T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
1904.1 | i heard it too!! | POBOX::SEIBERTR | Perky | Mon May 18 1992 17:17 | 0 |
1904.2 | | SAURUS::AICHER | | Mon May 18 1992 17:23 | 3 |
| FWIW I heard it too.
Mark
|
1904.3 | If you don't like this one, make up your own | GOLF::WILSON | | Mon May 18 1992 17:49 | 5 |
| I heard it too, FWIW. The one I heard was that it would be offered
to everyone, except for a core group of about 1000 critical people.
Any guesses whether all 125+ VP's would be in that list of 1000?
|
1904.4 | | NOTIME::SACKS | Gerald Sacks ZKO2-3/N30 DTN:381-2085 | Mon May 18 1992 17:50 | 3 |
| re "I heard it too":
5% of American adults believe they've been abducted by aliens.
|
1904.5 | | MR4DEC::GREEN | | Mon May 18 1992 18:48 | 4 |
|
That's the new package: you volunteer, then aliens take you away.
It's called TFSO: The Flying Saucer Option.
|
1904.6 | me too, and... | PRIMES::ZIMMERMANN | Mark @ COP, dtn 339-5318 | Mon May 18 1992 21:50 | 7 |
| FWIW, I've heard it as well, but a second part of the rumor I heard was
that this new package would be the last one (i.e. more layoffs, or ahhh
rightsizing, but no more TFSOs). If you ask me, that is additional
incentive to take it... then again, maybe it's the best way to get out
the door, those that may not want to be part of Digital anymore. No,
wait, let me guess, this new 'package won't be a TFSO, but a NIODP, a
New & Improved Open Door Policy... :)
|
1904.7 | | ASICS::LESLIE | Andy Leslie | Tue May 19 1992 07:40 | 6 |
| The rumour from the USA that reached the UK was that everyone in the
USA would be offered a years salary to depart.
FWIW,
Andy (in the UK)
|
1904.8 | | DCC::HAGARTY | Essen, Trinken und Shaggen... | Tue May 19 1992 08:02 | 8 |
| Ahhh Gi'day...
I've heard 7 months, and about 20,000 to go. There will be CHAOS if
this happens, I mean how much restructuring, reorg-ing, building
consolidation, moves, etc etc etc will have to take place after this.
20,000 is probably about 100 facilities that have to do. Either way
out, you'll have to pack your bags. Don't expect much to happen H1FY93
|
1904.9 | | WBC::LANIER | | Tue May 19 1992 09:15 | 3 |
| I've been hearing this for awhile now, however no one knows when. Has
anyone heard when this might be offered?
|
1904.10 | | ENABLE::glantz | Mike @TAY 227-4299 TP Eng Littleton | Tue May 19 1992 09:39 | 6 |
| Re .4,.5 ("The Flying Saucer Option"), ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Thanks for
a great tidbit of humor and insight into what would otherwise be
another pitiful rumour-mongering exercise.
See ya on Proxima Centauri Five ... I'm outta here ...
|
1904.11 | | SAURUS::AICHER | | Tue May 19 1992 12:17 | 6 |
| I don't see the 7 mos or year's salary 'cause of legal implications.
It would have to be what is it now, or less.
...the flying saucer thing was hilarious BTW.
Mark
|
1904.12 | Oh NOOOO, not *another* move! | ALFPTS::GCOAST::RIDGWAY | Florida Native | Tue May 19 1992 12:34 | 5 |
| RE: Flying Saucer....
I hate to think what relo costs are going to run on this one!!!!
Keith R>
|
1904.13 | different | WMOIS::JALBERT_C | | Tue May 19 1992 12:39 | 3 |
| WHY?? TFSO and SERP are two different packages.
|
1904.14 | | BREAKR::MIKKELSON | Kill me. I need the money. | Tue May 19 1992 13:19 | 6 |
|
I thought TFSO was the plan being implemented to reduce the number of
employees by 80%: Toss Four, Save One.
- David
|
1904.15 | Top manager said no | CIVIC::GIBSON | | Tue May 19 1992 14:22 | 10 |
| I recently attended a Q&A session with a top level manager, and this
same question was asked. The reply was that there would never be a
TFSO package opened to volunteers from the employee population in
general. In certain cases of downsizing volunteering has been allowed,
but the company tends to lose too many of the people that it wants to
keep.
Linda
|
1904.16 | | RAVEN1::JERRYWHITE | Hey you're pretty good - NOT ! | Tue May 19 1992 14:31 | 3 |
| I agree ... if it were offered at one site, then all sites should be
allowed to do it. And, that would lead to a mass exodus from DEC.
|
1904.17 | people in the know | JARETH::TREWORGY | | Tue May 19 1992 15:20 | 8 |
| This reminds me of our last pay freeze. There was a rumor that there
was going to be a pay freeze, so I asked my manager about it. He said
no way. Digital lost too many good people from the last one. Two days
later, the pay freeze was announced in the Wall Street Journal. Even
after WSJ announced it, I was never told about it from my management.
So I don't believe any of it until it is announced by people in the
know - that being the WJS.
|
1904.18 | | CALS::THACKERAY | | Tue May 19 1992 15:33 | 9 |
| I don't really believe that a wholesale offer would lead to a wholesale
exodus. Let's take New England employees as an example. Most of the
existing people who have been laid off can't find a job; the majority
of people would regard it as foolish to take the package right now.
What it might mean, though, is that the deadwood stays low and survives
the cuts, only to bring the company further down later on.
Ray
|
1904.19 | | ENABLE::glantz | Mike @TAY 227-4299 TP Eng Littleton | Tue May 19 1992 15:38 | 6 |
| > Most of the
> existing people who have been laid off can't find a job
That's interesting. I hadn't heard that, and it doesn't match my
limited experience. Can you point to a source for this info?
|
1904.20 | | FIGS::BANKS | This was | Tue May 19 1992 16:34 | 35 |
| > What it might mean, though, is that the deadwood stays low and survives
> the cuts, only to bring the company further down later on.
I keep hearing the term "deadwood" used around layoffs, RIF, and other
termination plans. What I don't hear is the real problem.
You fire deadwood. You lay off (or RIF) competent, useful employees that you
can't otherwise afford. "Deadwood" is all the excuse you ever need to get rid
of someone, and you don't have to wait for something like SERP or TFSO to get
rid of them.
For the life of me, I can't understand where the expectation that TFSO or SERP
exists to get rid of deadwood comes from.
But, I think I understand one of the real problems: If we still have "deadwood"
in the company, it's probably due to one of two reasons (anecdotal examples of
deadbeat employees excepted):
1. They aren't deadwood, but rather useful employees that someone else
doesn't consider to be useful or productive
2. No one really knows who the deadwood is or how to identify it
You can turn any employee into deadwood. You can also turn any employee into
"unemployed" (for the short term, at least). It's just that neither of those
pursuits happen to do anything useful for the company.
And, the assumption that "only the deadwood stays" also assumes that someone
who is "deadwood" enjoys their position. In my years at DEC, I've met a lot of
productive employees, and I've met a few non-productive employees, but I've
never met anyone that's said "Boy, I have a great time sponging off the company,
and I want to do that for years to come!". What I have met are a lot of
frustrated people trying, for the large part unsuccessfully, to find the right
intersection of their job skills with the company's expectations of them.
Somehow, the employee always gets blamed (or has to pay the price) when that
intersection can't be found.
|
1904.21 | Part of the Delta Program | HELIX::KALLIS | Pumpkins ... Nature's greatest gift. | Tue May 19 1992 17:50 | 6 |
| Re .12 (Keith):
No costs. The aliens pick up the tab. (SERP = Saucerian Experiments on
(Removed Personnel)
Steve Kallis, Jr.
|
1904.22 | Social Plan in Germany | DREUL1::rob | my life is His | Wed May 20 1992 04:51 | 27 |
| Actually, a voluntary severance plan was how it was done (or rather how it is
being done) here in Germany. It's what is called an Interessenausgleich/Sozial-
plan (or compensation and social plan...roughly translated :-). There was also
a bit of a concern that "deadwood" would stay, and the people that we need
would go. My general assessment of it is that, those people that know they
are good (or at least think they are :-) will take the money (it was pretty
decent) and go get a job at another company. People that, for whatever reason,
don't want to loose their job at DEC will stay. None-the-less, there were a
planned ~190 "Betriebsbedingte K�ngidungen" (lay-offs ...english can be much
more succinct at times :-) in spite of the almost 400 that took the money and
ran (you have to realize that, although the number may seem small, we've only
got about 4,000 employees, so it's around 10%+).
I think that no matter how it is done, the company looses good people. You
can never be guaranteed to get rid of the "deadwood" (mostly because noone
really knows how to identify it. Although I think the comment made in an
earlier note is "spot on", ie, it's not deadwood, but good talent that is not
being properly put to use). There's just no good way to rightsize, period.
All you can do is to lay people off, and that is usually decided at a manage-
ment level that has no real contact with the people (or groups) that get
canned, and therefore has no real idea about the talent, work ethics, whatever,
of the people involved, and unfortunately may also have no idea about the long-
term effects and problems they are causing.
sigh...
Rob
|
1904.23 | | GENIE::MORRIS | | Wed May 20 1992 08:18 | 5 |
| Or perhaps Starship Enterprise Retirement Package !
Well you have to have a laugh sometimes... Its only sane !
Chris
|
1904.24 | I speak from experience. | DCC::HAGARTY | Essen, Trinken und Shaggen... | Wed May 20 1992 09:03 | 5 |
| Ahhh Gi'day...
The "voluntary" package from Germany wasn't quite "voluntary" in more
than a few cases. You were called into personnel, told you were on a
"list" to be terminated, and you had an "option" to take the package.
|
1904.25 | How'bout using Desktop Direct for TFSO Selection | DYPSS1::COGHILL | Steve Coghill, Luke 14:28 | Wed May 20 1992 09:26 | 26 |
| Actually, I think the new Employee Purchase Plan for PCs is how the
new TFSO selections are going to be made. This is how it would work.
1) Let's say some 10000 employees take advantage of buying a PC with
the Digital "loan" (payroll deduction for 2 yrs.).
2) The average purchase is $2500.
3) None of them worry about the Ts & Cs which state that upon
voluntary or involuntary termination they owe Digital the full
amount NOW.
4) Digital terminates all of the 10000 people who took the loan deal.
Some sort of termination package is offered.
5) Digital gives each employee $xxxx and the employees each give $2500
back to Digital for the PCs they bought.
Advantages to Digital:
A) $25M in sales.
B) Easy to determine who "gets it".
C) They still get to write off the severance package.
|
1904.26 | Among the Aliens | VISUAL::BMACDONALD | | Wed May 20 1992 09:31 | 7 |
| I'm one of them. I was taken to a base in the pines called MKO, where
my brains were scrambled. I commute to work in some sort of trance.
Frm my cube I watch the sunshine of another planet through the windows.
I believe I am being used as part of some vast experiment among the
aliens. I break through my trance at times and remember vaguely
certain words; laughter; accomplishment; ideas; stability.
But I must end quickly! I hear footsteps approaching!
|
1904.27 | | FORTSC::CHABAN | Make *PRODUCTS* not consortia!! | Wed May 20 1992 14:06 | 12 |
|
Deadwood = People with titles like:
Marketing Manager, SCSI Cables
Director of Ethernet Terminator Development
Senior Marketing Manager, TK-50 Tapes
Seriously, I'm sure we have some titles around here that would raise
some eyebrows.
-Ed
|
1904.28 | motivate the survivors | HANNAH::BOONE | | Wed May 20 1992 14:53 | 7 |
| I think DEC should layoff as many people as necessary - give them as
little as possible, and then give the remaining people a bonus! This
would be the best way to increase productivity!
Just my opinion...
-jb
|
1904.29 | Good! a contact name! | ROMA::RUSSELL | Which one is the "Any" key? | Wed May 20 1992 14:54 | 14 |
| re .27;
>Deadwood = People with titles like:
>Marketing Manager, SCSI Cables
Ed, can you give me his name, please? I am having serious problems
getting hold of a SCSI cable for a DS5000-200....
Peter.
P.S> The note is facetious; the cable problem is not.
|
1904.30 | | ELWOOD::CHRISTIE | | Wed May 20 1992 15:51 | 8 |
| could always use a RIF system that another company uses (name
withhel). Each and every department has to get rid of at least one
person each time a RIF comes up, even if that department has only
one employee!!! In that instance, the entire department is gone
and the company does without.
Linda
|
1904.31 | questionable assumptions | SUPER::ALLEN | | Wed May 20 1992 16:00 | 19 |
|
RE .20
For the most part, I agree. However, I'd also challenge directly
the common assumption that during RIFs etc., it's the great or at
least near-great employees who are the first to leave.
From what I've seen it's the great self-promoters who are usually
the first out the door. Whether there's any correlation between
self-promotional skills and any other useful skill remains to be
demonstrated, insofar as I've observed them.
To be a little less subtle: I chose to come to work for DEC, and
for a variety of reasons chose to remain here until recently when
the Special Early Retirement Program was announced. How that may
qualify me as deadwood, I freely admit, I fail to comprehend.
Charlton
|
1904.32 | quo vadis | MOCA::RUSSELL_D | | Wed May 20 1992 16:47 | 23 |
| I've seen a lot of good people selected (Sonderbehandlung) not because
they were incompetent but mainly because they were not politically
astute enough. It continues to make me wonder why unsuccessful
employees are retained, promoted, given new titles, and allowed to go
up the ladder to fail again. At each stage, the people on the floor,
the engineers, first line supervisors realize some of these people
don't have a clue as to how to run a business, but there is always a
slot for them in the organization. I do think that if the employees
had a choice, you would generally loose those with potential. Those
are the ones who can find another job easily, are willing to take
chances, etc. We have a lot of people who would have trouble marketing
their skills on the outside. How do you put on your resume that you
ran a plant at a mega-loss, DL/IL ratio of .3, and never really got to
understand the product or customers. Those are some of the people that
have to stay with DEC because no one else on the outside is going to
hire them. The unfortunate thing is that some of the deadwood doesn't
even know that it's deadwood. We have levels upon levels, kingdoms
upon dukedoms, etc., etc. Usefullness, efficiency, gave way to
duplication, and waste. These bureaucracies are peopled by some of the
most politically astute in the company, that's how they built the
kingdoms, dukedoms, etc. Who do you think will stay and who will go?
Dave
|
1904.33 | excellent note! | WR2FOR::GIBSON_DA | | Wed May 20 1992 17:01 | 1 |
| re .20
|
1904.34 | it's our nature to make these things happen | TOOK::SCHUCHARD | Lights on, but nobody home | Wed May 20 1992 18:22 | 52 |
|
RE: .32 - Unfortunately, it seems that when you experience mega growth
despite oneself, different goals have a knack of surfacing. It's the
old "My part of the business is booming for now, we're rolling in $$$, so
let's set our priorities towards self-rewards". A bad technical decision
may not surface for years, so it becomes unimportant. What becomes
important is power games. Not what you know, but who you know. Much
like congress - with no clear goals for everyone, you replace them with
competing individual goals. Like the boss man says, good times bring
bad times as sure as shadows lengthen as sun heads down.
What does get lost in all this is any prior culture that may have
existed where the notions of "do the right thing" meant providing
opportunities at making profit for the company which in turn profits
you. If that is attempted out-of-band to the current political
juggernaught, the odds a very good you will end up with some very
skilled technical individuals badly scarred, cynical or both. If they
have enough political savy to survive these times of "other priorities",
they have nonetheless been conditioned to offering solutions that
appease rather than break new ground. (more like they break more wind
than anything else). In this industry, that can lead to sudden death.
We're suffering in many areas of this company from this phenomena. We
had a spell when too many people caught glimpses of themselves in the
spotlight, and attributed all our success (of the time) to themselves.
They believed their own notices... They stopped listening to those
within the company and most surely with the folk paying the freight
(our customers). They stomped on anyone who dared question their wisdom
- hey, how can you dare question a shining star? What does simple logic
have to do with things when big ego's rule?
So, we have more than a few very expensive disastors receiving deserved
frosty reactions from our customers. The spotlights glare has turned
harsh, and the real worry about profit and jobs and careers are
beginning to have their effect - a bit too late for those TFSO'd, but
happening nonetheless. I hear management asking questions I was
beginning to feel I only dreamed hearing in the long ago DEC - how do
we make things better, how do we make you feel empowered? I wonder
if we can really heal the cynicism, the wounds, without bringing in
more young and innocents to fuel it? I wonder whether we can figure
how to keep our priorities intact when (if) we return to market
leadership? Can we deal with self-criticism and instrospection without
breaking into fits of hysteria? Can we accept what our angry customers
are telling use before they all become former customers?
These are the tests we'll have to pass to get the growth going again!
Hard and simple, but quite necessary.
bob
|
1904.35 | created deadwood... | TRLIAN::GORDON | | Thu May 21 1992 09:30 | 6 |
| re: .20
execellent, but I'd like to add that if the deadwood is created then
it implies the management that created it isn't doing their job...!!!
Yet no one seems to take notice...
|
1904.36 | What are we talking about?... | GRANPA::JNEWMAN | | Thu May 21 1992 10:16 | 2 |
| I could have sworn the nature of this topic concerned the voluntary
severance package......guess not
|
1904.37 | | SALSA::MOELLER | DANGER:big ego/short attention span | Thu May 21 1992 14:53 | 3 |
| we were talking about noter's infinite ability to rathole any topic.
karl, waiting for Q1
|
1904.38 | who and how much? | SWAM1::WEYER_JI | The Right to Write | Mon May 25 1992 22:49 | 14 |
| The rumors contained within this note seem to indicate that there
will be a TFSO package offered in Q1. However, nobody is saying who
it will be offered to, and how much money will be in the package.
My guess is that it will be a much lower amount of money, say 10-12
weeks (not months) of salary, and it will be offered to entire groups
such as administration, finance, manufacturing - but not to sales
or technical support and maybe not even to engineering. Our company
can afford to cut back in the overhead departments, but not in the
revenue generating departments.
This is all just my opinion, of course.
-JW-
|
1904.39 | | DCC::HAGARTY | Essen, Trinken und Shaggen... | Tue May 26 1992 03:45 | 7 |
| Ahhh Gi'day...�
I don't agree, I think next time they will start to hit the places that
have only been talked about up to now. There are places in Digital
where 50% (yes 50%) of the workforce have been laid off.
Look at that as a goal, any less than that will be a silver cloud.
|
1904.40 | | DREUL1::rob | Rob Marshall - Customer Service Dresden | Tue May 26 1992 05:21 | 18 |
| RE .38 JW,
You bring up a question that I raised in a note not too long ago, but that has
yet to be answered. The opinions ranged from: management knows who, what, when
and how much (paraphrased :-), to: management has no idea whatsoever about what
their doing. Noone "in the know" has been willing to step up and inform the
employees about what is being planned, and Ken Olsen was even a *bit* adamant
about the fact that the employees don't have the right to know.
Whereas I think that it would be good to thin out the overhead, I fear that
that will not be the case. There will be endless, meaningless, meetings by
the "overhead" to figure out what part of the work force can go. Eventually,
this company will be nothing but overhead. The real work will be bought from
outside companies and consultants so that the overhead can continue to collect
their fat pay checks on stuff that they buy cheap from "outsources" and sell
high with DEC's name on it...just *my* opinion.
Rob
|
1904.41 | BINGO | PULPO::RUSSELL_D | | Tue May 26 1992 09:58 | 24 |
| re .40
Bingo, I think one of the problems is that during the past couple of
years DEC has been saying they have a head-count problem not that its
payroll was too high. Consequently, a $100K/yr manager when faced with
the need to "downsize" would look at lists of $25K-65K employees and
start checking off names. (No one stopped to think that you need to
roughly lay-off four at 25K to make up for the impact of one at 100K)
On top of that I bet a lot of those 100K+/yr managers would be able to
command less than half their DEC salary on the outside, if that. I
cannot imagine any of them looking down from their floating island of
Laputa, and viewing hourly, engineering, etc. (i.e. grunts) as little more
than expendable subhumanoids.
The other problem is sort of a statistical one. What is the
probability that the hierarchy that allowed the company to become
bloated, inefficient, non-comptetive, redundant, and short-sighted will
magically arrive at the optimum formula for future success? I'll bet
the 95% confidence interval around that includes '0'.
I remember some one talking about baseball and when a team has a losing
season, you don't fire the team, you fire the .......!
Dave
|
1904.42 | Hey, making decisions is hard work! | MOCA::BELDIN_R | All's well that ends | Tue May 26 1992 10:44 | 9 |
| re .40 and .41
Of course, if you believe that work is done by managers, then your
whole analysis goes down the tubes. :-)
Seriously, there is a myth that managers do necessary work. Until that
myth is defeated, the scenario you paint will continue to occur.
Dick
|
1904.43 | | DCC::HAGARTY | Essen, Trinken und Shaggen... | Tue May 26 1992 10:47 | 4 |
| Ahhh Gi'day...�
What did British Telecom do when they privatised? They sacked 5,000
managers if my memory serves me correctly... They now make $$$$$$$$$$$
|
1904.44 | overheard | REGENT::PATTENDEN | | Tue May 26 1992 12:43 | 6 |
| Haven't got time to read 10 - 42 but I overheard the rumour in the
local Chinese eating place - if the 3 of you read this you should be a
little more carefull of what you are saying in public - 1st July
through September. 1 years money. 20,000.
but: the food isn't very good either !.
|
1904.45 | devil's advocate | CSC32::K_BOUCHARD | Ken Bouchard CXO3-2 | Tue May 26 1992 17:42 | 6 |
| Well you got one thing right: DEC has always said it's got a headcount
problem not a payroll problem. When you say a $100k manager makes as
much impact as four $25k people,you're wrong! The four $25K guys make
MUCH more of an impact to DEC's finances when you consider benefits.
Ken
|
1904.46 | RIGHT! (as Bill Cosby would say) | BIGJOE::DMCLURE | New World Odor | Tue May 26 1992 17:54 | 10 |
| re: .45,
> When you say a $100k manager makes as
> much impact as four $25k people,you're wrong! The four $25K guys make
> MUCH more of an impact to DEC's finances when you consider benefits.
By this logic, we should all be paid $100k then! After all, the
salary doesn't matter - it's just the benefits that cost money right?
-davo
|
1904.47 | | SALSA::MOELLER | There are No More New Notes | Tue May 26 1992 21:28 | 6 |
| Query : the involuntary TFSOed persons' positions were not eligible to
be re-filled, neh ? What does the rumor mill say about slots vacated
by lucky VOLUNTARY TFSO persons ? Will the positions disappear, or
could they be filled from within the ranks ?
karl
|
1904.48 | 100K<>4*25K? | PULPO::RUSSELL_D | | Wed May 27 1992 08:24 | 11 |
| Re .45 & .46
The point I didn't make in .41 was that a manager at DEC making 100K
but worth less than half that on the outside is probably making
decisions that are costing the company millions not thousands. That
guy making 25K isn't in a position to screw up in the same order of
magnitude. So if you take that into consideration getting rid of one
of those 100K guys would probably be the equivalent of many more than
just four 25K guys.
DAR
|
1904.49 | magnitude of screwup...a new metric? | CSC32::K_BOUCHARD | Ken Bouchard CXO3-2 | Wed May 27 1992 12:47 | 6 |
| "magnitude of screwup" isn't taken into account when decisions are made
about layoffs. What *is* taken into account are the cold,hard numbers
appearing on a report. These numbers usually indicate that the four
$25K guys are costing a lot more in bennies than that one 100K guy.
Ken
|
1904.50 | | CARTUN::MISTOVICH | | Wed May 27 1992 13:12 | 4 |
| When you add in the extra perks -- stock options, "working" at
company-paid boondogles in the form of "excellence awards", etc., the
$100K guy makes closer to $200K and costs a lot more than 4 $25K guys,
bennies and all.
|
1904.51 | don't worry...be happy! | CSC32::K_BOUCHARD | Ken Bouchard CXO3-2 | Wed May 27 1992 14:12 | 5 |
| I'd be willing to bet that the four low-paid types are costing bunches
more for the big one...medical care. After all,the 100K guy probably
eats better and doesn't get ulcers worrying about his/her job!
Ken
|
1904.52 | | SALSA::MOELLER | There are No More New Notes | Wed May 27 1992 14:17 | 4 |
| "how much does a person cost" rathole aside, I'd appreciate a response
to my question in number .47, which is specific to this topic.
karl
|
1904.53 | It's the volunteers who stay who are important. | VOGON::KAPPLER | Spontaneity is fine in it's place.... | Wed May 27 1992 14:20 | 23 |
| Nobody seems to have mentioned the major benefit of a voluntary
program (as it appears to me!)......
Once the volunteers have gone, the remainder are the people who really
want to stay and make a success of Digital.
(British Airways did just this, and transformed their customer service
in a very short time.)
Of course this assume all the people who stay have a value, and will
have to be fitted in to the organisation, or have the organisation
adjusted to make the best use of their talents.
That's a job for management, albeit one that requires more effort than
just cutting chunks off the organisation. It's also about managing
people, so that makes it more difficult/challenging too! But it's what
I believe managers are paid for.
It also implies moving back to some of the old values we used to have
regarding our most valuable asset, people. I also think that would be a
good thing for the long-haul.
JFK
|
1904.54 | | KAHALA::CODY | Out of the Darkness...Into the Light | Wed May 27 1992 14:41 | 6 |
| Re: 47
Once someone has accpeted the package, volentarily or involentarily,
the headcount is cut.
Pierce
|
1904.55 | Visualize World Peas | DENVER::ZIMMERMAN | Karen Zimmerman | Wed May 27 1992 19:45 | 6 |
| I'd like to confirm or deny a bit of information that passed by my cube
this morning about he voluntary program. The person was saying that
the company was going to offer a 13 + 3 weeks/year program in June so
that FY 92 financials take the hit instead of FY93.
Anybody able to confirm or update this info.?
|
1904.56 | | CVG::THOMPSON | Radical Centralist | Thu May 28 1992 07:44 | 8 |
| > Anybody able to confirm or update this info.?
I suspect that anyone who really knows would know better then to
say so before the official announcement. The approval cycle on these
these things tend to get final approval only minutes before announcement.
Until then nothing is really real.
Alfred
|
1904.57 | | CIMNET::WOJDAK | U got lotsa peperoni in your bread | Thu May 28 1992 10:41 | 6 |
| Heard on the radio this morning - more jobs being cut this week
at other high-tech companies (most in Mass.)
Raytheon - Layoff of 700
Wang - Layoff of 1000
|
1904.58 | | VCSESU::COOK | Mystic Powers | Thu May 28 1992 10:58 | 2 |
|
Personally, I'm surprised Wang is still in business.
|
1904.59 | | CREATV::QUODLING | Ken, Me, and a cast of extras... | Thu May 28 1992 12:00 | 4 |
| Didn't IBM pump $100Milliom into them last year.
q
|
1904.60 | Alliant | ZENDIA::SEKURSKI | | Thu May 28 1992 12:48 | 8 |
|
Can't leave out Alliant who just let 165 people go, about 65% of
its' work force.
Mike
----
|
1904.61 | This may sound crass, but ... | AUSTIN::UNLAND | Sic Biscuitus Disintegratum | Thu May 28 1992 18:19 | 6 |
| Maybe I'm missing something, but isn't there *already* a voluntary
severance package? As in two weeks' notice? Why should DEC pay a
dime to anyone who *wants* to leave?
Geoff
|
1904.62 | If you have to ask... | ELMAGO::PUSSERY | JOYSTICK \\!// | Thu May 28 1992 18:31 | 9 |
|
I dunno either, but I'm sure grateful that you're not "Mr.DEC"
and just work here like the rest of us. {;^).
Nuff said !
Paul
|
1904.63 | | CGVAX2::CONNELL | It's my party and I'll scry if I want to. | Thu May 28 1992 18:46 | 38 |
| re .61 We go round and round on this voluntary severance vs. the "If
you hate it here so much. then just quit" camps.
Digital is trying to reduce the headcount. There are (IMHO) probably
not more then a few people who would like to leave the company and:
Start their own small business.
Retire.
Work smoewhere else.
Move to somewhere else to look for work or start their own business.
Choose any of the above or someothers that I probably haven't thought
of.
These people really can't afford to do so, as they have families to
support and bills to pay. They don't want to just quit. They're ready
for something else though.
DEC, by offering them an incentive to leave, might just put these folks
in a situation where they will leave happily or with mixed emotions.
DEC, by having them leave, gets a little closer to it's goal of reduced
headcounts and a return to profitability. (At least that's the idea)
DEC, by offering the incentive, is proving the company still has a
heart (others disagree I know. Remember this is IMHO) They only have to
give you money for time worked and I think, accrued vacation pay. They
don't have to give you anything else. I've been layed off this way
before. It ain't pretty.
This isn't a: So you want to quit. Ok here's a whole bunch of money and
extended medical coverage.
It's a: "We have to reduce our headcount. Your job is superflouous and
you will be let go. You've been a great, productive, cooperative,
employee for many years. Here's a little bit more then standard
severance. Thank you for your loyalty and hard work. (I know this is
questioned a great deal by others, both here and elsewhere. THis is
just how I see what the severance program is supposed to be)
Phil
|
1904.64 | It's about caring for your #1 asset | VOGON::KAPPLER | Spontaneity is fine in it's place.... | Fri May 29 1992 05:35 | 10 |
| A severance package of more than the basic notice also says two things
to the employees:
1) The company still cares about people (whilst trying to turn it's
business round by reducing expenses.
2) That employees who stay, can work on, safe in the knowledge that
they will be treated caringly in future events.
JK
|
1904.65 | Not trying to be a hard*ss, but ... | AUSTIN::UNLAND | Sic Biscuitus Disintegratum | Fri May 29 1992 19:10 | 22 |
| re: .63 and voluntary severance ...
In my previous reply, I didn't mean to imply that the "two weeks
notice" should replace a severance package. What I meant to say
is that any employee is free to "volunteer" for severance, all
they have to do is write a letter of resignation, and give it to
the company two weeks (or four, depending on the job) notice.
Voluntary severance implies (to me) that a person is in a job that
is considered necessary, but is asking to be "severed" anyway. So
DEC ends up paying extra *and* having a necessary job unfilled. If
a person is in an unnecessary job, then I quess it doesn't hurt to
bring the situation to management's attention, but I don't think that
there should be a formal program to do this.
If you're just looking to DEC to bribe to go look for a new job
because you're tired of working here, I think that is reprehensible.
We need to reduce headcount, but this is to eliminate *unnecessary*
jobs, not just anyone for any reason.
Geoff Unland
|
1904.66 | Memories ... | HELIX::KALLIS | Pumpkins ... Nature's greatest gift. | Sun May 31 1992 13:17 | 23 |
| Re .21 (Dimitri):
>- And one year there was a terrible infestion of spiders in mill.
> Purchasing actually cut a P.O. for 50,000 praying mantises
> which eat spiders. At the last minute it was decided that
> the mantises might cause more alarm than the spiders.
Well, when I was working on 6B-2 one summer, there were _plenty_ of preying
mantises around; do you suppose somebody else came up with the idea, or do
you suppose that some subset of the purchase order (maybe a sample?) got
through anyway?
>My last note
Sorry to read that. Good luck, old friend.
Re .51 (Tom):
>So how many noters over 50 are still left?
Even with all the cutbacks, I'll bet there are more than 50 noters left. :-D
Steve Kallis, Jr.
|
1904.67 | Lots of 50+ left | MIMS::BAINE_K | | Tue Jun 02 1992 10:23 | 9 |
| Apparently there are MANY noters over 50 left. LiveWire says only 3100
of the eligible 7,000 people took SERP.
Sure would be nice to know what the company is going to do next. Some
people like to plan their lives, and in this situation, there is only
so much advance planning you can do.
KB
|
1904.68 | | NOTIME::SACKS | Gerald Sacks ZKO2-3/N30 DTN:381-2085 | Tue Jun 02 1992 10:44 | 1 |
| I suspect that the powers that be don't know what they're going to do next.
|
1904.69 | | AIMHI::BOWLES | | Tue Jun 02 1992 10:59 | 14 |
|
Note 1904.67 Voluntary severance package?
67 of 68
MIMS::BAINE_K 9 lines
2-JUN-1992 09:23
-< Lots of 50+ left >-
Apparently there are MANY noters over 50 left. LiveWire says only
3100
of the eligible 7,000 people took SERP.
Small nit: Actually, I think the number was 3700. More than 50% and
apparently more than expected.
|
1904.70 | | SUBURB::THOMASH | The Devon Dumpling | Tue Jun 02 1992 11:38 | 10 |
|
> Apparently there are MANY noters over 50 left. LiveWire says only
> 3100
> of the eligible 7,000 people took SERP.
So, how do you correlate the number of people in the US who are over
50 and did not take SERP, with the number of noters over 50?
Heather (UK)
|
1904.71 | | SQM::MACDONALD | | Tue Jun 02 1992 12:04 | 11 |
|
The number of eligible that I heard was about 7200. The official
announcement says that 3700 took it so about 3500 remain. The
headcount estimate after SERP is about 112000 so about 3% of
Digital's remaining employees are over 50. It ain't all that
much and we probably the need the benefit of their years of experience
and maturity now more than ever.
fwiw,
Steve
|
1904.72 | Not everybody had to be over 50 | HELIX::KALLIS | Pumpkins ... Nature's greatest gift. | Tue Jun 02 1992 12:30 | 9 |
| As far as the SERP was vconcerned, you had to meet one of two elegibility
requirements.
You either had to be over 50 or have had 20 years servivce with the cvompany.
So, if you joined Digital at, say, 22, you could reture at 42, as I understand
it.
Steve Kallis, Jr.
|
1904.73 | SERP II PLEASE | ELMAGO::JPALLONE | | Tue Jun 02 1992 12:55 | 4 |
| Steve, I'm pretty sure you have to be 55 to retire from Digital, no
matter how much service time, so the only people eligible had to be
50 or more ..... there's a lot of us 49 year olds who are praying for
SERP II....oh please...
|
1904.74 | | ELMAGO::JPALLONE | | Tue Jun 02 1992 12:57 | 1 |
| oh yeah.....55 and at least 10 years service....
|
1904.75 | | KAHALA::CODY | Out of the Darkness...Into the Light | Tue Jun 02 1992 13:38 | 5 |
| There were two conditions, one of them had to be met. Either you had to be
50 years old or older with five years of service or 60 years or older with 1
year of service.
Pierce
|
1904.76 | There is life outside of the United States | ERLANG::HERBISON | B.J. | Tue Jun 02 1992 18:26 | 14 |
| Re: .71
> The
> headcount estimate after SERP is about 112000 so about 3% of
> Digital's remaining employees are over 50.
The 112000 is a worldwide number. The 3500 50+ year old people
are U.S. employees of Digital. The 3% figure is a meaningless
lower bound.
The conditions mentioned in .75 agree with what I have heard,
but they omit the limitation of being a U.S. employee.
B.J.
|
1904.77 | | CREATV::QUODLING | Ken, Me, and a cast of extras... | Tue Jun 02 1992 19:30 | 4 |
| Digital has been doing conventional layoffs in other countries in the
meantime...
q
|
1904.78 | | SUBURB::THOMASH | The Devon Dumpling | Wed Jun 03 1992 06:41 | 15 |
|
> The number of eligible that I heard was about 7200. The official
> announcement says that 3700 took it so about 3500 remain. The
> headcount estimate after SERP is about 112000 so about 3% of
> Digital's remaining employees are over 50.
Steve, you have mixed up the world-wide employee numbers with the US
over 50's number.
the 7,200 is the US employees over 50
the 112000 is the worldwide Digital employees
Heather
|
1904.79 | | ELWOOD::CHRISTIE | | Wed Jun 03 1992 08:51 | 4 |
| The 7200 number is those employees who are 50 or over from January to
May. There are many who will be 50 from June to December.
|
1904.80 | | SQM::MACDONALD | | Wed Jun 03 1992 09:45 | 7 |
|
Re: .76 and .78
Yes, I mistakenly mixed apples and oranges. Flog me.
Steve
|
1904.81 | Hmmm ... | HELIX::KALLIS | Pumpkins ... Nature's greatest gift. | Wed Jun 03 1992 10:07 | 7 |
| Re .79:
> ... There are many who will be 50 from June to December.
And then what will they be? :-)
Steve Kallis, Jr.
|
1904.82 | | SSDEVO::EGGERS | Anybody can fly with an engine. | Wed Jun 03 1992 11:08 | 1 |
| 51
|
1904.83 | what was the question again? | CIS1::FULTI | | Wed Jun 03 1992 11:18 | 4 |
| re: .81
42?
|
1904.84 | A flawed universe... | MSDSWS::DBROWN | Dwight Brown, KXO | Wed Jun 03 1992 13:53 | 4 |
| re: .83
What is 6 * 9 ?
|
1904.85 | Nothing wrong that a few extra fingers won't fix | MU::PORTER | Justified Ancient of Mu | Wed Jun 03 1992 14:05 | 2 |
|
6 * 9 = 42 (base 13)
|
1904.86 | | THATS::FULTI | | Wed Jun 03 1992 14:18 | 4 |
|
> What is 6 * 9 ?
I'll get my VAX onto that answer right now....
|
1904.87 | Not everybody over 50 was SERP-eligible | CUPMK::SLOANE | Communication is the key | Wed Jun 03 1992 14:37 | 8 |
| Eligible SERPs had to be 50 (by May 30) with 5 or more years of
service, or 60 (by May 30) with 1 or more years of service.
There are many employees over 50 who were not SERP-eligible, so the
estimated figure of 3% of employees_over_50_who_are_still_here is too
low.
Bruce (who_is_over_50_SERP_eligible_and_is_STILL_HERE)
|
1904.88 | | SQM::MACDONALD | | Wed Jun 03 1992 15:48 | 15 |
|
Re: .87
> so the estimated figure of 3% of employees over 50 who are still
> here is too low.
That's a worthwhile observation. The important point IMO, however,
is that relative to the total size of the company it still represents
a small number of persons whose maturity and many years of work
experience, Digital or otherwise, are particularly valuable to Digital
at this point in its history.
fwiw,
Steve
|
1904.89 | Is NEW BLOOD good for us ?? | RT93::HU | | Wed Jun 03 1992 18:57 | 16 |
|
I always wondering what average age of our V.P group in maturing
company like DEC. Anyone want to take a guess ?
I guess it take 10-20 yrs to promote to V.P in fortune 500 company,
thus by the time arrives, it may be good to be SERPed and take
lumpsum severance payment. Humm, 20 yrs service plus V.P base salary
to calculate seems pretty good deal to me.
Did we still get V.P like Jim Manzi, or Jobs, or Joy, or M/S chairman
at young age ? (Gees, couldn't get my brain remembering anything)
FWIW, I think it's hard to find any young V.P in DEC at all.
Michael..
|
1904.90 | | CREATV::QUODLING | Ken, Me, and a cast of extras... | Thu Jun 04 1992 00:06 | 6 |
| Yup, replace all of the departed VP's with people in their mid 30's
(pick me), add some real product evangelists (Maybe we can get Guy
Kawasaki), and stop the indecision about employment.
q
|
1904.92 | Good luck -- he'll need it there! | LYCEUM::CURTIS | Dick "Aristotle" Curtis | Tue Jun 09 1992 12:52 | 6 |
| .89:
There was a VP in his 40's here in Marlboro (Don McInnis). I say "was"
because some months back he went to work for Jack Shields...
Dick
|
1904.93 | Heard about 2 packages | WR2FOR::PROVENZA_WA | | Tue Jun 09 1992 15:18 | 14 |
| re: 91
Karen:
I approached my boss ( I'm in the field too - AET DCC) and flat out
asked him about the rumors. At a recent staff meeting he told us that
he asked our VP, Malcom Jones and Malcom said that his information is
that there will be two packages in July. One WILL BE a volunatry
package and one will be involuntary. I don't know the details, but
just that piece of information is important to me!
Anyone else heard anything?
Wayne
|
1904.94 | Heard the same thing! | GLDOA::LAETZ | | Tue Jun 09 1992 15:54 | 4 |
| RE: .93
Heard the same thing (one voluntary and one involuntary). From what we
are hearing, it will be for about 15% to 20% of our groups population.
|
1904.95 | 25,000 to hit the streets? | STAR::DIPIRRO | | Wed Jun 10 1992 14:08 | 3 |
| The rumor I heard said they were shooting for a total reduction of
25,000 people starting in Q1 (but I didn't hear when it would end, if
ever). Sounds like we're anticipating a really strong Q4, eh?
|
1904.96 | | NOTIME::SACKS | Gerald Sacks ZKO2-3/N30 DTN:381-2085 | Wed Jun 10 1992 15:11 | 3 |
| >Sounds like we're anticipating a really strong Q4, eh?
Strong as a skunk.
|
1904.97 | | CREATV::QUODLING | OLIVER is the Solution! | Wed Jun 10 1992 15:21 | 6 |
| And, of course, soon the recession will be over, and both the people
left in Digital (Mr Smith and Mr Olsen will be wondering where they can
hire soom good people from...)
q
|
1904.98 | positive outlook | BUSY::FLAHERTY | Going, going, gone.... | Fri Jun 12 1992 17:51 | 2 |
|
You're wrong! The recession will never end and Mr. Smith will layoff Mr. Olsen.
|
1904.99 | Bad Times need Good Managers | CGOOA::DTHOMPSON | Don, of Don's ACT | Mon Jun 15 1992 14:30 | 11 |
| re: .98
The recession will end IF and WHEN Perot becomes Pres. (Snuck into
wrong conference, I know. Sorry)
No current Digital management appears to be able to lead the company
back to good times UNLESS there is a 'BOOMING' economy world-wide. I
am afraid weak management is the legacy of good economic times.
Don
|
1904.100 | Perot Digital Systems? | NECSC::ROODY | | Mon Jun 15 1992 16:08 | 7 |
| re -1
> The recession will end IF and WHEN Perot becomes Pres. ....
I didn't know the DEC BOD was considering anyone for the pres slot. I
thought they would keep KO for a while. Oh well, guess it's me who has
it all wrong.... 8^o
|
1904.101 | | CREATV::QUODLING | OLIVER is the Solution! | Tue Jun 16 1992 12:34 | 19 |
| There is a key point in .99. Which basically states, that current
Digital Management is not able to lead us back to a healthy state,
unless the world economy goes back into a "Boom".
Digital Senior Management, is very typically expert in good times, but
not in bad. The excuses being made around the "Economy" are a crock. We
are such a significantly large corporate entity, that we can a) roll with
the punches, and b) have an impact on the economy.
Other Computer companies in "our league" are not taking the same
fatalistic attitude that DEC is, and they are succeeding inspite of the
recession.
When the world switches to "commodity" computer buying, then it will be
the "added vaoue" that makes a difference. At the moment, we seem to
think that our "added value" is a liability not an asset...
q
|
1904.102 | | VCSESU::COOK | Mystic Powers has left the building | Tue Jun 16 1992 13:13 | 4 |
|
The economy excuse IS a crock. The figures have been going up, and
things have been consistently getting better for the past three
months. It you don't believe, it look at the figures.
|
1904.103 | | INDUCE::SHERMAN | ECADSR::Sherman DTN 223-3326 | Tue Jun 16 1992 13:25 | 5 |
| Blaming our losses on the economy is management's way of saying that
they've done nothing stupid. This would hold water if our competitors
were also suffering similar losses.
Steve
|
1904.104 | Pres Perot (or is that Pyro, man ?) .. | SOLVIT::EARLY | Bob Early, Digital Services | Tue Jun 16 1992 14:34 | 19 |
| re: 1904.100 Voluntary severance package? 100 of 100
> re -2
>
>> The recession will end IF and WHEN Perot becomes Pres. ....
Interesting thought. One needs to keep aware, however, that their
are two open ends to a recession. Down and (up).
Depression and Anxieties ....
Has Ross Perot accepted the BOD's invitation, or are they still haggling ?
Bob
;^) ;^) ;^)
(tree ot2be enuff)
|
1904.105 | | VCSESU::COOK | Mystic Powers has left the building | Tue Jun 16 1992 14:47 | 12 |
|
re: .99
The recession is ending now. Take a look at the figures. Industrial
production just rose again for the 4th month in a row. Other figures
are doing likewise.
As far as Perot goes, even if he wins the popular vote, he won't win
in the electoral college. The only thing you will lose if Perot
becomes President is your rights.
/prc
|
1904.106 | Please stick to the topic of discussion... | SCAACT::AINSLEY | We will miss you, Simon | Tue Jun 16 1992 15:59 | 5 |
| Presidential politics has nothing to do with the topic of dicussion.
Thanks,
Bob - Co-moderator DIGITAL
|
1904.107 | After the banter comes the question! | HEFTY::PARKERJ | | Wed Jun 17 1992 13:14 | 4 |
| Does anyone have any information about the TFSO this time around?
Is the 26th the "day of the boot"? Is it still v-3 or a new version?
Any news??
Jas
|
1904.108 | what do you think? | UNYEM::HALLC | | Wed Jun 17 1992 15:42 | 8 |
| I use to be secretary for 3 remote field service offices. Now
I am secretary for only 1 office. Does that sound like I may
be heading for the door? (18 engineers down to 5 engineers)
One manager transferred to a new job and the other took SERP
package. So I really don't have a manager either!!!
What do you think?
|
1904.109 | not sure... | POBOX::SEIBERTR | Perky | Wed Jun 17 1992 15:55 | 9 |
| I've heard that secretaries aren't "targeted" for TFSOs. I don't know
how true that is. The secretaries that I've known that would have been
affected were able to be relocated to other secretarial jobs. I don't
want to give you a false sense of security though. I would like to
think if your job went away you'd be given time to look for something
else. From what I've been reading and hearing though, it sounds like
if your job goes away....so does the employee.
Renee
|
1904.111 | | AIMHI::BOWLES | | Thu Jun 18 1992 12:08 | 1 |
| It's back! Again!
|
1904.112 | | SHALOT::KOPELIC | Quality is never an accident . . . | Thu Jun 18 1992 12:15 | 5 |
|
This is NOT new information about a new package. It's an old
announcement from 1991 that accidentally got posted into LIVEWIRE.
Don't forward it around.
|
1904.113 | Hoax | ZENDIA::SEKURSKI | | Thu Jun 18 1992 12:20 | 28 |
| <<< HUMANE::HUMANE$DUA1:[NOTES$LIBRARY]DIGITAL.NOTE;1 >>>
-< The DEC way of working >-
================================================================================
Note 1919.0 Don't believe the LIVE WIRE "downsizing" memo No replies
DR::BLINN "Who are the Brain Police?" 22 lines 2-JUN-1992 16:07
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is a "memo" circulating that purports to be from LiveWire
and describes a round of "involuntary layoffs". A copy of the
headers and first paragraph is included here for your reference.
DO NOT CIRCULATE THIS MEMO. IT IS A HOAX.
Although this "memo" was originally posted on LiveWire in January
of 1991, IT IS NOT A CURRENT POLICY OR PLAN.
If you receive a copy of this via MAIL or otherwise, don't panic.
Tom
Worldwide News LIVE WIRE
New phase of U.S. downsizing announced
Increasingly intense competitive pressure within the computer industry --
business practices, technological advances and manufacturing efficiencies --
are placing added pressures on the company's cost structure, in spite of
ongoing cost reduction efforts that focused on increased productivity and
efficiency and two voluntary downsizing programs.
|
1904.114 | | HUMANE::PROXY::HOPKINS | All one race - Human | Thu Jun 18 1992 12:20 | 5 |
| I got the memo in .110 and about 10 minutes later got the message
saying it was a hoax. Pretty funny.....NOT. However, I haven't seen
it in LIVEWIRE. I just looked again and I can't find it in there.
Marie
|
1904.115 | | A1VAX::GRIFFIN | | Thu Jun 18 1992 13:28 | 4 |
| That same message was sent to all of the employees in our group by our
management folks! 15 minutes later came the "retraction". This was a
few weeks back. Things have been pretty quiet since then.
|
1904.116 | See Note 1948.19 | DOBRA::MCGOVERN | | Thu Jun 18 1992 13:42 | 1 |
|
|
1904.117 | Big Brother is Watching!! | SWAM1::TRENT_JO | | Mon Jun 22 1992 13:11 | 2 |
| What official word on TFSO?? There is none!! Except in the Trade
Rags.
|