Conference 7.286::digital

    
    Hmmm...
    
    I've heard that many managers are afraid to hire a TFSO person or someone
    who was involved with All Hands On DEC because many took other jobs 
    OUTSIDE the company.  Why waste the time putting through paperwork when
    the guy takes the package the day before you get him the offer letter?
    Unfortunately, someone capable of finding a job outside DEC is most likely
    someone DEC could use!
    
    Do we underpay some old timers? YES!  Do we also have a lot of
    deadwood?  A resounding YES! 
    We DEFINATELY have to cut headcount. The Greater Maynard Good-Old-Boy
    Chowder and Marching Society (as another colorful noter pointed out)
    is a good place to start.
    
    -Ed
    
     

	First of all, these "TFSO's" are not layoffs (even though I admit
    to occasionally slipping and calling them that myself).  Like you said,
    they are more like "being fired for cause, but with better severance."
    In the real world, this sort of thing has always been known as a "RIF"
    (Reduction In Force).  A RIF is worse than a lay-off, but that's why
    the corporation typically buys you off and gets you to sign papers
    saying you won't sue for compensation, etc.

	The reason "high-tech" corporations can get away with RIF's versus
    layoffs is basically because most high-tech employees are too uppity,
    snobbish, complacent, and wimpy to unionize for any sort of collective
    bargaining power.  This is partly due to the fact that most high-tech
    employees tend to come from college educated, white collar, uppity,
    snobbish, complacent, and ultimately wimpish backgrounds than do most
    "blue collar" unionized labor shops.

	Remember, Ratheon is a union shop.  That's why they have real
    layoffs.  That's also why their layoffs are handled with the employees
    in mind.  Seniority means job security in a union shop.  At Ratheon,
    when a layoff occurs, it means the lowest employee on the seniority
    totem pole gets bumped.  Many times, such a bump ripples through the
    entire company with people with higher seniority and similar job skills
    bumping in to replace the laid off employee.  In our computer biz',
    a RIF is a RIF and management can be as creative as they like in
    determining who gets hit (within EEO guidelines of course).

	The other key difference between a layoff and a RIF is that
    an employee who is laid off is also considered first in a hire-back
    situation (a concept which is somehow alien to DEC).  This is yet
    another reason why a RIF is more akin to being fired for cause.
    On the other hand, a RIF isn't quite as bad as actually being fired
    for cause however. According to our local management anyway, a certain
    percentage of employees who are let go at DEC *are* fired for cause
    with no package - nada - see you later, goodbye).

	Before all the anti-unionists get all riled-up though, I should
    add that being a union shop is no picnic either.  Layoffs are a fact
    of life in a union shop.  Also, union shops tend to get uniform salary
    increases in that the entire company (or Ratheon anyway) gets the
    same percentage increase for each given scale based on the negotiated
    contract - regardless of individual performance factors.  Contracts
    typically get renegotiated every two years or so.  They also have
    all their vacations during the same two-week shutdown period each
    year in August (complete with a limited number of sick days, etc.,
    ad nauseum).  As can be imagined, Ratheon employees bitch about work
    the same as the rest.

    	Like you however, I can't help thinking that there has to be a
    better way to handle RIFs than what has been done so far.  Like the
    sheep that we high-tech employees are however, the only way the
    current situation will ever change (at DEC or at most other high-
    tech computer companies anyway) is if high-tech employees organize
    to do something about it.  Otherwise, our careers (as well as our
    very livelihoods) are at the mercy of this week's upper management
    directive and/or the line manager's opinion of a given employee.

				    -davo

p.s.	 Remember: If the boss gets miffed, then you may get RIF'ed.

    The point of the exercise is to reduce headcount. The methods employed
    are to support that.
    
    I don't like it, but I understand it.
    
    	- andy

    .3 comes close to saying "the end clarifies the means", if not
    exactly "justifies" them.   Trouble is, "the methods employed" seem
    to be very variable from place to place, and are therefore likely to
    be unfair to individuals (if you define fairness as some concept of
    equal treatment with adjustment for inequalities in circumstance).
    
      I'd agree with .2 on how having unions around, concentrates
    management's mind and improves administrative procedures for
    layoffs.   In fact it seems to improve most personnel-related
    administration, from my experience working in large unionised
    organisations, as well as non-unionised large/small computer
    companies, in the UK.    Unfortunately there aren't any
    examples of good, unionised, computer companies I can think
    of.   Can anyone in the US suggest any?

Ahhh Gi'day...�

    Some parts of the company are saying layed off people can come back and
    will be given some form of priority.

    Some parts of the company are expressly NOT using EEO in layoffs.

    
    	re .0
    
    	>It used to be that nobody got laid off. So if somebody quit, they
    	>were not eligible for rehire, even if a manager really wanted them
    	>and had an external req...
    
    	Where is this written? I know quite a few people who left DEC and
    	were subsequently rehired.
    
    	I am not familiar with all of the details of TFSO, but..are you 
    	trying to say that if someone gets the package today, and the
    	business turns around next year and DEC needs their skills again,
    	they are not eligible for rehire? Doesn't make common sense, much
    	less business sense.
    
    	re .2
    	As for unions, you can keep them, thank you. They cause more
    	problems than they cure.
     
    	Signed,
    	Uppity, snobbish, complacent and wimpy high-tech employee
    

re .6:

From VTX ORANGEBOOK:

 Rehiring of Former Employees

 Generally, employees who terminate from the Company will not be
 considered for rehire.  A decision to rehire an employee may only
 occur after a careful review of the individual's previous Company
 record and with the approval of two successive levels of management.
 In addition, reference checks with previous Digital supervisors should
 be carried out to determine if the rehired employee will meet the
 requirements of the new position.  Rehiring someone into a senior
 management position (i.e., direct report to a group/area manager)
 requires the additional approval of the appropriate Management and
 Personnel Management Committee member. When a former employee is
 rehired, that employee receives no credit for prior service except as
 provided under the terms of the Pension Plan.  Pension plan rules that
 were in effect at the time of the employee's termination determine
 what, if any, pension benefits are recoverable.  Rehired employees are
 issued their former badge numbers.

    What I think is really sad is that I know employees with over 
    20 years experience in DEC working at one site, who are going to be let 
    go only because their projects are being canceled, while people doing 
    the same job at another site with 3 years experience will stay. My boss 
    would gladly trade for those more experienced employees if he could.

    
    	re .7
    
    	Thanks..I guess that it *is* written somewhere! But it must be
    	(or at least *was*) fairly easy to get re-hired..like I said, I
    	know quite at least half a dozen people who jumped ship and came
    	back.

    re:.10
    Prior to, say, 1985, it was very easy to get rehired.  Of course, back
    then it was not uncommon to jump 3 salary levels all at once, if that's
    what your group manager wanted to see happen.  Things were pretty
    loose.  Since most groups did _not_ give big raises, though, oldtimers
    had a good incentive to jump ship for, say, a year.
    
    But the current orangebook rule was added in order, it seems, to curb
    the perceived abuse.  Of course, if the oldtimer really was worth the
    new offering salary, it could be arguably correct to pay it, but the
    rule was intended to say that once you're a digit, you're forever on
    the same salary track and you should never have any hope of catching up
    with newcomers!  Quit and you're out for good. That happened during the
    last great hiring binge, and there's been rather little outside hiring
    for the past few years.  Thus even without the rule, little chance of
    rehire.
    
    Right now, though, it reminds me of a lottery.  Shirley Jackson-style.

The way I heard it (from a guy with a 3-digit badge number), it WAS very 
easy to leave and come back.  As a result, a lot of folks had a tendency
to leave and try to start their own company (often using an idea they'd 
developed on DEC's time).  If it failed, back they came.

The no re-hire policy was , to a great extent, aimed at stopping this 
practice.

-dave

    re: rehiring
    
    I've been here for 5 years.  Not long after I started, I remember
    hearing that our then-Area-manager had said that he would NOT approve
    ANY ex-employee's re-entry into Digital in his chain of command --
    PERIOD.  It is my understanding that certain Field chains of command
    MIGHT be able to rehire -- with appropriate VP approval -- but this
    appears to be VERY rare indeed!
    
    I don't know if this manager (now VP of another area) has changed his
    thinking at all about this, but I know that he told two friends of mine
    upon their departure ~18 months ago that they had better not waste their
    time trying to come back under him -- the answer would be NO!  (and
    these two were each highly rated in their skills)
    
    -- Russ

The Orangebook is a list of accepted _GUIDELINES_, not rules.   The wording
allows the rehiring of people if it makes good sense to do so.

Unfortuately, many of the "good old boys" abuse this privilege.

Bob

    re: rehiring. Back when I was a contract worker, I knew of a permanent
    hire that was working here. Thyis person didn't like there hours. They
    got "hurt" Went out on LTD. Went to another DEC facility and got hired
    there also as a full time person. It took several weeks for the fact
    that this person was already working for DEC to catch up with them. the
    person collected several paychecks before it was found out and still
    collected disability. This was over 8 years ago and I'm sure just
    something that "fell through the cracks" It does happen.
    
    Phil

    I'm one of those "re-hires". Let me tell you it was EXTREMELY difficult
    to get back in. I left in 85 and came back in 86. If I hadn't had a
    squeaky clean record (including a check in the "OK to rehire box on my
    exit interview). I wouldn't have stood a chance. My ex-mgr went to bat
    for me with personnel, who seemed top be the main roadblock. My req
    eventually went all the way to Jack Smith for approval. I did get my
    pension seniority and my old badge number back ... but no other
    seniority (as in Vacation)
    
    Sign me "glad to be back" ,
    Tom

    At DEC, and I,m sure other places, there is no rule, orangebook
    statement, fairness doctrine, value statement, moral obligation 
    or other guidelines that cannot be adjusted by Management and 
    Personnel under the mother of all driving statements...
    "FOR THE GOOD OF THE BUSINESS" 

    
    I was a permanent Digital employee from 1980 to 1983; in September
    1983, I began a 6 month leave-of-absence from DEC and also started my
    first semester as a full time college student.  I did well in school
    and decided to not to return to work when the leave ran out.  I temped
    at Digital while in school and was rehired as a permanent employee in
    1987 (entirely different job from the one I had on the first go-round).
    
    Cq  

    
    
    	 I left in the 1985 TFSO that was voluntary. The Albuquerque plant
    at that time was hurting big time and scrambling for some new Charter
    Business to pay the light bill. After two years with Mc Donnell 
    Douglas FS in Los Alamos I returned to work with DEC in Jan. 88.
    If there were any "special requirements" they were invisible to
    me. As mentioned earlier my exit interview in '85 recorded a 
    ?? loss to the company and the rehire box was checked. I did note
    that Personnel Policy changed in 88 to exclude any prior hitch to
    apply towards vacation accrual. They changed the wording of the
    policy to something like "continuous years of service".
    
         But then I'm not an engineer , just wage class 2 ,so maybe
                       it didn't really matter.............
    
    
                              Paul

    RE: ? .20
    
    	There was a TFSO in 85?   What kind of package did they give you
    then?
    
    /Dan

    
    The '85 Voluntary Layoff "Package" was not termed TFSO, but
    amounted to the same thing. I had 5 years service and was given
    13 weeks pay, plus $300.+change for my Pension accrued. This 
    plant in Albuquerque had as many as 200+ employees sitting at 
    tables all day waiting for some area in the plant to need able
    bodies. We did away with most janitorial services and grey badges
    cleaned the toilets. We didn't paint the parking lots , but some
    did paint the walls. Scary time then with my then SO and I both
    working here and a mortage to pay, so we both moved on to other
    jobs.  
    
           Don't remember any addittional weeks pay being added to
    the base 13 weeks, but since I only had 5 years I may not have
    been concerned with it....................sad part is that the 
    spiral is being felt here now, and if it's not a lack of orders,
    it's a lack of parts to build the orders we do have.
    
                  Parts is parts...but where's the beef??
    
                              Paul
    
    

re: .8

> The transitioned employee accepts a financial gift to soften
> the blow and to absolve the company of any claim against it for the
> firing.

So if one refused to accept any compensation upon being asked to leave,
and was therefore able to refuse to sign anything absolving DEC, one
would be free to sue? Might be an interesting situation to watch, eh?

-Jack

re Note 1897.23 by 16BITS::DELBALSO:

> So if one refused to accept any compensation upon being asked to leave,
> and was therefore able to refuse to sign anything absolving DEC, one
> would be free to sue? Might be an interesting situation to watch, eh?

        Yes, but you probably would lose (Digital can hire more and
        better lawyers for far longer than you probably can get).

        Bob

Ahhh Gi'day...

    Digital is  VERY  wary about going to court.  Start a sub poena on some
    management types, and you can name your price.

re: .25: WRONG... I have seen it NOT happen.

Jim

    Digital is getty feisty again on litigation.  The local news had
    an item saying that civil suits being filed now won't make it to
    in less than four years if either party drags their feet.  Bush's
    latest round of Justice Department "suggestions" to judges will
    pretty much eliminate any chance of a single plaintiff standing
    up against a corporate defendant.  Even class-action suits get
    minimal priority on the docket.  If you don't have a collective
    bargaining agreement or an EEOC administrative ruling to base
    your action on, you are sunk, end of story.
    
    Working for a big company is like having a giant pit bull for
    a watchdog:  It can protect you from the harsh outside world,
    but it if turns on you ... who's going to protect you from it?
    
    Geoff
    

Ahhh Gi'day...

    One case  to  the opposite doesn't make it WRONG!!! Digital IS probably
    more  willing  to go to court now, but I've seen cases to the opposite,
    especially   on   personnel   matters.   It  probably  depends  on  the
    juristiction as well...

Please be VERY careful about discussing litigation involving Digital in any
manner here.  In fact, I'd go as far as say please DON'T discuss it here.  It
isn't productive and can cause serious trouble both for noters and for
Digital.

				Steve - co-moderator

1897.30
                <<< HUMANE::HUMANE$DUA1:[NOTES$LIBRARY]DIGITAL.NOTE;1 >>>
                          -< The DEC way of working >-
================================================================================
Note 1897.30     Termination with prejudice is counterproductive        30 of 30
WFOV12::AWKAL                                        18 lines  20-MAY-1992 12:28
                               -< Digital today >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Hi 
    I am new to this note file , but I am reading it all the time , I 
    agree with .27 Digital is a very big company and could fight any one
    of us .
    what I like to see happening is that we help Digital in creating more
    jobs to hire more people not to get rid of people.
    one more thing I wish the U.S will change to the European countries style
    like SCANDINAVIAN countries, in Denmark when you get laid-off you go
    to the unemployment they will take care of you till they find you a job
    you don't have even to look for a job ,and as long as you are
    unemployed you getting payed by the government.
    as for now I hope Digital will succeed in the soon future so all
    of us could keep our jobs.
    I still think Digital is one of the best companies around in treating
    their people, because most other companies will get rid of their people
    with nothing , I agree with the voluntary TFSO , not the unvoluntary
    one.
    thanks ALI