lowest common management denominator
	is Ken Olsen.

	I wish you could see the crud that is being produced by
	some of these groups....and the quality stuff produced by
	some good ones ( Steve Lionel...take a bow....great stuff,
	committment to quality...great support of the CSCs ).

	To add to the bologna, the CSCs seem unwilling to fire even
	the most blatantly incomptent of its employees.  One must
	set the building on fire or (worse) wink at a secretary
	to be dismissed.   Not showing up to work, giving out
	incorrect answers to big customers ( try Chemical Bank,
	Citicorp, DuPont, et al), doing nothing but self-promotion
	all day IS CAREER-ENHANCING behavior here !

	Expect the CSC cuts to be insane, random, and to improve
	nothing but a headcount number.

	Steve H

RE: .28,.36

>    employed supporting a profitable product......that's hard to argue
>    with.  I am preparing a proposal as we speak to increase service
>    pricing by over 500%, which will:
>    
>                1 - Restore acceptable margins.
>    
>                2 - Outrage the customers.


I am part of a group that recently made a sale to NASA that involved one of
our very technical products.  The sale was $10m ($30m over 5 years) and
WOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED without this technical product (and some others to
be fair).  This was SI bussiness and we have a chance for several similar 
sales around the same design.  The support group for that product was 
recently told that they were loosing money on support contracts to the tune 
of -200%.

We may be loosing money on portions of a product and that product still be 
critical to bussiness.  Are you going to drop our SI bussiness because one
small piece of the pie doesn't make a profit?  I think this "my group has to
make a profit but to heck with Digital" attitude is going to make our recovery
take a LONG time.  

One interesting note, our direct competition for this product charges 4 times
what we charge for a support contract and has done so for many years.

al

    

    Hmmm.  Concerning the last few, if we are losing money on a product,
    but that product is critical to making money with another product, then
    under NMS shouldn't the accounting be fixed so that the money-losing
    product is more honestly shown to be profitable?
    
    Similarly, wouldn't products which appear to be money-makers might more 
    honestly be represented by accounting for all costs that directly added
    value?
    
    I like the idea of slamming bean counting as a poor way to manage. 
    But, it sounds like this situation is best solved by resorting to
    honest bean counting.
    
    Steve

    Well reading the Digital_Notes file, has again got my nerve up....to
    reply with how I feel. I've been with the company almost 4 years...took
    me a long time to get a job with Digital. I always had a lot of respect
    for the philosophy that Ken built the fondation of the company on.
    Honesty,trust,hard work,and faith. I have tried to adopt these
    standards to my daily work routine. I WILL NOT leave my office if asked
    to volunteer for "the package". I will not except a layoff notice....or
    any other offer that terminates my employment with Digital,as long as
    the obvious is happening as stated in said recent replies. I WILL
    chain myself to my terminal, and accept a night in JAIL first. I will
    not turn a deaf ear to it all again. I don't consider myself recklessly
    irresponsible....just honest.
    
    
    
    
    

    re 41
    
    That's ok...your manager will call the Swat Team and they will treat
    you "like an other visitor". (isn't that the lingo for the departed
    memos?)
    
    Other than that....
    
    Nobody is buying anything period. We are going into a deep recession
    according to my crystal ball. Like it said on the news, all areas of
    mfg are dumping people, because their is no business. The business is
    going elsewhere cause it's done cheaper and maybe better. That doesn't
    mean we at Dec don't do it better, it just means others are losing
    their jobs, and their companpies aren't spending. First the steel
    companpies, then the auto industry and then.....
    
    I'm still wondering what career is good for my kids and what languages
    they will need to know.
    
    Heck with it.
    
    Merry Christmas and to all a good night.
    
    Dave
    

re: .38

I appreciate what you say very much, so please don't take this as anything
but innocent inquiry:

>	1) Make patch tapes on $95 (?) TK50s
>	2) Spend 15 minutes/specialist/patch.
>	3) Spend $20-30 for Fed-X shipping

What progress, if any, is being made on using electronic distribution
(Internet,
Usenet, other private networks, even modems where the customer dials into
a computer owned by the CSC to get a patch)?  I know about the technical
issues that make this difficult; I'm just interested in a progress report.

Also, do we use Express Mail where appropriate?  (Frequently cheaper
than Fed-X.)  Perhaps a slight decrease in reliability, but that should
be factored
into the decision on whether to use any overnight service versus cheaper
alternatives.

   Gary

re: .43

>>What progress, if any, is being made on using electronic distribution

We use electronic distribution where possible. Progress has been made.

>>(Internet,
>>Usenet, other private networks,

Not currently used for various business, legal and practical reasons.

>> even modems where the customer dials into
>>a computer owned by the CSC to get a patch)?  

Customer supplies an appropriate modem.  CSC supplies CSC developed
software supporting database searches and file transfers. (Again,
costs not paid by engineering, but development overhead costs incurred 
by CSC, no such thing as a free lunch). 

Not all customers are able or willing to buy a modem and pay for
a phone line however, so the bulk of patches are done by tape and
mail of some kind.

>>Also, do we use Express Mail where appropriate? 

Various delivery methods are used, with cheapest favored, but if the
customer is "hot" FED-EX overnight is used.  The customer is frequently
"hot", to say the least.

Much of our media based patch distribution is done through SSB now,
but the volume is still high, and the cost to the company remains.

Please, back to the subject!

Mike

    
    Re:
    
>Note 1701.39                    Bloody January???                       39 of 44
>FOOSW6::COOK                                         32 lines  20-DEC-1991 14:36
>
>One interesting note, our direct competition for this product charges 4 times
>what we charge for a support contract and has done so for many years.
    
    
    Then it strikes me that Mr. Lennard is doing exactly the right thing.
    Support for this product is too cheap. Increasing its price will make
    it profitable and on your own admission the competition is charging a
    lot more anyway.
    
    Dave

    
>    Then it strikes me that Mr. Lennard is doing exactly the right thing.
>    Support for this product is too cheap. Increasing its price will make
>    it profitable and on your own admission the competition is charging a
>    lot more anyway.
    

Other parts of Mr. Lennard's note seemed to be pointing at the engineering of
a product as the reason for its support not being profitable.  I don't think 
this is always the case.  With the product I was talking about it was pointed
out to "the powers that be" for many years that the support contracts
were being sold for the same price as contracts for other less technical 
products.  This was even though the typical call length was several times that
of the average product.  Also, the typical call had nothing to do with
a problem or bug with the product but were customer usage or design issues.
The profitablity issue as not a cut and dried engineering issue where "put
the pain back to the people who started it" will solve the problem.


I believe that services should be priced reflecting the cost of providing that
service.  If my note appeared to say otherwise, that was not my intent.  Where
I see a danger is in dropping or never providing support for a strategic 
product because that fair market value is not set for the service rendered.


al

    re .39 --- "are we going to drop our SI business just because a part
    is losing money???" (paraphrased)....absolutely, positively yes.  If
    we cannot provide a complete, profitable solution we shouldn't be in 
    the business.
    
    We've been submitting losing bids to the federals for years because of
    this silliness.  Let someone else go broke being competitive.
    
    No use arguing.....under NMS, NOBODY is going to be allowed to lose
    money, period.
    
    BTW, how come everyone thinks they know what product I'm talking
    about??  I didn't mention it....or is it's reputation that widely
    known?

    That kind of "every group for themselves" thinking is scary!
    We all still belong to the same company and if we can't all
    work together to make a profit then we all lose, right? I 
    think what we are really talking about is how the money is 
    distributed - who gets what - and that should & can be worked
    out internally without losing ANY business (and hopefully fewer
    people!).
    
    -Lee
    
    

"Every group for themselves" invariably leads to the sort of infighting that
causes one group to stop at nothing - including screwing every other group in
the company - all for the sake of its own bottom line.

If I didn't have a vested interest, it'd make a good spectator sport.  Sort of
like cock fighting.

    Re. .48 and .49
    
    Unfortuneatley it appears we are rapidly running down the "every dog
    for himself" road. And IT IS scary. Personnally I like the
    accountability thing. However, I think we'e pushed accountability to
    low. Every sales manager has to show a profit. I am a sales support
    type and, frankly, I am going to duck on this one. The infighting over
    who gets credited for what sale and who gets debited for what expense
    is going to get very bloody indeed. Perhaps even vicious.
    
    Gene

    re .48 ..... I understand what you are trying to say, but it just isn't
    going to work like that anymore.  We've been "distributing" money for
    years.....only we called it "allocations".  During the good days of the
    mid-80's dozens (perhaps hundreds) of our products looked profitable on
    paper because of a loose, sloppy system of allocations which very
    effectively camoflauged some really bad products.
    
    NMS was designed to stop that silliness, and it's going to start
    hurting.  But, it has to happen.  If we can't bid a government contract
    with real profit for all participating PCU's, then we shouldn't be in
    that business, period.

re the stock

	The market is up 71.00 right now





		




			DEC is  "Unknown"

    RE: .52 The Stock Quote system on my workstation says Digital is
    up 3/4 today. I'm guessing you got your unknown from the same
    source as mine read unknown earlier today. There are often times
    that the Dow number are unknown as well. Remember this is not a
    direct tie to the Big Board.
    
    			Alfred

re .53

>    RE: .52 The Stock Quote system on my workstation says Digital is
>    up 3/4 today. I'm guessing you got your unknown from the same
>    source as mine read unknown earlier today. There are often times
>    that the Dow number are unknown as well. Remember this is not a
>    direct tie to the Big Board.

	Right, its back now.   Dec 50 1/4  up 3/4,   Dow now 3011.00 up 77.00 

	R

PS	Does the Dow ever hit 10,000 ??

    Anent .54: I remember when it looked like the Dow Jones could never
    reach 1,000.  Now that it's been at 3,000, I suppose 10,000 isn't
    impossible.  The Toyko Nisei Index is in that range (so their 100-point
    drop isn't a big deal).
    
    A few previous replies about the New Management System demanding that
    all groups be profitable strikes me as simplistic.  More sophisticated
    models admit the existence of loss leaders.  Does the supermarket care
    that they lose money on milk if milk is what brings in customers who
    also buy highly profitable items while they're there?  (I don't know if
    milk is a loss leader -- they're too clever to tell us.)  Does the
    lounge worry about losing money on the cheese and crackers, when they
    lure in sutomers who wash the appetizers down with a couple of imported
    beers?

    re. .55
    
    Steve,
    
    Everything I have seen, been told, and experienced in the last 6 months
    discounts your supermarket theory. I could be wrong, but I don't think
    so. I hope I am wrong. Because if I'm not....then God help us.
    
    Gene.

    Here's something to cheer you up.

    

    The recipients of the TFSO1 package will be eligible to be rehired
    in just a little over 6 months.

    f.m.

    Here's an example for all the yuppies out there...
    
    (I, myself have been {unjustly ;') } accused of being one.)
    
    I recently read a book title, "In Search of L.L. Bean."  The author
    discussed, briefly, the marketing strategies.  
    
    What do you think is the LEAST profitable department?   FISHING
    
    What do you think is the MOST profitable department?  WOMEN'S CLOTHING
    
    L.L. Bean realizes, however, that the sporting image is critical to the
    ongoing success of the company.  While all of the other departments
    have extremely agressive growth, profit, and revenue/sq.ft. metrics, 
    the job of the manager of the fishing department is to ...
    
    "not lose money."
    
    Fishing doesn't have to be profitable.  It exists so that others may
    be.  But it can't lose money either.
    
    For what it's worth.
    
    Happy Holidays...
    
    Al

Re:  previous few (NMS debate)

The problem with accepting loss leaders as part of the model
is that pretty soon words like the following start showing
up in business plans:

   "Our product, ABC, while showing an IRR of 8% (admittedly
    below acceptable hurdle rates), should still be manufactured, since 
    its position in the overall product offering will leverage sales of the 
    <insert_a_profitable_system_here>".

We spent many years of the previous decade producing products that were 
*demonstrable* losers because they would theoretically leverage sales
of VMS, or VAX 8600s, or whatever.  If you step back and look at 
business plans, and significant percentages of them use the excuse
of "leveraging" sales of something else, pretty soon you're losing
money. 

The intent here is not to claim that loss leaders are *never* a good
idea, just that they should be carefully managed.  The problem is that
DEC is so decentralized that business management at that level is extremely
difficult.  Loss leaders are fine if you're making tons of money from
very profitable products like VAX/VMS, but when your cash cows come under
margin pressure, you better take another look at the use of loss leaders.

Glenn
                   

The one neat thing about NMS is that the allocations now add up to 100%, and
not up to 500% of the selling price that they used to. However, it's civil
war in here.

I have SPG revenue being booked into SPS as nominal "licence compliance
consultancy". And then there's the "allowance out $1.1M of software to close
the total business" trick. Not to mention the end-of-quarter revenue
redistribution games one day before the books close (i'm owed $6M of misbooked
revenue for Q1 alone - but people get awfully tardy handing over the money in
this business environment).

At least when the business is healthy, we can concentrate on giving customers
good value and service. At the moment... the fun's in other areas.

								- Ian W.

    Ha!! .59 .... and you think that is the  way it "used to be"?  I saw
    a major software business plan last week with a five-year project IRR
    of 8%, and that only after the most agressive forecast inflation I've
    ever seen.  We haven't learned yet.  Of course the leveraging plans
    are incredible!
    
    If all of the "leveraging" that was supposed to take place in the past
    ten years had happened, the entire continent of North America would
    have sunk into the sea under the weight of the VAXs's about May of 1988.
    I saw only one PBU manager that challenged our methods of forecasting.
    Would you believe that he actually wanted to know WHO we were going to
    sell product x to??  BTW, product x never made it through the door.
                                                                 

    I like the L.L.Bean comment.  If we simplify this company to only two
    departments and introduce NMS, what might happen?
    
    If they operate independently and feel that they each need to maximize
    profit and perhaps even compete for customers, you might go to the
    store and see salespersons trying to get you to go either to the
    Clothing Department or to the Fishing Department.  Competition might
    get so fierce that customers are turned away just because it looks like
    they are fighting.  When it comes time to do accounting and reports,
    the Fishing Department always has trouble and is seen as a problem area
    and possible target for layoffs.  Business is bad all over, of course,
    since customers aren't coming in as much as they used to.  Of course,
    everybody blames it on the hard times.  Couldn't possibly have anything
    to do with the internal fighting and confusion.  The Clothing
    Department is showing a good return on expenses.  They're safe.
    
    This is not how it should work.  Let's take another shot.
    
    When customers wander in everybody is friendly.  If they express an
    interest in Fishing, they are directed to the Fishing Department.  If
    they express an interest in Clothing, they are directed to the Clothing
    Department.  This is all regardless of what department the salesperson
    they first meet is from.  They get warm and fuzzies about the place, so
    they tend to wander in both departments.  The salespersons take note of
    how many customers wander between departments.  Sales are good, in
    spite of tough times.  When reporting time comes, sales leads that
    result from customers wandering between departments become part of the
    reporting process.  True, the Fishing Department does not have the
    earnings ratio of the Clothing Department, but it is making a profit.
    More, the reports that track cross-marketing show that a lot of
    customers wander over from the Fishing Department.  Only a few wander
    over to the Fishing Department from the Clothing Department.  Because
    the Fishing Department is, according to this measure, partly
    responsible for the sales of the Clothing Department, they are
    allocated funding from the Clothing Department in proportion to the
    value of having helped bring this business.  With this adjustment, the
    Clothing Department is shown to be slightly less profitable, but the
    Fishing Department is shown to be much more profitable than its numbers
    first indicated.  Everybody gets a Christmas bonus.
    
    The important lesson here is that anything that is important and that
    contributes value needs to be tracked and accounted for.  Ignore it,
    and you won't understand where you are or how to improve.  NMS 
    (and probably just about any other system) can only work if proper 
    accounting is reported.  Throw in lying, cheating and stealing and the
    war will be lost in spite of supposed victories.  Blame all the 
    inability to make your internal control systems work on "bad times" or any 
    other external influences, and you are probably the source of your own 
    blindness.  That is not the attitude of a successful entrepreneur,
    IMHO.
    
    Steve

    There's another program underway which when fully implemented will have
    a major impact on CSC staffing.  It's called the Service Entitlement
    Program, and is basically intended to turn away the thousands (I mean
    thousands!!) of customers who call in for support who do not have
    service contracts.  When we can finally clean that mess up, staffing
    can probably go down dramatically.  It should also reduce the cost of
    supporting people who do have legitimate service contracts.

    
    	re .63
    
    	Hopefully that program will also generate additional revenue by
    	signing some of the...for want of a better term..."freeloaders"
    	to service contracts.
    
    	John

    Sure....I forgot that very important element of the program. 
    "free-loaders" will be given temporary access to support, and then
    the local sales office will be strongly encouraged to sign them up.
    If they refuse....well then it's no tickee-no shirtee.  Sure hope
    they can make it work.
    
    Very broadly, there is a general expectation that the remedial support
    business for software will flatten out, and then go into decline.  This
    is based on the assumption that our software WILL get better.  Ought'a
    be interesting to see what happens in the next few years.

    re: .65
    
>    Sure....I forgot that very important element of the program. 
>    "free-loaders" will be given temporary access to support, and then
>    the local sales office will be strongly encouraged to sign them up.
>    If they refuse....well then it's no tickee-no shirtee.  Sure hope
>    they can make it work.
    
    I hope so, too.  But don't count on it.  That sounds remarkably
    like what was supposed to be happening when I was at the CSC in 1983.
    

    RE: .65-.66 is correct.  Until we get our internal processes in order,
    we will do nothing bu alienate our customers.  I am sorry Mr. <isert
    your favorite multi million dollar customers name here> we do not show
    you in our database, so you cannot get service.  Oh, you have A
    software agreement number that we (Digital) assigned you?  Sorry, I
    cannot see what the Southern States Region has in their database, do
    you have an access number?
    
    It gets real confusing.  I've posed this question many times in the
    past year or so to anyone who will listen.  If I am in an airport in
    Washington D.C. I can go up to a ticket counter of an airline and they
    can tell me if Joe Blow is on an airplane (even the flight and seat
    number) flying from Alaska to Hawii in realtime.  Why cannot we do the
    same thing with our customers?  IMHO-herein lies the problem.  If it
    costs $1 billion to build this database it will be well worth it in
    customer satisfaction, reducing the cost of doing business over the
    long run, and repeat business because it is easy to do business with
    Digital.
    
    Mike

           <<< Note 1701.67 by GRANMA::MWANNEMACHER "Merry Jimble" >>>

   >   If  I  am  in  an  airport  in  Washington D.C. I can go up to a ticket
   >   counter of an airline and they can  tell  me  if  Joe  Blow  is  on  an
   >   airplane  (even the flight and seat number) flying from Alaska to Hawii
   >   in realtime. Why cannot we  do  the  same  thing  with  our  customers?
   >   IMHO-herein  lies  the  problem.  If  it costs $1 billion to build this
   >   database it will be well worth it in  customer  satisfaction,  reducing
   >   the  cost  of  doing  business  over  the long run, and repeat business
   >   because it is easy to do business with Digital.
    
       You are taking a lot for granted here, in  expecting  us  to  use  the
      technology  that  we have developed for our customers in our own day to
      day operations.  

      No sour grapes here, but I just do not see that happening,  in  fact  I
      see  much  of  the opposite, where those in the know, refuse to embrace
      new technologies or service opportunities,  and  instead  continue  the
      Business  As  Usual  approach,  or "it worked this way for x years, why
      can't it continue this way?". My message to  those  that  continue  the
      BAU approach, is that BAU is a going out of business strategy.

      We  have  this  tremendous  Service  Infrastructure already in place, a
      definite leg up on a good  part  of  our  competition.  Why  aren't  we
      refocusing this Infrastructure to address "Service of the Nineties"? We
      make great hardware (we know it, our installed  base  knows  this)  our
      margins continue to decline, that is true across the industry. (lots of
      good people did tons of work to see this happen!).  We  need  to  focus
      this type of serviceability and work in our SW  products  as  well.  We
      need  to  be  creative  in  our approach to services, no longer is that
      direct "nose to console" Customer Services Engineer needed  to  perform
      those  tasks  that  many of us remember. We need a good remote services
      and support along with innovative approaches to  these  services.  Look
      at  the  typical  desktop  service  and  support  strategy/model. It is
      difficult for us to map our services to that model, won't you agree?

      For the company that brought the computer out of the  sterile  computer
      room environment and into the department, we must now actually jump two
      steps, (the desktop step has been taken, and we are a bit player  in  a
      multi-billion  dollar  production),  we need to capture the enterprise,
      and our products and services must be up  to  the  task  to  face  this
      challenge. What would make you, a customer pick DEC over IBM/HP/ etc.?

      The answer could lie in services, if we can do it right.



      Mike

    I'm also reasonably pessimistic that the service entitlement program
    will really get off the ground.  I have been directly involved in the
    why-dont-we-know-who-has-a-contract? issue for 7 years, and have been
    further involved in several recommended solutions.  "Management" always
    nods sagely, and then the who damned thing crashes in flames because
    nobody wants to spend the money involved.  I agree that a
    billion-dollar investment should be made, if that is what is necessary.
    
    Given present pressures for increased services profitability, and HEAVY
    headcount pressures, I give it about a 1% chance of ever happening.
    
    We have never known how to use computers, and that internal cancer
    continues to grow.  Our services database people should spend a six-
    month sabatical at L.L. Bean.  I know they'd learn a lot.
                                        

    re the last few - our internal systems are a disgrace.  And customers
    and resellers hear about it.  One of the reasons we've been unable to
    get the Gold Key program accepted in some OEMs.
    
    karl

    Could we return to the original point - would you please post a copy of
    the memo, and does anyone have any further detail/rumor information
    concerning these cuts?
    
    Thanks.

    	rep last few
    
    	This may seem like small talk to many but in my eyes this is a big
    problem. The customer remembers and forms an oponion of DIGITAL as in
    the entire company not software or services or sales but DIGITAL and one 
    problem loggin a call can blow some big deals.
    	Think about it you are customer X and you know you spend $XXXXX.XX
    (notice the numer of X,s) now you go to log a call and you get this
    nonsense not in the database. Later the call gets logged and service
    has to come out and explain why he had this trouble notice the focus
    on the real problem the broken hardware has escaped your mind... 
    	This happend when we CENTRALIZED (how dare me use that word here)
    or call dispatch. We had people local who knew our customers names
    and faces and cared about them and thier problems.

   You know, I just finished reading the string in another note about how
   people enjoyed getting out of management or how we avoided getting into
   it by choosing a more technical track.  It occurs to me that your average
   management type isn't really effective as a system user.  That is part of
   why they are in management rather than a more technical career.  But the
   decision making power of how we invest our internal systems dollars are
   made by these people with _no_ customer contact and _poor_ systems
   planning skills.  Is it any wonder that we can't get systems that provide
   acceptable levels of customer service?

   Our service organization is built on the rock of providing labor
   intensive, not information intensive service.  So, they select people for
   their ability to deal with single customers, not to provide service to
   lots of customers at once.  So, its not reasonable to expect that any
   systems level thinking will arrise from that part of the organization.
   
   Will somebody please identify _the_ organization chartered to use
   computers to provide better service to customers?  Does that
   organization have the resources (human and financial) to do the job?  Who
   do we need to finger with these observations?
   
fwiw,

Dick

re .74;

Pick any job that needs doing.  Try and find "the" individual or organization
within Digital having the responsibility and resources to do that job.

Scary, ain't it?

  
  Re .65 (Dick)
  
  > This is based on the assumption that our software WILL get better.
  
  HA HA HA HA HA HO HO HO HO HO HA HA HA HA HA HO HO HO HO HO HA HA HA HA
  
  If that wasn't just a wacky thought to brighten up the new year and was
  intended seriously then please go back to taking the tablets ... you're
  not cured of your delusions yet ...
  
  As .67 (Mike) and others implied, one reason why the floodgates were opened
  to give the customer the benefit of the doubt when he called in was due to
  the quantity - and heat - of big customer complaints when they called in to
  get the familiar "I'm sorry but you don't appear to be on our database ...".
  Though I'll admit I disagreed with it at the time, the amount of customer
  pain that it saved seems to have been worth it.  Would that DEC could put
  support specialists out of a job by producing reliable software rather
  than by writing brainless memos and introducing more political "projects".
  
  Frank

    
    
    RE .74 "Will somebody please identify _the_ organization chartered
    to use computers to provide better service to customers?"
    
    Here are quotes from the Purpose/Mission/Objective/Goal statement
    from the SPE group (Serviceability and Process Engineering Group):
    
    	 Objective #4: SPE Work
    		Provide integrated service standards, processes, and
    		tools to our development and service delivery partners
    		that enable globally consistent, locally tailorable
    		services to meet customer needs.
    
    		Goals:
    		#5.  Develop the processes and specifications for 
    		     delivery of cost effective service in support
    		     of business requirements.
    
    	Now, can someone tell me if I am making a stretch to get from
    	the concerns in .74 to the SPE quotes above?  Not having a
    	lot of SPE info it's hard to tell....
                                             

    Well, thos of us IN SPE don't have all that much info to date, but I
    agree that it's within the bounds of possibility that we'll do it.

    I'm sure it's in other notes, but on this morning's radio... as many as
    15,000 layoffs are expected, resulting from the 138,+++,+++ loss
    announced yesterday.
    
    t.

.-1>    I'm sure it's in other notes, but on this morning's radio... as many as
.-1>    15,000 layoffs are expected, resulting from the 138,+++,+++ loss
.-1>    announced yesterday.
    
  Yeah, but when.  We held our breath from October until December because we 
had been told that December was layoff time.  Then in December we were told
January.  Now we don't know, except that it will happen.  So keep holding
your breath because no one is telling us when, or WHO, or WHAT the criteria
for selection will be.  Many people I know who deliver software consulting are
looking for other jobs.  Many have been for some time.  Some have had offers
and keep putting off their prospective employers until they get pushed out the
door by Digital.  Doesn't anybody up there know what's happening to the morale,
loyalty, trust and enjoyment it's employees (some, not all) are loosing ??????

   Oh well, when it happens, it happens.  &-(

    WHen they say 'as many as xxx' they're also implying 'or as *few*
    as yyy.'

    And in the past month I've heard of 4 more middle managers being
    assigned to a "project" position.
    
    
    Mike

    And a baffling scientific phenomenon will occur.  When they 
    "turn up the heat" as JS says, the heat will probably travel 
    downward instead of rising as natural laws would dictate. ;^)
    
    Mark 
    
    

    
    
    	That's just above the area where "rightsizing" ends.  Happens
    	that way quite a bit.  
    
    	(A bit below that level people are offered the package because
    	THEIR job has been eliminated.)
    

    	Don't be so sure that upper level managers are insulated from
    the blood-letting.  Sure, the ones who survive make obscene salaries
    and wield power not unlike the godfathers, but obtaining and retaining
    such positions of authority is no easy task.

    	All I know is that if you want to see real blood spill, you
    have only to witness the behind the scenes antics of upper level
    management politics.  Does the term "Machiavellian" ring a bell?

				   -davo

    
    
    	.85	Does the word reality ring a bell?
    

    The trouble is a lot of people making "obscene salaries" to quote from
    two replies ago don't wield much power, in fact, they are not doing
    much of anything besides inventing new processes and watching the
    weekly bookings reports.

    A lot of good sales reps should have stayed sales reps and not become
    sales managers.

    A lot of good sales managers should have stayed sales managers and not
    become part of the headquarters bureaucracy.

    Ditto for some of the good software specialists who joined the
    bureaucracy.
    
    Today a lot of them feel that they are not making a difference and long
    for more customer contact.

    The problem was (and perhaps still is), the salary and perks, and this
    illusion we call the career path.  Sales commissions would have done
    years ago what NMS attempts to do in a half-hearted way: provide
    incentives for the best to do the best they can do in their current
    role.

    re .83
    
    Mark, that scientific phenomenon is called the "inverse world" 
    phenomenon where everything is the opposite of what it should be.
    
    				 ;^}
    
    					Jim.

    The blood is flowing heavy here in the D.C. area this week.
    
    
    Mike
    
    

Ahhh Gi'day...�

		     What sort of people are being hit?

    Field service, account support, BASE.
    
    
    

    Also product support and tech admin.
    
    regards
    Al Root
    

    
    	Field Service people here in the greater Maynard area have been 
    	hit yesterday, also.         

    Feels like last January, waiting to hear where the next SCUD would
    land.

    RE: Jim,
    
    You've got that right.
    
    Mike

    
    must be long range scuds, 'cause they are reaching the west coast.
    
    

    Are we allowed to shoot back?
    
    Jamie.

    re .97
    
    Jamie-
    
    I heard people talk about shooting back. Literally shooting back!!!! 
    
				Jim.

    
    re: .97, .98
    
    They do at the post offices !

    Heard tell of a BLOODY FEBUARY.
    God please do not do it near Valentine's Day....
    The press will have a ball.
    
    Rick A (who gave up on rumor mills but could not resist)

I know of a couple EIS specialists in Seattle who volunteered for a multi-year
project.  At the end of theid participation, they were looking for another
project to join.
They were TSFO'd this week.

Kevin

    RE: Saint Valentines Day Massacre
    
    As it happens, February 14 will be my last day.
    
    ken

    I know of one Unit Manager in Tampa who got the severance plan this
    week. 
    
    Has anyone heard the total number of people being cut this week ?
    
    Vijay.

    i know of one customer services manager in birmingham alabama that was
    tapped on the shoulder but he got another job with dec on the mosanto
    account and their was a sec in the customer services dept in birmingham
    that also got tapped on the shoulder. so far two in birmingham alabama
    office of the customer  services dept.

    Tempe, AZ got hit this week....
    the Account Support Group mgr, secy, and several f/s engineers

    RE: last few
    
    	22 people here in the CSC in Colorado, 1 manager, several admin, 
    engineers in the merlin (pdp) team, lat support, networks, etc.
    

    The number I heard about in the Western States Region is 100, all
    supposed to be from Customer Services.  I know of only 5 individuals
    myself, which are 3 service technicians @CWO, 1 Account Support Group
    Manager from LAO and 1 Account Support Group Manager from CWO (These
    are the managers who have the "Services Selling Reps" working for 
    them, now one manager will cover LAO, CWO and I think Tempe too).
    
    Oh well, I'll have to say goodbye to some friends again.
    

I'm shocked by these replies posted here today.... nearly all of them in
the services sector, supposedly the 'breadwinner' these days (in terms of
income) here in the US.

This isn't fat we're cutting, it's flesh and bone!

Lee

    In Washington d.c. district which covers Maryland,D.C., and northern
    fringe Va. from all accounts I heard at least 20-30 people got the axe
    Monday and Tuesday. A certain percentage were Digital Services
    Engineers. Also included were district CRRs,District mgrs, Unit Mgrs.
    I also heard that more Digital Services cuts will occur in June '92. 
    
    What recession ?
    MikeTurro

    Will the last person to leave Digital please remember to switch off the
    V.P.s.
    
    Jamie.

  
  Re .110 (Jamie)
  
    It's an automatic process : when the company's value decreases to the
  sum of their golden handshakes, the remaining VPs split the kitty and
  go to their next job.  That's what's probably worrying some people about
  the increase in VP count - they're burning the candle from both ends :-)
  
  Frank

    
    *Rumour* has it that Customer Services (as we call Field Service
    over here) is to be "rationalised" across the UK...
            

      re .97 and others re "shooting" or other post-TFSO weirdnesses:
    
      Why do you think we've got all these nice new red phones that
      connect directly to DEC Security, local police, and local Emergency 
      Medical Services?

      Plan several routes out and learn to run with your head down.

      MM
      

    I wouldn't even joke about such a thing.
    
    Gregg

    re. 109
    
    Hey Mike, Maybe this TFSO isn't going to be too bad. I already
    have set up a fishing date with Charlie in RI. in April.
    
    Hey It's been a hell uv a ride for 15 years. Just like anything
    else our warranties expire. At least I won't have to watch at
    close range while Digital writhes and suffers through the crisis
    until she is back to good health, and she will be. 
    
    I still have two weeks to find a DEC job. But if I don't I still
    will hold my 15 year tenure with Mother Digital in high regard
    and extend many thanks to those who have shared the good times with me
    and special thanks to those who brought me on board.
    
    		-Harold-

    That's what the first Engineer I trained with told me my first day at
    DEC.  I had hoped to squeak through this "down-sizing"  but did not
    make it.  I have been an FSE for 13 years and I've had some great times
    with the people of DEC.  Anywho, I hope this is it on the "down-sizing"
    period.  If I hadn't been TFSO'd waiting until June for another round
    would have been a killer and I just got my blood pressure down.
    
    I'm going to miss NOTES.  Good-luck to all of you, I'll be following
    you in the press,
    
    P. Wall
    

    re .116
    
    Hang in there and good luck. I'll be following you out the door.
    
    Regards
    Al Root
    

    Harold its good to hear from yeh ! I wish it wasn't under these
    circumstances though. Hopefully youll find something in the time
    remaining. If you do indeed see Charlie,tell  him I said hello !
    
    Im going to write to him soon.
    
    Good Luck partner,
    Michael Turro

    Hey folks.
    
    I'm one of the fortunate ones cause I am of retirement age and I 
    will be back with my "R" badge to pester the do do out of you all
    to make sure you get this company going again and the stock I have 
    back up to where I can afford that "Jag" or something.
    
    My daughter reminded me of what problems really are....
    She works as a receptionist for a childrens optomologist and one 
    of the patients, a four year old girl, came in the office and
    was a beacon of hope,love and energy. All smiles and happiness
    but tragically she has brain cancer.  Folks, introspectivly we
    really don't know real problem in comparison.
    
    No bitterness, no pain and no sorrow. A lot of miss ya's but
    I guess this is a final farewell. Cheers, good luck and
    help Digital back to health, Please.
    
    			-Harold-

    The corporate logic around here sounds like treating the patient with
    high blood pressure by cutting off his legs and let the blood volume
    drop. Sure it drops the pressure, but it will eventually kill the
    patient!
    
    Eric

Re: .106 -- 

>  	22 people here in the CSC in Colorado, 1 manager, several admin, 
>    engineers in the merlin (pdp) team, lat support, networks, etc.

Our district manager told us that 25 people across all the U.S. CSCs would 
be impacted.  If your figure is correct, this would leave only 3 remaining
of the other CSCs (which I sincerely doubt).  So one of us has bogus info.

Nevertheless, the CSCs were definitely impacted this time, including support
engineers.

-Andy

Re:<<< Note 1701.121 by PEACHS::MITCHAM "Andy in Alpharetta (near Atlanta)" >>>

>Our district manager told us that 25 people across all the U.S. CSCs would 
>be impacted.  If your figure is correct, this would leave only 3 remaining
>of the other CSCs (which I sincerely doubt).  So one of us has bogus info.

The previous reply is correct.  We were told that it was 100 people across the
U.S. CSCs... 

-  David

    So what was the total body count from this latest exercise?  I've heard
    wild figures of anywhere from 10-15k, but if this was mostly customer
    service than I doubt that.
    
    /d.c.

At the recent Mid-Year Business review which is supposedly happening US-wide 
the number 1000 was mentioned.

    On the issue of shootings, etc.,.....as the mower works its way
    through thousands more people, there will be a nutcake, somewhere,
    sometime, who will decide to go on the offensive.  From what I read
    about the red phones, etc., I'm glad someone is taking measures.
    
    Would also assume that K.O. and others have some form of security.
    If not, they're taking a helluva chance.
    
    What scares me is that it is still quite easy to get into most Digital
    facilities without showing a badge or having your badge closely
    checked.

    Yeah, didn't IBM have a disgruntled employee come in and 
    "pepper" the place at some facility years ago?
    
    Mark

Some disgruntled postal worker seems to shoot up a post office every year
or two.  Sort of puts the lie to Ken's comment about working for the post
office if you want a safe job.

    re. a few back "Hellave ride"
    
    Yup, It sure has be a good ride, but a lot shorter in duration than I
    was planning on when I hired on back in '84.
    
    There will be life after DEC but it just won't be the same.  As with
    others, I'll miss the notes files and other support systems that made
    working for Digital very unique, not to mention the people that have
    always been exceedingly (sp) helpful whenever I got into a jam (mostly
    due to Sales folks {sorry, couldn't help it}(;^)).
    
    I too will be looking with great interest from the outside as my
    remaining comrades re-group and recover.
    
    Best of luck to you all and Digital, a company that will never be the
    same again, but in my eyes is still the best in the business!
    
    SA

    Re: Note 1701.128 by HOTWTR::ADKINS_ST
    
>   There will be life after DEC but it just won't be the same.  As with
>   others, I'll miss the notes files and other support systems that made
>   working for Digital very unique, not to mention the people that have
>   always been exceedingly (sp) helpful whenever I got into a jam (mostly
>   due to Sales folks {sorry, couldn't help it}(;^)).

    As one of those sales types that has put you in a jam or two, Steve, I
    want you to know that you will be missed. Thanks for all the jams you
    helped me with. Sorry to see you go, and best of luck to you...

    Rich

    re: 128
    Best of luck to you and don't slam the door in my face as I follow you
    out. The 14th is my last day also. I'll miss the DEC that used to be
    and all the good folks I've talked to in my 20 years with DEC. You all
    take the easy road and I wish you all the best of luck in your careers
    with DEC.
    
    Regards
    Al Root
    

    So long and good luck, Al.  I hope I can follow you very shortly.
    
    I've got my 20 years too, and it just isn't any fun anymore.

    re: -1
    	
    	I agree, if it is so bad to work here, then quit the company!
    You (and you know who you are) obviously don't need DEC and DEC
    doesn't need you.  Go find a better job, good luck too.  Digital
    doesn't owe us anything except payment for last weeks work.  It is
    up to each of us to be competitive and marketable at all times,
    just like Digital.  I like my job and look forward to it each day.
    The more customer sites I go to, the better I like it here.  So
    please, do us all a favor...
    
    
    Brad.

    RE: 1701.132 & .133 
	Dick tells it like it is.  If you don't want to hear it, move on.

    Hey, this is an open forum, and disagreements are all a part of the
    ongoing debate. Just beacuse somebody has a negative feeling doesn't
    mean that others shouldn't be permitted to express their own feeling as
    well just because they don't happen to support the negative position.
    Go to any of the parks around the worl where soapbox speakers debate
    and you'll hear lively disagreements taking place all the time. And I
    submit that getting all the emotions and arguments out in the open is
    the healthiest form of expression we can have. There is a big change
    taking place in this Company, and it needs to come out: there are more
    and more people that are deciding to look positively to the future and
    act accordingly instead of just standing silently by while the negative
    thoughts flow out. If somebody gets cut, we all support them and they
    have every right to express their negative thoughts and have their
    feelings respected. But for those who are still accepting Digital's
    paycheck and bad mouthing the Company while waiting to get cut, I
    support the idea that it's time for them to stop waiting for Digital to
    send them out and take full responsibility for their own careers. 
    
    The sails are starting to fill and the anchors need to be on board and
    stored so we can get under way. And we have just as much right to say
    that so that the read-only's who are still making up their own minds
    can see it's not all negative in Digital; there's a LOT of positive
    things happening, and let's get them out in the open too!
    
    Oops; I forgot to use ALL CAPS TO SHOUT IT!! Next time...!
    
    Fred   :^)
    
      

    
    
    	OK, so we're agreed, right?  Only happy people that love thier
    	jobs here at DEC can express thier opinions.  The rest of you
    	can go get fired.
    
    	

    Hey, that's not what was said. The point was that EVERYBODY, happy and
    unhappy have a right to speak here, and just because the "Happies"
    don't happen to agree with the "Unhappies" doesn't mean they should
    keep quiet and "respect the feelings and sensitivities" of the
    "Unhappies".
    
    So if that's a deemed childish -< kids! >-, so be it...!
    

    Well, we are still calling this  "Bloody January"
    
    Anyone want to start a new topic call February Massacre!
    
    We can pick it up there; those who are left!

In response to COOKIE::LENNARD and the negative responses that followed:

You know, I really know where he's coming from.  I know how he feels, 'cause I'm
not so happy with my job or the company, either.  And no, I don't pretend to 
believe that this isn't impacting my job performance, 'cause I know that it is
(and not in a pretty way, either).

Probably, the best thing that could happen for me right now would be for me to
get the "package", except that I'm such a security junkie that the prospect 
scares me to death.  And, I'm enough of a control freak that I'd want it to be
my decision.

So, I can really relate to Mr. Lennard here.  The point where we differ is that
I realize it'd be childish for me to just wait to get the package.   I have to
do what I have to do.  Probably the best thing I could do, both for me and the
company, is walk away (well, quit without burning bridges).  But, that's 
something I have to do on my own initiative.

It'd be silly for me to expect to get paid for it.

Mr. Lennard:  If you really are that unhappy with the company, just do what's
right for you.  Prolonging the agony, just waiting for a package that might not
happen, or might not be as monentarily wonderful (?!?) as those in the past,
just isn't worth the suffering.

And talking like this (the way I'm talking, and perhaps the way you're talking)
is probably one h*ll of a bummer for the people reading this conference who
still like their jobs and the company.  Is this really fair to them?

    
    	What's being discussed here is REALISM vs IDEALISM!
        (Realism is Idealism with it's edges chipped away.)
    
    	It's great to mount your white charger and say 'if you don't
    	like it quit' (or "I hope you get fired!").
    
    	It's another thing to show your stupidity/idealism by up and 
    	quitting and saying 'screw their 2 years of salary, I'll show 
    	'em.  I got integrity!"
    
    	The people that want this package are in thier 50's/60's!  They are
    	not gonna go out, in this economy, and pick up another job 50k-60k 
    	job.  They are not going to land another job that will give them 
    	another pension.  This is it!  The money is important!  	
    
    	One other thing.... these old birds are what made this company the
    	opportunity it is/was.   If it wasn't for PDP8's there wouldn't
    	have been PDP11's, if it wasn't for the PDP11's  there wouldn't
    	have been VAX's, and if it wasn't for for the VAX's.... ALPHA!  If
    	some of them are tired/bored/disillusioned/cranky/etc. it's OK. 
    	It's human nature.  Just like it's human nature to be full of P**s
    	and Vinegar when you're young.
    

    We all walk a tightrope here of being like Pollyanna, full of false
    optimism that the world owes Digital something, that things will turn
    around (don't they always), Alpha is certain to be even better for
    Digital than VAX, if Ken Olsen only "took charge" we'd be out of "the
    mess" in 30 days...

    And full of destructive pessimism that things will never get better and
    we're doomed, we've blown ACE, ALPHA is too little, too late, 
    management hasn't a clue, etc.

    Bare accusations by one participant that another participant in the
    DIGITAL conference is too optimistic or too pessimistic are boring and
    tedious.  Even this reply is tedious.

    I urge people to not accuse each other of too much optimism or too much
    pessimism.
    
    If you've got a reason to think we've turned the corner, or we've
    sealed our doom, let's hear about it.

    Your opinion and reasoning behind the opinion are more valuable to me 
    than the accusation that someone else is too optimistic or too
    pessimistic.
                       

    re:.141
    
    Hey wait a miniute. At 52 I am one of those "OLD BIRDS". There have
    been too many of us old birds run off all ready. 
    
    To run off a 50 year old with no early retirement, when a substantial number of the folks
    that age have medical problems which won't be covered by insurance at a
    new job is cruel enough not to joke about it. The "Pre existing condition 
    clause on most health plans is a real bummer to many of us if
    we get the package. We may find a good job out there, but will be
    screwed to the wall on insurance coverage.
    
    Not offering early retirement, therefore seems to be an injustice to
    the older worker.

	It seems odd to me that you are looking at this from the angle of
	the company and job you are leaving, rather than the new one.

	It seems odd to say a company aught to give 50-year olds early 
	retirement options because of healthcare issues.

	Surely this should be on length of service and age.

	If the new job comes with a restrictive insurance policy, tackle that
	as part of the package that comes with the new job, not the company 
	that you are leaving.

	Or am I missing something?


	Heather

    
    	Re .141
    
    		Calm down Sonnie!
    
    					;^')
    
    

    
    
    	.144  
    
    	A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
    
    	To walk out on a healthcare package thinking that that's my next
    	employer's problem is definitely not the way to look at it!  It's
    	MY problem not thiers!  If I/we can nail down a guaranteed health
    	care plan now, I/we sure will.
                                      

                      <<< Note 1701.141 by BAGELS::REED >>>

>    	some of them are tired/bored/disillusioned/cranky/etc. it's OK. 

     Tired and cranky? Always. Bored? Seldom. Disillusioned? Go to
     Burger King and have it your way. (Only your Doctor doesn't
     want you eating that stuff 8^)

This is a replacement note with the correct fast food vendor. Bet is fakes out
your unseen map.  m

    Jeeeeze!!! What did I say??  I simply said it isn't any fun anymore.
    What the hell is the big deal?
    
    .131, I hope that when you are 59, the market will still consider you
    "competitive and marketable".  For the vast, vast, majority of us old
    timers, that simply is not realistic.
    
    When I leave Digital, I will never be able to work again.  This is both
    a factor of deteriorating health, and the fact that I chose not to be
    a greeter at Wal-Mart or to fry hamburgers.  I want the best possible
    deal I can get from Digital, and I BY GOD, BELIEVE I HAVE IT COMING TO
    ME!  So please be a little gentle with the old guy...OK?   You'll be
    there someday yourself.  If you really believe that people in their
    50's can retain their marketability, you must have been living in
    a time warp for the past 15 or so years.  Real problems with getting
    another job start showing up around 45 as a matter of fact.
    
    I'm ready to retire, but I'm not going to be stupid, and I absolutely
    am not going to walk away.   I still function quite effectively, thank
    you, and am presently working on multiple service proposals which should
    yield about $100M in new high margin business.......but I don't, dammit,
    have to like it!
    
    I don't understand how a simple statement that "it's not any fun
    anymore" can be twisted around to imply that I am bad-mouthing DEC.
    I'm not the very senior V.P. who in the last two weeks, in writing,
    has evidenced very serious reservations about both ALPHA and ACE.  Go
    yell at him!
    
    I have worked full-time since December 16th, 1950.  I've been a combat
    leader, a college instructor, and IBM customer engineer, and have held
    sixteen different positions at Digital...all of them with increasing
    responsibility.  I don't owe you, or anyone like you, any apologies
    for my attitude, or any other aspect of my work ethic.  I cleaned
    toilets for six weeks to feed my family.....have you done anything like
    that?
    
    .135 ...... is that you Chuck??  Call sometime.
    
    Anyhow........still waiting.......but it is damned hard.

    re: .148   Bravo!  
    
    		I hope what you say about finding new employement getting
    harder starting around 45 isn't true, but if it is I at least have 2
    years to find something, starting today.

�                    <<< Note 1701.148 by STRIKE::LENNARD >>>
�                         -< That's a little too much >-

	Dick,

	I think we all understand what you're trying to say, and the predicament
	you are facing.  It's just when we hear/read it day after day, time
	and time again, over and over and over, that it gets a bit tiresome.

	The end result is that it really takes the edge off anything pertinent
	you might have to say.

	--Mike

    Somebody has to leave...
    
    People over 50 have been teased for two years...and many are willing to 
    leave...
    
    I love my job, I like DEC but I am so tired of waiting and wondering
    about the future, a decent health plan and a job.
    
    It isn't fun anymore...

While I can fully sympathise that finding a new job in your late 50s is *VERY*
difficult, I fail to see how the payout of TFSO makes any lasting difference.
A year, yes.  The rest of your life?  No.

I understand the begging for early retirement.  Not the package.

    
    
    .152
    
    Let's say that the ER salary package yields $75,000., right now, here,
    today, cash money.  Now, if you/me/him/them stay and don't take the ER
    package, how long will it take you/me/him/them to save $75,000?  
    
    Takes a long time to save 2 years salary.
    
    So, some folks are saying give me 2 years salary, and a lump sum ER
    pay-out rather than a pension, hospital benefits 'till I'm 65....
    
    Hello, shuffleboard!

    I can imagine that people (especially "old timers") aren't too happy
    with Digital at the moment. Geesh, even people who joined te company
    only a few years ago find it hard to keep up the spirit.
    People are layed-off left right and center and managers are
    streetfighting to maintain their power or get more.
    I'm convinced that 99% of the "workers" within Digital want this
    company to get healthy again (I'm one of them), but not knowing who'll
    be your buddy tomorow or to what costcentre of manager you report
    tomorrow makes it pretty hard to stay motivated.
    
    And with respect to packages, in Holland we rightsized last December.
    The package (Dec employee untill June '92), help to find another job
    through agencies, one month salary for each year with DEC) was
    considered extremely generous by others in the branch.
    And besides a decent package, people over 50 and those who would not be
    able to find another job for medical reasons stay with DEC.
    People over 55 where offered early retirement with additional pay by
    DEC untill they are 65.
    
    DEC these days a "difficult" company to work for? Yes indeed. People
    not being happy these days? Can't blame them.
    But, what I've seen out here is that the guys who are the least happy
    with the company are the ones who work the longest hours and are the
    ones who try to make the most money for DEC.
    
    My 2 Dutch cents worth.
    
    Charles 
    

    RE: Dick L.
    
    	The difference between you and I Dick is that when I reach 59,
    there most likely will not be any big pillow for me to land on when
    I get 'old and tired'.  That means that for the rest of my life (I'm
    31) I will have to work my ass off to stay 'competitive and
    marketable'.  Santa Claus isn't going to hand me a 'package'.  Cradle
    to grave employment is a thing of the past, and age is meaningless in
    todays market, I am as likely to get laid off this summer as you
    or Jack Shields.  So I have two choices, sit around whining and
    complaining, waiting for fairyjobmother to come and save me, or take
    a look around and see where the next job opportunities will be and 
    point myself in that direction.  Anyone who doesn't do this is foolish,
    and btw, it is *NEVER* too late to start.  I have mowed lawns for a 
    living, worked underground shoveling concrete and blasting rock.  I
    have stuffed envelopes and cleaned toilets to feed my family, I have
    had a cushy corporate job and now I work with our customers delivering
    consulting services for real money that goes toward our salaries.  I
    have worked closely with perhaps 75 customers in the last two years
    and I can say, this is the best job I have had, and Digital is the best
    company to work for.  Anyone who dreams about greener pastures should
    go take a look and see if you can find one.  I don't say this to make
    you feel bad Dick, but to make you aware of what you have.  There is
    an old saying that goes  "Happiness isn't having everything you want,
    it is wanting everything you have".
    
    Best of luck,
    Brad.

    Brad,I'm trying to understand your note. If you're trying to say that a
    59 year old should simply get another job,dream on! There isn't  a
    company in this fine old country that'd hire such a guy. (a company
    offering a job commensurate with Dick's skills that is)
    Also,I don't know Dick personally but I'll bet he's had a few ditch
    digging jobs too like a lot of us.
    The fact that he's of retirement age and would leave readily if asked
    is somehow bad?
    Brad,did I misread your note? It sounded like your flame was on high.
    
    Ken

Hi,

 I have not read all the replies to this note, so forgive me if someone
 else have already talked about this point:
 
 I've been sitting here in front of the terminal thinking about this issue,
 I cant figure it out.

 Why is it harder for an older Engineer to find work? 

 I would have thought that because of all the experience and knowledge they've
 accumulated over the years , that would be a great asset, not something 
 held against them?

 let me guess, is it because their salary is too high by then? 
 well , Excuuuse me, you get what you pay for !  
 plus, Salary is negotiable, right?

 is it because of higher medical cost? 
 
 well, what if the guy is healthy, and have no major medical problems? 
 they could have brushed their teeth's every day all their lives, and taken
 care of themselves, right?
 
 plus nowadays people live longer and healthier than before, also you could 
 hire a young dude who is sick all time, and will cost the company more money 
 than an older guy. 

 I hope when Iam in my 50's and in the prime of my live , I would not have 
 to worry about these things...That reminds me, I need to buy a new teeth
 brush soon..

thank you very much .
/Nasser
    

    No, I'm saying stop ragging on Digital.  Dick is 'begging' for
    a package, should I be happy about it?  Finding a job certainly
    is not on Dick's mind, otherwise he would be working hard to keep
    the one he has.
    
    Brad.

    One must take a over view of how the "right sizing" and "down sizing"
    is occurring. There is no apparent rhyme or reason how it is being
    handled. I've seen guys doing the same job some with 10+ years get it
    and some with 3-5 years get it. The logical conclusion is "well here
    is the dart board and all of the 200+ VPs each have a dart- ready-
    aim-fire... well there goes 200 more."
    	regards
    	John

   RE .157:

   > Why is it harder for an older Engineer to find work? 

     It is harder for an older engineer to find work (regular, full-time
     work) because many companies feel that it is not worth their while
     to hire someone who has only a few years of working life left (say 10
     years, if the engineer is 55) before they have to pension him.  Of
     course no company will come out and say this, because if they did you
     could nail them for age discrimination.  However, age discrimination 
     does exist out there, and very strongly too.

    Age discrimination does exist, Nasser.

    A few reasons for this have already been mentioned 
    	
    	high salary (negotiable),
        
    	high health care cost (possibly negotiable)
    	
    	short working lifetime (55 years old=10 years to retirement)
    	
    	possible physical difficulties (hearing/vision/weak bladder)
    	
    	possible mental problems (senile old *****)

    	set in behavior patterns (Their view - can we teach this old dog
    our company tricks)

    	minimally productive person (their view- the thoughts seem to be- 
    this person is going to shuffle along and do just enough to get by because
    all he needs is a few bucks a week until social security kicks in so we
    will never get more than 40 hours out of him but we can get 60 or
    seventy hours for 40 hours pay from this 25 year old)

    	minimally productive rev 2 -  (their view - this person is so old
    he could not possibly have an original thought)


    The list goes on and on and it still all boils down to age
    discrimination and it does start at around 45 years old and gets worse
    the older you get.

    Re .-1
    
    I am beginning to get really fed up of reading notes from people who appear
    to be sitting on the edges of their chair just waiting for Digital to
    offer them a nice lucrative early retirement package. Doesn't all this
    waiting impact the efficiency of how you do your job? Surely Digital does 
    not owe anybody an early retirement package. If you'd like one and you get
    one fine. But my suggestion is that you stop worrying about a bonus and
    just concentrate solely on doing your job to the best of your ability.
    Maybe you'd even enjoy it then.

    Dave
    
    PS The original version of this note was censored by the DIGITAL.NOTE
       censorship board. This version has been given a PG13 rating. I'm
       putting it here where my original note was because it refers to
       notes .131 and earlier notes.

    Sounds like Holland is a good place to work! 
    
    Ken

    re .162.
    I agree, there could be worse places.
    
    Charles

    My dear departed supervisor might just disagree with you there Charles.

    Jamie.

    Which one you mean Jamie?
    
    Charles

    The female one.
    
    Jamie.

    Ah. Last I heard was that she said she wasn't too unhappy "Digital had
    taken that decision *for* her".
    Don't know if she still thinks that way though.
    She was quite upset though by the procedure.
    
    Charles

    I think that the reasons mentioned for why old folks can't find a job
    are  totally accurate.  To my experience it starts at about 45, and
    then really peaks at 50 or so.  At 59, I would not even attempt to
    look for a job....it's impossible.
    
    The really finda funny aspect of the whole thing is the incredible
    level of denial at every level.  When the Target Sales Forc S--t the
    bed, there were 108 people who had to find a job.  One year later
    there were still five of us looking.  All of us were over 50!!!  When
    we mentioned the possibility to personnel that age might be a problem,
    you would have thought we were proposing a union or something.
    
    For those young'uns who don't believe it still.....fine....but just
    be ready to retire at 50.
                  

     I'm not sure you can start with 45. It depend on where you interview.
     I was told at one interview, after generally good feedback, that I
     was really too old for the position and that the person would deny he
     said it. I had worked at the company before and new the person that
     had said it.

     I was 36 at the time.

             Mike

    I'm a Principle M.E. and due to the restructuring of manufacturing have
    considered changing careers and moving into software. I have a
    reasonable knowledge base in software and have used several different
    programming languages. When I interviewed for the first time for a
    software job, I was told that it may be difficult for me get into the
    swing of things. That changing career paths at my age (39) would be
    difficult. And was asked, "Do you think you have the energy at your age
    that would be needed to succeed ?" To me, that snaps of age
    discrimination, and that comment and alot more was stated to me during
    an interview here at DEC...  I can understand what the older folks are
    up against, it seems it has already started for me. I really beleive
    that due to the glut of unemployed people out there looking, that it is
    a buyers market and they will certainly have an assortment of ages,
    skill sets and pay ranges to choose from. Can't blame though,
    everybodies shopping with caution these days....
    

    
    	You would be surprised how LITTLE it takes to be considered age
    	discrimination.  I would consider that (.170) age discrimination.
    	However, proving it is a bit difficult if the other guy lies.
    

    I think, under US law, you can't charge age discrimination until you're
    over 40.  Thus .-2 just has to wait a year to be told the same thing.

    	Or you could try my technique of acting really, really immature so
    that no one would actually guess how old you really are. Of course,
    this does wonders for your career in other ways, but that's a different
    matter.
    	But then again, 39 is pretty, darned old...

>                               -< 39 and to OLD >-
>I'm a Principle M.E. and due to the restructuring of manufacturing have
>considered changing careers and moving into software. I have a
>reasonable knowledge base in software and have used several different
>programming languages. When I interviewed for the first time for a
>software job, I was told that it may be difficult for me get into the

My advice is to: Keep trying.
I was a hardware engineer, and because the business needs have been changing,
am converting from hardware support to software support; i.e. becoming
a software engineer.

Its easier to convert in  a product support group, because most engineers, i 
think, like to do "new stuff"; but to do followon support to someone elses 
mistakes takes a lot more talent, and involves a lot more stress. Its one 
thing to have the PM beating on your back; its something eles to be 
getting phone calls from .... ah .. "much higher up" in the company .. 

oh ... and by the way ... I'll never see 39 again ... or anything
beginning with 4n either ... 

In following several Technical Notefiles, it is apparent that there "should be"
opportunities in "Custom Software Applications" and "Networking with PCs" as the
current "hot" growth areas. Particularly in "post sale support".

Keep trying ...

Bob

    
    
    	When people ask my age, I tell them I am almost 30...
    
    
    
    		I'm 2F.
    
    
    	(a little radix humor)
    
    	rjc

    Gathered thru this and quite a few other topics, it seems pretty
    clear that one of DIGITAL's problem is a generation conflict:
    
    A lot of folks, now around 50, grew up with DEC. Not only are
    they legally proud of, but no matter what they say (not
    everyone is as open as Dick Lennart) they are unable to commit
    themselves fully to the "new" DIGITAL. They try hard (some honestly,
    some in appearance only), but they still think and act DEC
    subconciously. Worse if they are in a management position as
    the influence and impact is proportional to power.
    
    If we now assume that DIGITAL needs a new culture (or no culture
    at all, just processes) the "old folks" (together with the crowd
    of "younger" believers) will never allow this to happen or at
    least make it very difficult, long and expensive.
    
    I do not feel qualified to judge which is the better between
    the old DEC and the new DIGITAL, but as long as these two
    worlds have to live together, noone will ever be able to judge.
    It could very well be that the new DIGITAL has only survived so
    far thanks to the "obscene" efforts of the old DEC'ies to
    do the "right thing" despite and against the new management trends.
    Perhaps a phenomena similar to the Frenchie's who fought their
    last TONKIN battle at Dien Dien Phu destructively brave, knowing 
    perfectly that there wasn't any victory for them or France
    possible. However, the few who survived, are proud and recognized
    as having done their job. 
    
    I'd leave the conclusion up to you, returning to my own battle...
    /fred  
                             

    Please don't lump all us "old" DECCIES together.  I have been here for
    19 years and am still trying as hard as I can to drag DEC yelling and
    screaming into the 20th century.
    
    My view is that a lot of folks at the top have never had to manage in
    bad times and they are in real turmoil.  What they are doing wrong is
    not listening.  It is so easy to ask questions but not if it could be
    interpreted as weakness.  
    
    DEC needs a fundamental change to a more self-managing environment, but
    that is a scary change for folks who have climbed the ladder of success
    only to find out that they don't have all the answers. 

    I second .177:  don't make too many assumptions about "old DECcies". I
    have been here 28 years, and still find many things done in an
    inefficient or unreasonable manner simply because nobody has been able
    to change the system.  It appears to me that a good portion of the
    reason is there are far more people empowered to say "No" than are
    empowered to say "Yes," but that has been covered elsewhere.

    I'll list two additional items I have run into recently:  managers
    who don't want to use VAXnotes because, "They are a waste of time",
    and an option-numbering system that would that would have been perfect
    for Henry Ford I.

    And an additional item for some newer people: the objections to the new
    EFT petty cash system, when trivial changes to one's personal
    money-management procedures would cause no real difficulties.  This
    has also been discussed exhaustively in this conference.

    I also see new managers who reject the "old Digital philosphy" of do
    the right thing and import obviously unreasonable practices from other
    companies in the name of the "New Digital".
    
    The list goes on and on.

       Re:last two
    
        As a 19 year deccie myself I have to agree. Our dept. has been
    plagued with VBL problems when putting a board into layout. Usually
    good VBL's exist at other sites yet ,you name the site, most sites
    don't share their VBL's so new ones get built from scratch. On one
    project I got bumped twice onece from LTN>MR0 then from MR0>SHR at
    each site I had to supply mechanical info for non-standard components.
    I did this at all three sites because the data-bases weren't shared!!
    In this instance a common corporate VBL would be the most viable
    solution. Sadly it'll likely never happen. So we'll continue to get
    boards with erroneous footprints for devices etc. A co-worker and I
    will eventually a suggestion to create a corporate database for this.
    Management is no help in solving this because they don't understand
    the problem..... Sound familiar??
    
               Bob

    Re: .-1
    
    All too familiar.  The wrong footprint problem has been with us for
    20 years that I know of.

    re -1
    Send this info into Delta. If there is a problem make sure the right
    people know about it. If someone is not told how can the problem get
    fixed. If people in this company know about problems, they had better
    take the attitude and make sure that someone other than their
    management, because they do not consider it a problem, if we do not
    make sure the problems get fixed, you and I might not be around to do
    anything in the future about problems that we see. 
    
    	I remember a speech by KO, if you do not keep your head on straight
    and try and solve the problem, and keep at it, until the problem is
    solved, no one else is going to do it for you. It is VERY hard to
    institute change. If we in the know, do not keep plugging away to fix
    the system, it is not going to fix itself.
    
    My .2C
    

    Well, I'll let somebody more recently connected with footprints deal
    with that issue.  I'll take your suggestion for a few of the other
    things I mentioned in another note.

re: -.2 (I think)

RE: Taking suggestions to DELTA

I once sent a suggestion to DELTA a year or two ago and here is what has happened
since then:

I have received at least 5 thank you notes both electronically and in hard copy
format from 5 different people.

I have received at least 5 more memos again from 5 different people
electronically as to what they did with my idea.

All I can say is, does the DELTA organization have a high turn-around with staff
and poor record keeping?

		- Ramani

    RE: .183
    My experience exactly.  My suggestion was for Security to use a
    less expensive alternative to the Ford Taurus they currently
    drive.  I received no less than half a dozen polite thankyou
    notes from different managers for submitting a suggestion to 
    Delta.
    
    After several months, I received a followup.  Security will
    continue to use the Ford Taurus, because Fleet Adminstration 
    *lets* them.

    Ramani - I am the operations mgr for DELTA and can sit here at my
    terminal and look at the entire history of your idea from its
    submission on 11/11/90 through the first response that came to us on
    11/21/90, the fact that we sent it back to the organization
    responding because the answer did not satisfy us, through a second
    response and through our survey to you.  The fact that you did not
    answer the survey is also noted.  Please get in touch with me directly
    if you have any issues or things that we can improve.  I would be more
    than happy to send you our complete set of records on your idea by mail
    if you wish.

    re .179
    
    Hi Bob!
    
    Take heart...this issue is being worked and is recognized as a need at
    the VP level.  We're in the process of getting the $$ and other
    resources together to do this.  But as you know, here at DEC "Progress
    is our most important problem!"
    
    					John G.

    Rick - The fact you did not recieve back the answer that you wanted is
    not an indictment of the DELTA process.  We have never said that every
    idea would be implemented or even that any of them would be
    implemented.  What we have said is that we will provide a channel for
    ideas to be heard and evaluated.  The fact that there are areas of the
    company who still do not understand that employees are the single most
    important voice for process change says that we have a long way to
    go.  
    
    Silencing DELTA and employees is not the answer - educating management is.  
    
    

    RE: .187
    Maxine, I have no problem with the fact that my suggestion was
    not implemented.  What I had a problem with was that any mention
    of potential cost savings was never answered or acknowledged.
    
    The final answer simply stated, "we will continue to use the
    Taurus because it's on the list of cars approved by Fleet...".
    My suggestion was to modify the list of cars approved by fleet
    administration with less expensive alternatives, but that was 
    apparently never addressed.
    
    Heck, my wife would like a Taurus too.  The fiscal reality is 
    that she drives an Escort.
    
    Rick

    re:186
    
        Hi John,
    
      Do you think Alex G. and I should still submit our suggestion to
    "DELTA"?  I can give a good example for anyone wishing to better
    understand the crux of the problem.
    
       I was working on an option for one of the FT-Vaxes. We were using a
    223 pin gatearray. This gatearray had been used on two previous options
    so a good VBL existedin LTN and MR0 When we commenced work on the 3rd 
    option at SHR they used a databook to create a new VBL from Toshiba or ?? 
    whereas our design was based on ASICs pinout. None of the pins were 
    located where they were supposed to be. Fortunately in this instance we 
    caught the problem before we had any pcb's made. It was sheer luck that 
    I noticed it because I'd been under the false impression that there was
    a central database. We ended up spinning a 2nd pass of etch anyway
    because yet another VBL SHR created was pinned incorrectly. 
    
            Bob

    re.188
    
    Try to separate the process from the answer.  The process did what it
    was supposed to do - got your idea evaluated and responded to.         
    
    The response leaves a lot to be desired, but our process says that you
    are in charge of whether or not the idea is "closed".  If you didn't
    like the response you had 2 options:
    
             1)  You have the name of the person who responded to you -
             tell them you didn't like the answer and engage in 
             constructive dialog.
    
             2)  Tell DELTA you didn't like the answer and we will work
             on alternatives with you.  
    
    If you did neither then how can the process ever be successful in your
    eyes?
     

    Well, the value of a process is determined by the results it achieves.

    re: .190
    
    Maxine,
    
    As I have stated many times on follow-up forms to your organization on
    various DELTA ideas I have submitted, there needs to be a third
    alternative - the DELTA process has to have some accountability and/or
    responsibility to follow-thru and drive closure for those responses
    that either misconstrue the intent of the original idea, provide an
    evasive or "canned" reply, or deliberately give the original idea short
    shrift.  As the process stands today, a reviewing organization can
    stonewall or ignore an idea indefinitely, and DELTA has no teeth to
    force a reasoned, rational reply.  That effort is left to the
    "empowered" employee.  What a joke.
    
    BTW, I don't recall ever receiving a satisfactory answer to the
    above-stated concern from your organization, either.  I think that
    DELTA will be window-dressing only until it accepts some real
    responsibility for driving thoughtful response to ideas *and*
    meaningful closure.  The current admin-only process comes up short.
    
    Dick.

    Re last few
    
    I believe this is rather a rathole and I will continue the
    conversations offline.  However, we have come a long way in the last 2
    years and an idea sent in 2 years ago did not get the same treatment it
    gets today.  Our process has matured and continues to mature, as does
    the corporation.  Statistically we are running at a 90% satisfaction
    rate for the process and a 75% satisfaction rate for the responses
    over a database of over 5000 ideas.  
    
    You are right - we do not have the power we need and won't until all 
    of us pull together.  Management, in many cases, would like nothing
    better than for DELTA to disappear. Some are even lobbying for just
    that to happen. 
    
    I'll ask again - if not DELTA, what?  We are all in this together.

This entire string should probably be moved to the "Delta" topic.

RE: 1701.190 
>> The process did what it was supposed to do - got your idea evaluated 
>> and responded to.         
  
Well, I agree with half of that.  My idea certainly got plenty of
responses, but none with any substance.  If it had been truly
evaluated, I would have heard something back on the potential
cost savings of using a car that should cost less to purchase,
maintain, and insure.  But since I received no feedback whatsoever
on that issue, I can only assume it was not seriously evaluated.
Instead I received a list of basic maintenance tips they are using
(i.e. checking oil level and tire pressure) to minimize expenses.

As far as pursuing the issue after it was rejected, my suggestion
was one for an area in which I have no repsonsibility or expertise.
The thought of pursuing it sounds nice, but now is not the time for 
some of us to make waves beyond the area of our immediate job 
repsonsibilities.  

I have no doubt, however, that at some point, someone will suggest 
the use of less expensive cars, it will be determined that some 
real money can be saved, and that person will be recognized for
their dedication to saving the company's money.  Anyone else wanna 
run with it?    8^0

RE: .193

=>                        -< Let's take it offline . . . >-

	Why? This line of discussion is of interest to more employees than
	just the respondents here.  

=>    the corporation.  Statistically we are running at a 90% satisfaction
=>    rate for the process and a 75% satisfaction rate for the responses
=>    over a database of over 5000 ideas.  

	Point of curiosity...on what data are your statistics based?      

	>> Point of curiosity...on what data are your statistics based?
    
    I thought the previous note had made that reasonably obvious, at least
    to me.  Perhaps you could rephrase your question to be more precise on
    what further information you are looking for.

  
  Re .195/6
  
  >> Point of curiosity...on what data are your statistics based?    
  >                                                                        
  > I thought the previous note had made that reasonably obvious, at least 
  > to me.  Perhaps you could rephrase your question to be more precise on 
  > what further information you are looking for.                          
  
  The above response is [strictly speaking] a truthful and timely answer.
  It closes down the original query and leads to a new query on exactly
  the same subject.  It also provides zero information to the questioner�.
  The reply would thus fall into the "satisfactory response" category and
  so counts for +1 on any call-based measurement system [ actually it's
  worth more than that as the querient will almost certainly log another
  call to get the same information as they were originally asking for ].
  
  Whilst I'm not sure if Mr. Eggers intended it that way or not [don't know
  him well enough to differentiate sarcasm from serious comment] it provides
  a very good illustration of a response that is accurate & useful from one
  viewpoint and content-free & useless from another.
  
  Frank
  
  � The question had arisen because the person did not believe the previous
    note "had made that reasonably obvious" - responding that it is "obvious,
    at least to me" without providing further enlightenment isn't a lot of
    use to them.

    I would urge anyone who wants to learn more about the DELTA program to
    look at VTX DELTA.  It includes not only our statistics but also a lot
    of good work done by a lot of employees over the last 2 years.  I also
    urge anyone to give me a call to talk about the process or to come to
    the Stow facility and meet with us.  Our staff meetings are every
    Thursday am and any employee is cordially invited to join us.

    re: .197
    
    Excellent reply!  I beleive you've proven your point very well.
    
    -joe tomkowitz

    re. 189
    
    Bob - I'll send you some E-mail and we can discuss this off-line.
    
    					John G.