Conference 7.286::digital

    Can anyone confirm the rumor that this will be the last of the
    packages? A friend heard it from a usually reliable source.
    BG

    Can anyone confirm the rumor I heard that another layoff-related base
    note would be entered by the end of this week?
    
    Mark.

	From what I heard, 25,000 more layoff notes will be added in the first
wave and another 10,000 in the 3rd quarter.

    A friend of mine, who's sister's boyfriend's mother works at DEC, said
    he heard that there would be a new Layoff note every 9 days, depending
    on how long the noter worked at DEC ...
    
    :-)  	Jim

    The rumor here in Upstate NY is that layoffs are scheduled in this area
    on August 18.
    

    
    
    Any clue as to whether or not these current layoffs are Palmer driven
    or residual from the "old guard".  I'm wondering if we can take a hint
    from Palmer's manufacturing background; continuous layoffs until the
    numbers are right and no golden (silver or bronze, for that matter) 
    handshakes anymore.
    

    
    Question:
    
    Why are we forever talking about the number of PEOPLE we need to cut
    rather than the number of DOLLARS we need to save?  
    
    -Ed
    

�       <<< Note 2032.8 by FORTSC::CHABAN "Pray for Peter Pumpkinhead!" >>>
�    Why are we forever talking about the number of PEOPLE we need to cut
�    rather than the number of DOLLARS we need to save?  
 
	Cuz the people with the DOLLARS are making the DECISIONS.

	--Mike

RE: .8

Come on! Fire the wealthy?  Is this like taxing the rich.  Go do some simple
math and you will see that the majority of the labor costs are in the rank
and file, not at the top.

    Actually, if you'r wealthy, then you dont need to work anyway, so firing 
    them will not hurt them.
    seems so obvious, no?
    
    I hope iam not saying something that is non-PC here, this is one of those
    things where after you write it, you look back, and wonder about 
    its PC'ness.
    
    /Nasser

    RE .10
    Simple math will tell you that if you get rid of 10,000 people making
    $50,000 a year,you'll save $500,000,000 a year. We'd only save half
    that by getting rid of the people making $25,000.  I agree with the
    previous note that said to get rid of the ones who make the big bucks
    and leave the people who actually do something alone. But as also
    mentioned previously,the ones that need to go are the ones who are
    making the decisions on who goes. 

    It's never been said that payroll was too high; it has always been
    stated that we have, "a headcount problem."  I doubt that there are any
    managers here that don't believe that they are more indespensable than
    those who work for them.  The paradox is that if a manager was waching
    his "headcount" in recent times and trying to run a lean/mean machine,
    s/he would have to cut an already trim organization.  Those managers
    who built up empires simply have to moan and cut fat that they should
    have done years ago.  BUT you retain those managers, who by their
    wisdom and uncanny business acumen, led us to the current state of the
    company.  Does anyone really believe that we are going to eliminate any
    of the dotted lines, functional/nonfunctional managers when they're
    still plenty of peons?  Naaaa, no way.
    
    Dave

My last reply left out one important part: I'd trim the management as well.

RE: .-1 Maybe we will nail the upperlevel management.  This typically occurs
when a new CEO comes in.  

    For those of you bemoaning the trimming of "workerbees" to the
    apparent disregard of the "uppermanagement", I have a list of
    DEC Corporate Officers that is probably about 6 - 8 months old
    (Grainger is still on it for those history buffs).
    
    Of the 34 listed officers, 13 (including KO) are either gone
    or soon to be gone.  That's a cool 38+%.
    
    If an equivalent percentage of the balance of DEC's employees
    were to go (based on the maximum number of 126,000 or so after
    acquisitions, before any downsizing), the resulting headcount
    would be about 78,000.
    
    

    >> Of the 34 listed officers, 13 (including KO) are either gone
    >> or soon to be gone.  That's a cool 38+%.
    
    And how many officers have been promoted to replace them?  How many
    left with lucrative "golden parachutes" that are over and above the
    terms of TFSO?
    
    ... Bob
    

    Then allow me to take-off my "headcount reduction" hat and put on
    my "cost reduction" hat and point out that it is still 13 BIIIG
    salaries that DEC is/will no longer be paying.

    RE: .10
    
    >Go do some simple math and you will see that the majority of the labor
    >costs are in the rank and file, not at the top.
    
    Makes sense.  After all, that's where most of the actual labor is done.
    

    Re -.1  "...it is still 13 BIIIG
        salaries that DEC is/will no longer be paying."  
    
    Not if each one has been replaced!
    
    
    It is the helplessness of layoffs � la Digital which causes the most
    pain.
    
    If I am doing my job as I have been asked, and am working particularly
    hard, then I want not to be dumped by some incompetent making arbitrary
    decisions such as xx% must go in department YYY.  Nor do I particularly
    want to be dumped by the decision of some up-and-coming 'bottom-liner'
    whose focus is 180 days out to the next job he'll get on the grounds
    that function ZZZ (probably a bad choice of variable name, there) is no
    longer needed.
    
    What SHOULD be done, and what would give individual employees some
    semblance of control of their own destinies which is, after all, what
    the New World is all about, is that the bottom xx% of PERFORMERS must
    be let go, regarless of what they do.  The remaining people could be
    moved about as well as possible and retrained if necessary to perform
    the tasks which the company needs performed.  
    
    The principle here is that a non-performer in an essential job doesn't
    perform,  (look at the numbers since Mr. Smith took over)  while a
    performer in any position, even non-essential is a performer and will
    LIKELY continue as a performer when moved.
    
    The problem for Digital is that making such decisions is something our
    management (and, yes, management deserves a thorough bashing!) has
    never before needed to do and is something for which they have, to date,
    exhibited an incredible incapacity.
    
    When performance is ther criterion for dismissal - directly or through
    some generous layoff package - individuals are provided with some
    control over their lives.  People who feel they are to some extent 
    in control of their own destinies produce more than those who don't.
    
    As it has been implemented, the layoff packages resemble a lottery and
    we could save incredible amounts of money by using an old Rainbow to
    run it and eliminate all the committees, task forces, and other groups
    of executives currently pulling names from the hat.
    
    
    In the words of Mr. Clinton...   "I can do better!"
    

    maybe you weren't on the distribution list ... ? I believe that AT
    LEAST 15 new V.P.s have been named in the last few weeks. I've seen
    announcements for 11 in Europe and 4 in the U.S. I think. They're not
    all "corporate officers", but they are V.P.s with the salary that goes
    with it.
    

    Re:  .12  WAY TO GO!  LOVE that simple thinking, coached in simple,
    easy-to-read, grammatically correct English.  Now...NOW...dunno know if
    that thinking is *politically* correct...
    
    Signed:
    
    One of those $20 some odd K rank and file types
    

    re.19
    
      You have entered the most sensible note I have read concerning
    layoffs. It is a terrible injustice that many people who have worked
    very hard over the years to make a good contribution are being told
    that they no longer fit into the company plans. Some of those people
    are the reason that Digital was very successful for so many years,
    they should not be the ones put out to sea on an ice floe. Being laid
    off because you happen to work in a group that has to be eliminated is
    a kick in the ass. If the management of DEC could really manage it
    would do exactly what you suggest, get rid of non performers, then 
    marginal performers, and that leaves you with the best people to get 
    the job done. 
    
    Paul
    

    See notes 1948 for Lay off info.  Our latest info from our district
    mgr. is that the "lay offs" are going to occure in two waves, the first very
    soon (August?) and the second before the end of the calender year. 
    That manufacturing would loose a total of 15,000 and another 15,000
    from othe areas.  He told us we would be affected and it would be deep!
    
    

    (My god, people are quoting Clinton in the layoff note...)

    It stands to reason that downsizing is an effort to draw appropriate
    resources to amount of work.  The work (rubber hitting the road) is
    traditionally done by what you've labeled "worker bee's".  A number
    of Worker bee's are managed by a *manager*.  A number of managers are
    managed by senior managers, etc.

    Once you allocate resources to work, then and only then, can you start
    cutting upwards.  Most work related to the exit process is *the* work
    managers are supposed to be around to do, anyway.

    So it is really silly to argue management should go before the first
    line staff.  And since each manager has several people (in theory)
    working for them, it stands to reason that a much higher number of
    line personnel are going to depart in relationship to managers.

    As far as all those people that were here, who made Digital what it is
    today, we are a $37/share and lost 2.5 billion dollars last quarter /year.
    
    I would assume all employees take responsibility and consequence for
    that number.

    Identify work, employ enough resources to do work, configure management
    around resources.

    As a security manager for the Central States geography, the transition
    work I've witnessed, Digital has been much more fair and generous than
    transitions from companies my fellow security associates work. 
    
    Chip

>    Identify work, employ enough resources to do work, configure management
>   around resources.
    
    Looks easy, but this exactly what DEC is struggling with these days
    Perhaps just ordering items as above is already a big issue
    
    /fred

    Hi,
      There was a memo that came out a few months ago, which listed
    the criteria for layoffs, i.e performance rating etc.  This memo
    was in VTX also.  Can someone point me to it if it is posted in this
    notefile too?  thanks.  

    I don't know about the memo, but 1948.325 might help you.
    
    Stan

    Well August 17th is here, where are the layoffs??  Was that 92 or 93??
    

The powers-that-be could have decided to actually look at the supply 
chain and figure out where the money is generated first rather than 
using an axe.  If this is so, I, for one, would be much more hopeful for
the future of the company.

Lee, with pollyanna glasses on :-)

    re: .28
    
    layoffs are here and are happening in the field and in mfg
    
    

    
    Which manufacturing is being hit?
    

    re: -1
    
    WMO (actually, it's the admin people in mfg which is
    now under the logistics umbrella)
    

    The layoffs reached the publications part of TNSG today.  Of seven
    writers in my group, four were let go.
    

    
    We lost two out of six.
    

    Here at NAS/EDS, we lost one out of one (me!).
    
    				Steve
    

    We lost one writer here in TAY1.  In our meeting, my manager gave us
    some figures.  In IDC, 50 people were TFSO'd ... all of them were
    individual contributors ... no management positions were affected.
    
    In the same meeting, we were given IDC's new blueprint for a
    streamlined organization where effectively one or two layers of
    management will be eliminated and teams of individual contributors
    will essentially manage themselves.
    
    I'm not sure I want to verbalize how this all looks to me.
    
    ... Bob
    

    We heard in our meeting that a high level IDC management team 
    is being put together, and that anyone who wants to be on it, including
    managers, must apply for the job.  
    
    As I understand it, current IDC managers do not automatically have
    management jobs in the new organization, and will probably be job
    hunting within DEC, or working as individual contributors if they do
    not apply for one of the new management jobs that will be created.
    

re .36

>... we were given IDC's new blueprint for a streamlined organization...

IDC has a organizational design spec that is being deciphered by a team
of cryptologists from Jupiter.  I await their analysis before believing
that it can be implemented consistently across the organization.

-PHiL

    I await their analysis before deciding what to believe, positive or
    negative.  On paper, it looks like an improvement over the way certain
    aspects of the organization are currently being managed.  If they can
    pull it off, I'll feel some optimism for the future.  If not, well I do
    still have a job, and I am happy about that.
    
    However, I do view the messages of the lay-off demographics vs. the
    concept of self-managed teams of individual contributors to be somewhat
    contradictory.
    
    ... Bob
    

Musical chairs or musical choirs?---I'm not sure, my hardcopy is smudged.

    
    Classic case from the DEC school of management:
    
    Ready,	Fire (about 50 PEOPLE),		Aim!
    

          <<< Note 2032.36 by CUPTAY::BAILEY "Season of the Winch" >>>
                              -< Digitalogic ??? >-

>    We lost one writer here in TAY1.  In our meeting, my manager gave us
>    some figures.  In IDC, 50 people were TFSO'd ... all of them were
>    individual contributors ... no management positions were affected.
    
>    In the same meeting, we were given IDC's new blueprint for a
>    streamlined organization where effectively one or two layers of
>    management will be eliminated and teams of individual contributors
>    will essentially manage themselves.
    
>    I'm not sure I want to verbalize how this all looks to me.
    
>    ... Bob

	Hi, Bob, as a fellow Individual Contributor in IDC, I *will*
	verbalize how this looks to me...it looks like a very convenient
	method for the management of our organization to have avoided
	the package, assuming that it is true that no management positions
	have been eliminated to date.

	We also lost two I.C.s from our group yesterday...when we asked if
	any management positions had been affected in the organization as
	a whole, we were told that our supervisors didn't know the answer
	to that question. However, if it is true that only contributors
	have been separated to date, it doesn't surprise me, and I can
	understand why it went unstated.

	Obviously, Digital has too many levels of management. IDC is a
	combination of two former organizations (CUIP and ESDP), each of
	which, (IMHO, having worked in each) were top heavy with multiple
	levels of middle and non-line management. Thus, the merged
	organization is currently carrying *two* ex-bureaucracies. From a
	logical viewpoint, excessive management would seem to be a prime
	candidate for "rightsizing." Instead, it is the people who
	actually produce the organization's work who are being let go.
	Unfortunately, I think this approach is symptomatic of the way
	that the "rightsizing" is being mishandled throughout much of the
	Corporation. Once again, though, it should not surprise us - it is
	the management committees that are making the decisions, and
	we can't expect people to eliminate their own jobs.

	So, in sum, I hope to be proven wrong, but right now the new IDC
	vision looks like a way to "flatten" the organization so that the
	multiple layers of management are less hierarchical and therefore
	less visible.

	Jim	

    re: .42
    
    Hmmm ... you almost sound, well, surprised! 

    Re the last few
    
    There is another explanation you know. When organizations downsize it
    is common for the management to be hit after the ICs. Ie need the
    existing management to rightsize the organization and they can be
    blamed for all the problems. As head honcho you now reorg the
    management and some are left without jobs. I've seen it happen. It's a
    damn site more difficult for managers to find jobs than it is for ICs.
    The managers then find jobs at lower levels or they just leave. Whereas
    ICs given the chance have a lot better chance of finding jobs in other
    organizations. Allowing that to happen doesn't enable you to shed
    people. So it is only managers that get that done to them.
    
    By the way I've heard of several managers who were told. "Find another
    job". Now who was it who used to be in charge of LAN...
    
    Dave

    

         IBM and DEC decided to have a boat race, on the
         Thames, following the famous Oxford vs Cambridge course.
         
         Both teams practiced hard, and came the big day, they were as
         ready as they could be.
         
         IBM won by a mile.
         
         Afterwards, the DEC team were very downhearted, and a decision
         was made that the reason for the crushing defeat had to be
         found, so a working party was set up to investigate and
         report.
         
         Well, they had everybody on the working party, Sales, Systems
         Engineering, Marketing, Customer Education, Field Service,
         the whole lot, and after 3 months they came up with the
         answer, and the working party co-ordinator gave his summary
         presentation.
         
         "The problem was", he said, "that IBM had 8 people rowing
         and 1 steering, whereas we had 1 person rowing and 8
         steering."
          
         The working party was then asked to go away and come up with
         a plan to prevent a recurrence the following year, for DEC's
         pride had been damaged, and another defeat was not wanted.
         
         2 months later, the working party had worked out a plan, and
         the coordinator gave his (customarily brief) summary--
 
         "The guy rowing has got to work harder" 
    
	 So the following year the two teams met once again by the banks
	 of the Thames.  And again IBM won by a wide margin.

	 The DEC team reconvened their working committee, which spent
	 several more months investigating the defeat and formulating
	 a recovery plan.  After exaustive study it was determined that
	 in order to win they must lighten the boat ...

	 ... so they threw the rower overboard.

	That was pretty good !

    re: .12
    
    I get it. Let's lay off all those making 50,000 dollars a year. We'll
    save the company zillions and of course incur the added benefit of
    ridding ourselves of those 50k do nothings. Then for the next round
    of layoffs we can get rid of the 25,000 dollar a year big buckaroos
    do nothings etc.. I wasn't aware that 50k was the "big bucks" league...
    
    Even better yet, why not just pay everyone 10,000 dollars a year and
    now that we've leveled the "big bucks" playing field, we are now
    positioned to downsize with fairness by using ones height as the
    criteria. Tallest first etc...  This is all just so much bunk. There is
    no easy answer for much of this but to suggest that those making 50k
    per year and up are somehow all responsible for this mess is quite
    simply naive.
    

    O.k.,                         
                                  
    This is Rumour Control...    
                                                               
    IOSG (ALL-IN-1 Engineering and Unix Office products) based in
    Reading,UK  is to lose 8 out of 63 people. We've just been told we'll
    know on the 3rd September, and that they will be out on the 30th. 2
    managers and 6 lower is the desired ratio.                     
                                                
    Severance package is the UK standard.
                                         
    ALL-IN-1 is remaining a key development activity - its ancillary
    projects which are being deactivated.
                                    
    Winton

    
    	The RDG in the CSC's particularly in Colorado Springs is expected
    to get hit on Monday the 31st.  A Mandatory meeting has been called for
    Monday afternoon, which will probably be attended by the survivors. 
    Rumors are that 20 -26 code 240 engineers may get the AXE.  There are
    approximately 45 code 240 engineers in the RDG out of 70 so people.
    
    	From many other sources, Monday the 31st, may be a BIG day for many
    organizations thoughout the U.S., particularly services!
    
    /Dan

Monday, the Customer Services Organization in the SF AG will be
reduced.  How do I know this??  Well a couple of weeks ago, some guy
decided that he should be driving where I was and Consolidated (the
current fleet maintenance group) decided that the car wouldn't be
fixed, so I called our fleet person locally and she informed me that
cars would be available monday, confirmed by the Administrativer
Assistant to the CSAGM (Customer Services Account Group Manager) 

Larry

Yes this is TELGAR::WAKEMANLA playing with Xnotes

    
    Lessee now, if we can 'em on the 31st, they're outta here on Friday and
    we don't have to pay for the 'Labor Day' holiday the following Monday.
    
    How ironic!  Sounds like a DELTA cost saving suggestion to me ;*)
    

    ...yeah but they still get the holiday pay. Remember, they still get 9
    weeks pay.
                                      Denny

    Re .49
    	I realize that this event is a rumor, but since it is not unlike
    others that have occured (and been reported in this notesfile), it brings
    up a question in my mind as to why management would allow this talent
    to leave without implementing more innovative options?
    
    	I can speak with some experience about the potential of DS
    engineers and I think that it is ludicrous that we are
    financing the departure of groups of individuals with solid product
    line knowledge, customer communication and negotiation skills, and proven
    ability to work in a stress environment. This doesn't mean that other
    groups don't also possess the same qualities, but I just don't have an
    in-depth understanding of their backgrounds, like I do for field
    service.
    
    	Now, if it is truly a situation of too much of this talent within 
    the current DEC organization, then I have no argument with down-sizing
    including my own, but simultaneously with these events I see new jobs
    being posted throughout the company that require the skillsets listed
    in the preceeding paragraph. These job reqs usually list specific
    experience that precludes  most individuals from qualifying, but I can
    remember a time in the past that we attempted to fill such vacancies
    from within the organization with far more emphasis on potential versus
    such experience. 
    
    	How many of these, and previously TFSO'd individuals, do you think
    would be receptive to attempting a career change, to sales for
    instance, and would not both DEC and the employees benefit? It has been
    my experience that salesmen with previous services experience are
    extremely effective. Also, what about those services personnel with a
    software aptitude? Why can't we move such potential to software services?
    
    	Please don't misconstrue this opinion. I do believe that the most
    qualified individual should get the position. I do think that
    experience counts for something. But I also think that, prior to paying
    someone to leave we might consider them for career alteration. I just
    don't understand how the corporation justifies transitioning someone
    the same day that a requisition requiring similar skills opens up.
    
    Regards,
    
    John
    
    
     
    I think the opportunity should be a part of the package.
    	
    
    

    re:.53
    
    A (usually) silent noter harkens back to the memory of ...
    
    
    
    
    C.O.D. (Career Opportunity Days for all you new hires ;*) )

    
    re: .53
    (
         I realize that this event is a rumor, but since it is not unlike
     others that have occured (and been reported in this notesfile), it
    brings up a question in my mind as to why management would allow this
    talent to leave without implementing more innovative options.
    )
    
    	I understand what you are saying but I believe DEC is strictly out
    to reduce the head count at this point.  Our district manager summited
    5 different proposals to corporate, trying to save as many head as he
    could.  Supposedly he proposed moving many engineers into other
    positions open within the CSC.  Each proposal was rejected until the
    last.  After so many tried you give them what they want.  
    	The basic concept is cut deep, cut now, if it hurts, then later
    they may expand!
    
    	As far as looking for jobs within the corporation by the end of
    that week, forget it.  At this point it a worthless joke.  All jobs
    reqs have either been removed or frozen until after the HIT.  We hear
    that those reqs that have been taken away will return the week after
    everyone is gone!
    
    /Dan
    

    re .55
    	Let me see if I understand this... First DEC is going to cut the
    local workforce so that absolutely no extra/underutilized personnel are
    present an THEN open up local reqs that will have to be filled by hires from
    outside the area or outside the company?... Why am I having such a hard
    time grasping the logic here?
    
    re .54
    	I have never been privy to the post-mortum regarding COD, but it
    was my understanding that that effort was to EXPAND the field sales
    force. Wasn't the problem that sales income didn't expand with the force? 
    If so, doesn't this differ somewhat with filling current vacancies?
    I am not advocating creating jobs for people, just filling the
    company's current needs with the company's current people.
    
    John

>   <<< Note 2032.56 by SANFAN::ALSTON_JO "You can't teach an old dog ..." >>>
>                                 -< Say What? >-
>
>    re .55
>    	Let me see if I understand this... First DEC is going to cut the
>    local workforce so that absolutely no extra/underutilized personnel are
>    present an THEN open up local reqs that will have to be filled by hires from
>    outside the area or outside the company?

Nope.  They'll open the req's so they can be filled internally.  
<set mode/sarcasm>  Probably to be filled by all of the managers who aren't
sent packing but now have noone to manage.
    
>    re .54
>    	I have never been privy to the post-mortum regarding COD, but it
>    was my understanding that that effort was to EXPAND the field sales
>    force. Wasn't the problem that sales income didn't expand with the force? 

Nope.  Within months (sometimes VERY FEW months) of COD implementation,
the field was asked to start chopping.  By and large, COD people were
chopped since local management had no political reason to keep the newbies
around.  Sure, there are still some COD'ers out there, but not as many
as we shipped off to the field - not by a long shot.

Just MHO.

K.

    
    I was informed on Monday that I am included in the current TFSO round.
    My accounts were deactivated at that time, and I was given access to
    this guest account which expires at 5PM Friday, 8/28.  
    
    It should be noted that access to personal material in any accounts
    (eg, personal mail to extract return addresses etc) was not possible,
    although my manager did offer to print out or forward selected material
    (if I could identify it!).  So, if anyone expects to be hit with the TFSO, 
    plan ahead!
        
    It really makes it obvious that the deck is stacked against trying to
    land another job within the company, and it seems the "guest"
    facilities are really pretty clearly discouraging spending any more
    time on company premises than the absolute minimum.  For example, there
    is a Scriptprinter (LN03R) connected to the LAT here with evidence that
    it once had a print queue associated with it, but there is no such
    queue now and mail to the SYSTEM account has been ignored.  Take the
    hint, if they tap you on the shoulder, the message is "pound sand"...
    
    I was not surprised by the notice, there was ample warning and I did
    nothing to avert it.  Nor am I particularly distressed, it seems
    appropriate and justified to me.  I view it as an opportunity for
    personal growth  rather than a problem confronting me.
    
    My future plans are still uncertain.  I have already had one job
    interview, and have been invited to submit a proposal for contract work
    (with a one-day evaluation commitment already approved).  I also have 
    several potential opportunities for independent ventures.  Thankfully
    the TFSO gives me the chance to explore career alternatives without
    immediate financial problems, so I plan to make sure whatever course 
    I follow is right for me.  Who knows, perhaps it will involve Digital
    and/or RSX...
    
    Thanks, and best wishes to all of you!
    
    --bruce mcculley
                                                          

    Excuse me, but I may not understand what the term Layoff actually
    means.  
    
    I understood that Layoff meant that your job was going away and that
    there was nothing else you could do within the organization that you
    were qualified for.  But, if sometime in the future your job came back
    you would be called back in to work if you were still interested.  
    
    DEC's explanation of Layoff seems to be quite different.  The
    impression that I'm getting here is that they're going to hack and
    slash everywhere, and then, if they need to reinforce certain areas,
    they will open up rec's for outside hires.  No mention of bringing back
    the people who were originally in those positions to fill them
    again....
    
    Am I wrong?
    
    Candy
    On the list in Livermore.
    

   Re:2032.59
    
     Your definition is basically correct. However, DEC is in reality 
    performing "terminations",not "layoff's".
     When one is "terminated",that person is,there-after,a "non-employee"  
    with no stipulation to be "called back to work" when "things" get
    better. This doesn't mean that this person can't be "rehired",at some
    later point in time, when "things" get better. Translation = when one
    released by the Company,one is "history", in reality.
     It would appear that we employees would rather use the euphemism,
    Layoff,as opposed to the reality,and finality of the word,Termination.
    Let's face it;it sounds and feels a heck of lot better,psychologically,
    and to "other people", when someone says, " I was laid off." ,as
    opposed to saying, "I was terminated." The word "terminated" has much
    more of the scepter of finality,then does the word "Laid off". Laid off
    sounds and feels like a "temporary" condition.
     Oh well, so much for Behavioral Psychology 312,on this aspect, today.
    euphemism,Layoff 

I think you're a bit behind on terminology.
Layoff is now used to mean "Reduncancy"

They now use "Furlough" instead of the original meaning of "Layoff".

And if you say that use of Furlough is incorrect - you're probably right.

    about this 9 week period when you are technically still on the
    payroll...but not working at the company...are you therefore still
    still a "DEC employee", ie, a potential internal candidate?  Could
    you still apply for jobs before signing whatever agreement and 
    getting a lump sum check?
    
    If so, then it would be wise to stay in touch with all of your 
    internal connections, as job opportunities might come up a month
    or two after being given notice, that you could apply for as an
    "internal" transfer (from the transition cost center to whatever
    new one).
    
    tw 

    Customer Service in the Southern Tier (Binghamton, Ithaca and Corning,
    NY) is being hit today, 8/31.  Exact numbers are not known at this
    time.

    RE: .62 - my understanding, at the present, is that people are
    being informed on mondays that they have until friday of that week
    to have a firm offer, IN WRITING, in hand or they are being laid
    off. Effectively at the close of business on friday you are not
    eligible for internal transfer unless you meet the criteria above.
      This is somewhat of a 'stacked' deck against you finding a slot
    in the company as you're basically given whatever's left of
    monday after you're told, until close of business on friday to meet
    that criteria. From past experience, it takes the better part of 
    a week just to get someone to look at your resume, never mind setting
    up, going on and getting through any interview(s). Then you have the
    offer process etc. So, unless you're well into that process (like
    you expect an offer at any moment) I don't think there's a lot of
    hope in finding something. Most responses I've seen around that
    subject indicate that as well.
    
    - j -
    

    
    	The RDG (Remote Diagnosis Group) at the CSC in Colorado got hit
    today as expected.  Overall around 20 people, 240 code engineers.
    10 on Days, 2 in after hours, the remainder in our district but working
    out of Atlanta.
    
    	I am one of those that was hit.  I have been planning for it for
    over a year, I'm not really surprised, and frankly I'm glad the waiting
    is over.  I will perhaps be noting through Friday and may enter a few
    more notes.  I will definately miss the notes files.
    
    	For those of you that I have had the opportunity to meet, both
    through the notes and personally, it has really been great.  
    
    	Thanks and good bye,  Dan Entler  (16 years with DEC)
    

It was my understanding that all open REQ's have been frozen until after all of
the downsizing has occured.

So why are people under the impression that they can actively seek employment
within the company?

I would focus on external opportunities...

Bob

    RE: .66
    
    It is called grasping at one final straw... at the hopes of staying
    with this Company. Some people have devoted lots of time here. Grabbing
    at any rope, near the end, would be a natural reaction to getting the
    boot......!!!!!
    
    Bob G.
    

I know of one person in TNSG who managed to get an offer before 5 PM Friday.
I assume he'd been working on it before he was tapped.

    The axe has fallen in the L.A. North services district today.  I was
    one of the "lucky" ones to get the package.  It is just as all of the
    notes so far describe.  I hear that sale and sales support are due to
    get theirs on the 21st of Sep.  

    
    
    Customer Service (formerly Field service) in Manhattan got it today.
    

	I know several people who have been tapped and managed to find a
job in the 5 day period.  In one case, approximately 8 people out of a
complete 40-person group found other jobs.  A lot of it is how good your
contacts are, and how sure you are that the tap is coming in advance,
giving you a chance to look early.

	To the best of my knowledge, as of speaking to my boss last Friday,
there are still open reqs in some organizations, especially organizations
that are already living within their budgets.

						--D

    
    I would encourage folks to read an article presented in the August 3
    edition of Industry Week titled "Managing Survivors" beginning on
    page 15. It is an excellent article filled with common sense on how
    the process of saving money through the laying off of employees can
    actually and realistically cost you money in the long term. I would 
    consider this article mandatory for all Digital managers.

    10 days and no new entries? 
    What happened? 
    Did only the Noters get the axe?
    
    But seriously, does anyone have a feel for total numbers? A lot of good
    talent is going to the competition now. Did we aim well when we shot at
    out foot, or did the people who "needed" to go, go?
    
    .mike.
    (2 of 12 in Syracuse)
    

Major layoffs happened at the OPA facility in Charlotte NC today.  A few more
people will be told tomorrow and a there are a few deferrals until next Monday.

The entire CIS EIC organization here is being eliminated, not downsized. 
Somewhere in the neighborhood of 50 people.

For most of us the waiting is now over.  The future begins.

/Marty

Sales and support in New York got hit today.  No numbers avaialable yet.

    Sales and support in Dallas got hit today.

Layoffs happened at the CXN2 facility in Colorado Springs, Colorado today.
The entire Center for Migration Services (CIS EIC organization) here has
been eliminated, not downsized!

 1 District Manager
 2 Unit Managers
 2 Project Specialists
14 Software Specialists and Consultants

    FREE AT LAST, FREE AT LAST, THANK GOD ALMIGHTY, WE'RE FREE AT LAST

    The "T" within the AET (Aerospace, Electronics & Transportation) got
    hit today.  The "T" is now going to be missing permanently.
    
    Jon

    Indianapolis checking in, 3 EIS and 2 Sales Support.  No Sales hits
    known at this time.  A couple of weeks ago, there were 4 Customer
    Service hits made.
    
    An incredibly ironic note:  Today's Hagar the Horrible comic strip has
    Hagar and Lucky Eddie at either end of a battering ram - heading
    full-tilt towards a castle door, as arrows rain down on them.
    
    Eddie says to Hagar, "I **KNOW** times are tough, Hagar, but you just
    can't **AFFORD** to lay off anyone **ELSE**."
    
    Today, I am a "Lucky Eddie", yet I wonder how lucky I really am.
    
    Don

    Sales and Sales support hit at KYO, NJO and NYO
    No numbers, but the blood is running deep.....

    ...And according to a salesrep friend LIO (my home office) and WHO are due
    tomorrow. 
    
    
    							-Sal

RCO was hit today; 1 sales, 2 Sales Support, 2 Admin.

I don't understand why we're doing this. I'm in Sales Support and I've had
my most successful year here at Digital (with 14.5 years of tenure). Why do I 
feel so demoralized and confused? If those of us that are left are able, by 
some miracle, to achieve our sales goals, we'll most likely be 6 feet under and 
unable to enjoy any of the rewards. FY93 is going to be burn-out city.

Hangin' in there,

Jim

                                                                     Why do I 
feel so demoralized and confused?                                          
    
    Because its little more than a lottery and the rest of us are simply 
    waiting for our numbers to come up.
    
    See note 1994.27, and compare Ken's remarks to today's reality.
    
    don

    boy does this remind me of watching the news during Nam...

    SEO hit yesterday
    
    3 Sales support (out of 18)
    2 Admin (out of 6)
    rumor of 1 manager later
    
    DEC's Boeing Business Group is also getting the axe. Numbers I don't
    know but I heard 10-15
    
    Bye all...

    IVO - Chicago got hit.  I don't know the numbers but the managers were
    busy all day.  Sales and sales support got hit and some delivery people
    too.  
    
    Sad note - this week we are bringing in 3 rent-a-heads from outside,
    and they TSFOed the guy next to me who has been with the company 20
    years.  I just don't understand....
    

    MPO got hit yesterday and today...don't know when it will end but
    some really good people are going this time.
    
    4 in sales support
    2 in sales (so far today)
    2 in software services (including me)
    
    I will miss this place, my friends, and most of all, the ability to
    communicate and learn from my fellow noters.  Digital has been good
    to me in the past, relocating me to Minnesota from Colorado, and
    it will be  hard to give up my badge on Friday.  For all of you left,
    I wish you luck and hope with all of my heart that Digital will
    recover from the paralysis that "downsizing" is causing.
    
    I feel an immense sense of relief now that I know the reality.  Waiting
    and feeling helpless have to be the worst feelings I have ever had.
    
    Goodbye, and good luck to all
    
    Sherry Litasi

    Sherry:
    
    I do not know you but good luck and I'm glad you are relieved that the
    waiting is over.  I'm sure you're family is relieved that this terrible
    stress of not knowing and the endless waiting is finally over.
    
    Please say a prayer for those of us who remain...I hope we have a
    chance to turn things around.
    
    Again, Good Luck and God Bless!
    
    Ron
    

>>> Sad note - this week we are bringing in 3 rent-a-heads from outside,
>>> and they TSFOed the guy next to me who has been with the company 20
>>> years.  I just don't understand....
    
    We've been told "our" new business model is becoming one of 5-6 "core"
    (read that as real, digital people) and 15 or more rent-a-heads (like
    that term).
    
    Still trying to determine how one retains the "technical expertise"
    that allowed us to survive the cut - when we are to be relegated to the
    "write RFP', "run project scheduler", "hire rent-a-head", "kibitz with
    customer" role.

    Sales and Sales Support in Los Angeles [Commercial] got hit yesterday.
    
    3 Sales Support (I'M ONE OF THEM)
    5 Sales Reps
    
    Adieu,
    
    Lynn T.

Re: .86

	Hardly!

	Cathy

    Has the management staffing already been determined to be the "right
    size".  Have not hear even one report of a manager getting the
    heave-ho.   Even in cases of as few as 6 direct reports.

    It's probably more a matter of "cutting off" a complete facility, but
    here in OPA (Charlotte NC), the layoffs include 4 managers, in addition
    to the other 45+.  There are only 4 survivors, and two who managed to
    board another ship (job) within the company in time.
    
    Jack Bouknight

    I asked our DM many months back after a DVN when were the managers
    going to participate in TFSO.  His reply, which he repeated a month ago
    at the August DVN was, with our endless reorganizations, mgmt would
    participate in the 'future'.  Trying to tie him down to when the
    'future' was about as easy as finding an open req in the jobs book!

    15 to 18 in the downtown Atlanta sales office - don't know if that's
    sales AND support, or just support. 
    

re: -1 Atlanta

It was both sales and sales support.....

Keith R>

5 sales Reps and 1 Support person.

Did anyone see Hagar the Horrible Monday??

It shows Hagar holding the front of a battering ram and Lucky Eddie
holding the back as they run up to a castle gate with arrows 
flying all around them.  Eddie is saying "I know times are tough,
Hagar, but you just can't afford to lay off anyone else!"

I will scan it in at some point as post a pointer

Larry

	... included Birmingham and Huntsville, AL.  That's the Southeast 
Account Group. Doesn't sound like Mobile, Pensacola, or the remotes in GA. 
were affected.

RE:<<< Note 2032.99 by TELGAR::WAKEMANLA "You Bloated Sack of Protoplasm" >>>

>Did anyone see Hagar the Horrible Monday??

See reply .81 in this topic.

-  David

    Bye folks, been here 7 years, leaving with the package 30th Spetember.
    Luckily the UK is a lot better deal than the US one...         
    
    8 people out of 65 in IOSG (ALL-IN-1/Office products)in Reading...
                                                                   
    I'm off (with a grin) to start a MSc in Aberdeen Univeristy in Applied 
    Artificial Intelligence.                                       
                                                                   
    Management to give them their dues, have been very,very good -  
    they took personal requests seriously and have not 'escorted' us out of
    the building or anything...
       
    I works as well - I will finish my work and hand it over to the unlucky
    sod who gets to do twice as much. I get to tidy up my affairs files
    etc.  
                                                                  
      Winton (I'll be internetable to hopefully [email protected])

    Goodbye, Winton, you're comments have been appreciated and will be
    missed...like so many others!

    While I have differed with "Wanton Devious"� in the past, I'll confess
    to missing him as well.
    
    Dick
    
    � (Winton should remember this -- he mentioned it himself!)

    Today's BOSTON GLOBE says we will have reduced the headcount by about
    3,500 during Q1.

    Yesterday's COMPUTERWORLD had a short article that mentioned an
    estimate of 5,000 for Q1...

    On Livewire they show 5300 people gone in the first quarter.

>                <<< Note 2032.107 by ROYALT::TASSINARI "Bob" >>>
>
>    On Livewire they show 5300 people gone in the first quarter.

Only 3300 of those were through layoffs, some were through the sale of the
Greenville plant (PWB).  Not sure if the rest were simply by normal atrition
or if there were other plants sold.

    Here's my question to you all:  How come DEC can't come out and say
    EXACTLY how many people were SERP'd, TFSO'd, sold, etc?  How come we
    can't come up with an EXACT number of employees at quarterly reporting
    time?  What's the big deal/secret?  We are a computer company and
    someone must be able to write a software program that can accurately
    update the number of employees any given day of the week based on
    payroll, right?  Or are we including contractors who come and go with
    the wind in this headcounting?
    
    Where can I find exactly how many people were let go and how many came
    in (through new company acquisitions, new blood hiring, g-o-b network,
    etc) and how many we actually have that we pay weekly?
    
    Ogre.

    The data isn't worth the cost of programming and running it.
    
    Simple, isn't it?  What can any manager do with that piece of
    information?  What decisions will it affect?  Just because we *can*
    find out some information, doesn't mean we need to.  Generating all
    these "nice-to-have answers" is one of the reasons our costs are out of
    sight and our systems can't answer the important questions.
    
    If there is one "contribution" that IM&T can make to getting us out of
    this mess, it is to "just say NO" when people ask for non-essential
    information.  Work that is directed to non-goals isn't available for
    real goals.
    
    Dick

    
    5300 in the last three months   Boston Globe and Middlesex news.

    
    re.110
    
    	I don't agree. The people at the top who are making TFSO decisions
       probably can and do have access to the exact number of people who
       have been TFSO'd, our exact head count for "ANY GIVEN DAY" and how 
       many more will have to be let go. Wether or not they choose to share
       that info with us is another story. Why would Management care to
       share this info with us, because all anxiety and no security makes
       Jack a very nonproductive boy. If we know how close the company is
       to accomplishing its downsizing we have some idea of where we stand.
       Granted these goals and numbers can change and they do, it is still
       better than the feeling of stumbling around in the dark and
       wondering if your going to fall through the trap door.
    
    	For what it's worth, The Herald this morning reported that DEC let
       slip the number of an additional 19000 people to be let go. This
       number was reported anlong wiht our Q1 loss. The herald also said
       that DEC would pick up the pace with its downsizing.
    
    	Mike

    Re: .109
    
     My suspicions are that DEC doesn't want to report the numbers because
    DEC doesn't want to show how many people have been hired while other
    people have SERP'd or TFSO'd. Not to even mention the number of outside
    contract people DEC currently has doing the work of people that have 
    left.
    
     To the best of my knowledge, there are no government or industry
    requirements to report current, past, temporary, or transitional
    headcount so why should they? Especially if the numbers are being
    massaged to put things in the best possible light for the investment
    community.
    
    
    Re: head count program
    
     I would be willing to bet such a thing (in one form or another)
    already exists but once again, why should I tell YOU how many
    Snickers bars I have in my desk right now and how many I have eaten
    today? Not to be rude or caustic but it really ISN'T any of your
    business.  :-)
    
    
    Re: 19,000 to go
    
     This may not be news to most people but it's consistent with the
    rumors (please note, they are rumors) I am hearing hear of big weekly 
    cuts each week during the months of November and December. Happy
    Holidays...
    
    
    Glenn

    re: last few...
    
    
    I believe there is a restriction on the information that can be
    released during the "quiet" time that B.P. reffered to during his
    announcement.  The numbers probably don't get rolled up for the quarter
    until we're inside the quiet zone.  If DEC released numbers reffering
    to actual headcount before releasing earnings, the SEC would get 
    pretty upset...
    
    
    my $.02
    
    Jim

	How many people work for Digital probably changes minute by minute.
	In a company this big people are being hired, fired, and quiting
	all the time. Any number given out would have a very short life
	span.

			Alfred

    I think .112 answered his own question.  He stated that the numbers
    should be released to show how close we are to achieving our downsizing
    goal and allow some employees to relax and be more productive.  I
    believe they haven't been released because we're still too far away
    from our downsizing goal and that information would cause more
    employees to get nervous and less productive.
    
    tom_p

But the number of employees worldwide *was* released, and Jack Smith told
analysts how many are planned to be employed by the end of 1993.  If you
do the arithmetic, the total number to leave will be 18,500 to 23,500.
How many of these are layoffs presumably depends on how much attrition occurs.

    
    re.116
    
    	I wasn't asking a question. I was responding to Re.110 where the
       noter was stating that it was a waste of time for management to
       even calculate the numbers let alone tell anyone what they are.
       We have been seeing numbers flying around all over the place
       and they are allways qualified by not taking this or that into
       account. So you never realy know what the number is. I guess I'm
       just trying to say that I feel it's important for employees to
       know where we are in relation to where we want to be and not be
       told "never mind, just get back to work", when we ask for so called 
       "useless information", as it was refered to. 
    	  By the way, I don't think management is handeling this info
       in the way I just described. They are giving us numbers even if 
       they are sometimes vague. I just wouldn't like to be told that it
       is none of my business if they weren't and I asked them for it.
    
    	Mike

    my answer was given in another note in a subliminal way:
    
    1 in 4 will go.
    
    Look at your peers and pick out 3 plus yourself, then determine which
    one of you will go. Keep doing this until your oganization is bled dry.
    
    Ogre.

    I find it interesting that IBM announced a commitment to their
    perceived "no layoff policy". 
    
    Any manager who uses headcount reduction as his/her means for making
    their financial goals will be terminated.  
    
    Since we tend to either follow the IBM lead in management leadership, I
    reckon it will only be a week or two before heads roll for lack of
    revenue generation or discretionary expense practices.
    

    Granted that any figure given would become historical within minutes
    as someone else was either hired or layed off/fired. At the same time
    a qualifier could be put in place such as "AS OF 'XX XXX XX' DATE
    108,500 WORLDWIDE" could just as easily be given. What is rather
    of concern is that many people have implied "no one knows" or "we
    cannot get that information easily"? I think Payroll could tell you
    how many Paychecks are issued on any given payday, that would certainly
    be a start at least. I find it difficult to believe that no one knows,
    how many people are employed by DEC. IF that were the case (IMO) then
    how in the world can anyone decide how many need to be retained or
    how many need to be layed off? Likewise I'm sure that somewhere there's
    an active "Badge Number" Listing of Employee's.
     
    Jack Smith was quoted in several newspapers, and in VOGON news as
    stating specifically that employee headcount would be reduced by
    up to 23,500 by the end of 1993 (care was taken to say 1993 not
    FY93 so we're talking by a year from this coming December). He
    further stated that the company would have between 85,000 and 90,000
    worldwide by that time. While I'm no Math Wiz, if you take 23,500
    and subtract it from 108,500 you end up at 85,000. Likewise Bob Palmer
    stated in his recent interview that the number of people 'leaving
    this enterprise' will escalate rapidly in the coming months. I'd
    tend from those two sources to figure that before next June we'll
    probably be approaching those figures, won't be quite there, but
    getting close.
    - J -
            

    The question might be, Does the 5300 number include the recent TSFO'd
    employess. Remeber they are still Digital employees until November
    something. We have seen an almost across the board 20%. That would mean
    that an additional 20,000 + employess will be gone (off the payroll)
    in November.
    
    What ya think?

    re .121
    
    You are giving Digital too much credit for having its act together. 
    
    There is no single "Payroll" department.  While there may be one such
    department for all of the US (which I doubt), I can assure you that
    every subsidiary has its own.  The time lag for updating the "corporate
    employee master file" is greater than zero, so what one payroll
    department knows about, the corporate office may not know.
    
    So, to count all the employees as of XX XXX XX date, you need to
    coordinate some number (say thirty, for example) independently run
    payroll departments to each generate its list as of such and such a
    date.  Just to get the instructions out to do that might take a week,
    realistically.
    
    Dick

    Why can't each subsidiary simply state the number of payslips (weekly.
    fortnightly or monthly) is has printed in the last period ?
    
    John

    RE: .123 - Y'know, somehow I was afraid someone might say
    	       that! Scary though isn't it? I mean we're a Computer
    	       Company, in the information business, and we can't
    	       pull together our own information. Almost as if the
    	       patients are running the asylum isn't it? 
    
    		-- J

>    Why can't each subsidiary simply state the number of payslips (weekly.
>    fortnightly or monthly) is has printed in the last period ?
 
	We don't print them, a third party does. 

	I suppose we can ask them..........

	Heather

    re .124
    
    John, each subsidiary can do exactly that.  Now, somebody has to make
    the assumption about what that "number of payslips" means.  And if you
    think that we can get a dozen accountants to agree on how to interpret
    the numbers, fine!  I'm not quite that optimistic.
    
    Dick

    Re: .124

    The number of paychecks printed every week has nothing to do with the
    number of employees.  MANY, MANY employess get two payschecks every week
    because they put in for on call pay and payroll (sometimes) makes two or 
    more if more than one timecard is submitted.  This happens more than you
    may think.

    It seems, though, that the number of badge numbers receiving paychecks
    should be easy to determine.

    BTW I didn't know we didn't print our own paychecks.  Who does?

    Diane

    re -1
         I believe that for security reasons payroll has always been
         run by service bureaux outside of DEC.
    
         BTW what about all the people who are employees but not currently
         receiving paychecks because their absence without pay is covered
         by local labor regulations?
    
          Max

    
    	re last few, regarding # of paychecks:
    
    	This wouldn't be totally accurate, since people that receive
    	TFSO are on the payroll, and continue to recieve paychecks, for
    	an additional 9 weeks. A friend was TFSO'ed and got his paystubs
    	through the mail for 9 weeks (as all do, I'm sure)...the funny
    	thing was, the cost center was not his old cost center, but was
    	"YYO", which he took to mean "You're on Your Own !".
    
    	These same employees' Org. Unit under ELF show up as "U.S. AREA
    	MANAGEMENT" until the 9 weeks is up.
    
    	John

	RE: Paychecks I believe that Digital US does print its own paychecks.
	But we are a whole lot more companies than just Digital US. Other
	countries may and probably do use outside services.

			Alfred

    The Employee Master File contains the number of employess.

    RE: .132 Who ever told you that was pulling your leg. The Employee
    Master File that most of us in the US know and love holds only the
    US employees.
    
    			Alfred

Copyright � 1992 Dow Jones & Co. from DJ International Economic News Wire
Digital Equip Cuts Severance Pay For Laid-Off Employees

  MAYNARD, Mass. -(AP-DJ)-- Digital Equipment Corp. said it has reduced 
severance payments for employees who are laid off under its cost-cutting 
plans. 

  The reductions, first reported in the New York Times, will help Digital to 
cut up to 25,000 of its 108,500 workers over the next three years without 
expanding its 1.5 billion dlrs restructuring reserve, a spokeswoman said. 

  Under the new program, workers with less than 10 years seniority will 
receive nine weekly paychecks plus a lump sum of one week's pay for each year 
of service. Previously they got nine weeks plus two weeks pay for each year of 
service. Most people with more than 10 years will receive nine weekly 
paychecks, plus a lump sum of 10 weeks pay and two weeks pay for every year 
served, down from three weeks for every year. The maximum payment remains 52 
weeks pay. 
 
-0- 1903GMT

    Re .-1
    
    What's the truth? Some stories say that 25,000 of us will be TFSOed
    by the end of 1993. Other stories say it'll take Digital 3 years to get
    rid of 25,000 of us.
    
    Dave

    RE: 136
    
    	According to both the news media, and the Vogon News Service
        (Digital VTX Menu under Computer Industry news), Jack Smith
    	Senior Vice President, said, Digital will be down to between
        85,000 and 90,000 by the end of 1993. Since we're at 108,500
        that works out to 23,500 by the end of next calender year.
        Since he's made that statement, most of the papers etc have
        been citing 25,000 by the end of 1993. Frankly, my personal
        opinion is that we'll be approaching that number long before
        a year from this December. I base this solely on Bob Palmer's
        statements in his DVN that people will be leaving at an
        accelerated rate. Also, my own opinion is that, we will lose
        some awfully good and talented people in that process. While
        Digital MAY have had a lot of (according to many other notes 
        in this notesfile so I'm using their terms NOT mine) "Deadwood"
        in the past, I believe  a large bulk of that is long gone. We
        are no longer talking about trimming just fat here, but we
        will no doubt, cut some meat out too. Hopefully in that process
        we won't make such a cut as to cripple things. I DO NOT subscribe
        to the thought process that some folks are citing that we're
        only getting rid of Performance Problems or "Fat" at all, we're
        losing talented people as well. 
    
    	Just another couple of pennies worth....
    
            - J

 Re: 137 

>>	Digital MAY have had a lot of (according to many other notes 
>>      in this notesfile so I'm using their terms NOT mine) "Deadwood"
>>      in the past, I believe  a large bulk of that is long gone. We
>>      are no longer talking about trimming just fat here, but we
>>      will no doubt, cut some meat out too.

Very likely, if you're referring to individual contributors.  But I submit 
that the more serious problem is that there is incredible fat left in the 
management ranks.  This "fat" is deciding which IC's leave, while protecting 
their own.

Bob

    RE: 138
    	You make a very good point around the subject of Management
    	etc. and I certainly don't argue with you on that piece. 
    	I, for the most part in my responce (137) was NOT including
    	upper layers of Management in that response. Since it's a
    	free country and everyone's entitled to their own opinion,
    	mine is that we are rather top-heavy in that respect. With
    	85,000 employees as the target, I'd be curious to know how
    	many of those that remain will be, Upper Manager's and Vice
    	Presidents in charge of things beginning with "A" etc. 
    	While I wouldn't want to say that that is necessarily fat,
    	I wouldn't mind saying it's a not Lean by any stretch of
    	the imagination, nor is it necessarily 'Deadwood' although
    	it certainly isn't necessarily "Living Wood" either. I do
    	suspect that sometime over the next 13-14 months there
    	will be some surgery done on that level though.
    
    

    We have been losing real "meat" with each of the TFSO's. "Deadwood"
    still remains due to the good ole boy and girl network. It's a real
    shame but it probably happens in all industries going through what
    we are.
    
    Jim C.
     

    Managers are often rather strong personalities, not deadwood at all.
    Some use that strength for Digital, some don't.
    

Pruning a tree at the roots is rarely helpful and often fatal.

Bob

>Pruning a tree at the roots is rarely helpful and often fatal.



	Unless you weant to keep small whilst developing and maturing

	as Bonsai's do


	Heather

    RE: .143  by SUBURB::THOMASH 
    
>>Pruning a tree at the roots is rarely helpful and often fatal.

	>Unless you weant to keep small whilst developing and maturing
	>as Bonsai's do
    
    Heather, are you trying to start another Japanese takeover rumour?
    

	:-)    

    Re. .135:

    So the package is reduced to 9 + 1/year.

    Time to once again reassess whether it's worth the risk to stay with
    Digital...

    There _is_ a benefit to reducing the package in order to accelarate
    attrition :-(

    RE:.146

   > So the package is reduced to 9 + 1/year.

    	I believe if you read .135 again the package is reduced to a 
    maximum of 52.   9/weeks + 43/weeks = 52/weeks
    total.

    Joe

    There is an extensive discussion of the new package in 1948.,
    infact the last fifty or more notes are on that.
    
    

    Supposedly new layoffs are coming very soon. As anyone heard anything
    about them... how many, what groups, voluntary, SERPS, etc.? 
    
    
    

        We've been told that December 7 is the day that will live in
        infamy.

        Bob

    MAC will be downsizing in Q2, according to a widely distributed memo
    from Mike Thurk.

    I've also heard from a number of folks that Dec. 7 is a key date for
    a mass reduction notification.  Isn't that Pearl HArbor Day in the
    U.S.?
    
    Mark
    

    re: .153
    
    December 7 certainly is Pearl Harbor Day.  FWIW, it's also my son's
    birthday....

    
    re: .154
    
    FWIW it is my birthday too......

    December 7th is the anniversary date of the bombing at Pearl Harbor.
    Hmmmm, wonder if the "bombers" will be flying in low under our
    radar :-(
    
    Karen
    

    
    umm, a few back.  Was that a "mass reduction" or a Mass. (or MA)
    reduction?  Or both?
    

    
       
       SECURITY GUARD AT 9 O'CLOCK!!!
    
    
        HIT THE DEC!!
    
    

    
    
    RE: .156
    
    Why wouldn't they.
    
    And don't call me Shirley 8>)
    
    

    In a group meeting yesterday we were told that the latest rumor is
    10,000 on 12/7 and another 10,000 in June. This was not presented as
    fact, but it wasn't donw-played either.
    
    Linda

re Note 2032.157 by BOOKS::HAMILTON:

>     umm, a few back.  Was that a "mass reduction" or a Mass. (or MA)
>     reduction?  Or both?
  
        as in "massacre".

    re .152
    did you mean MAC or NAC?
    Networks And Communications is the organization that Mike Thurk
    manages, I believe.

    
    
      -1   NAC, from what I hear
    
    
    

    December 7th is the day we hear too -- ZKO should take a beating that
    week.  Of course, some might be away at US DECUS...  :)
    
    
    
    NOT!
    
    -- dg

    I meant NAC.                          
                                  
    Also, David Stone is rumoured to be gone. This seems  widespread
    rumour and I've mailed memit::d_stone (to no reply yet) to ask if true.
    Anyone here got a fact to share?
    
    Also rumoured to be getting canceled, - DECwrite, DECreport, DECquery,
    DECset, DECdesign, DECplan.....
    
    /andy

This rumor about Stone being gone has been officially denied in another 
conference by Claudia Mueller, who is Stone's communication manager (i. e., 
if anyone ought to know, she should).

   Gary

    The MAA (Mid Atlantic Area) was notified today via memo that another
    downsizing will occur during Q2 starting in December. Meetings were
    being held by The Good Old Boy Network to throw darts as to who stays
    and who are the lucky ones to at least get out with some kind of
    remumeration. The latest reports that Vultures were slowly circling
    the greater Philadelphia, Pennsylvania area. BOHICA for sure.
    	regards
    	John

    
    	re .166
    
    	Which conference, please?

    
    Since we're talking rumors, I'll add one I've heard :
    
    	This will be the last "layoff" with any kind of package. I assume
    	that to mean any additional lump sum beyond 9 weeks.
    
    - V
    

  Reading about the Vietnam memorial wall in Washington, DC, today led
  me to wonder if DEC should have a "wall of shame" outside of corporate
  headquarters (preferably by the entrance that most senior VPs use)
  with the names of all employees ever laid off by DEC, and maybe the
  number of dependents for each in parentheses.  It might serve as a
  good reminder of the human consequences of their mistakes to those who
  attain positions of power and alleged responsibility in this company.

  Anybody want to submit that one to DELTA?  Nah, i didn't think so...

								paul

    re: .169 and "no more packages"
    
    I suspect there will remain some crumbs of a package for those fired
    through TFSO.  The main reason for this is:  without any package,
    there's no incentive for a terminated employee to sign away his right
    to sue the company.  Given the current political and economic climate,
    there's lots of potential litigation time and expense that DEC could
    be in for if lots of employees are fired at once and DEC doesn't have
    those waivers in hand.
    
    As always, this is IMHO,
    
    Geoff

    Rep to <<< Note 2032.171 by AUSTIN::UNLAND "Sic Biscuitus Disintegratum" >>>

>    I suspect there will remain some crumbs of a package for those fired
>    through TFSO.  The main reason for this is:  without any package,
>    there's no incentive for a terminated employee to sign away his right
>    to sue the company.  
    
    Minimum would be  at least 7 weeks since all the paperwork/forms states
    that you were given  at least 45 days to consider with or without legal
    counsel to sign the paperwork and give up your right to sue.  But being
    how  Digital  is  process  happy,  they   could  always  write  up  new
    paperwork/forms.
    
    re: a few back concerning Dec 7th,
    
    Well how do I know this, I  was  officially tapped yesterday and Friday
    the 13th will be my last day unless I get something.   Dec 7th maybe in
    fact  be  big  day for some, but for others it's happening now and will
    continue upto and after Dec 7th.
    
    When you look at the #'s of employees as of last quarter, and  look  at
    the published figures of 80,000 eventually, do your math, that comes to
    1 out of 4 people will be tapped in the next year of so (25%), a lot of
    people will be surprised.
    
    Claude
    
    PS.  My group HEP (Human Enterprise program, old DEC-Flex group was hit
    by 25%)

    David Stone replied to my mail. He has left DEC and will be the
    President of AT+T's Operating Systems Division.

    The announcment of David Stone leaving is in LIVEWIRE as well.
    
    		Alfred

    Must have just got there, I looked at 9:20 and saw nothing!
    
    Thanks
    -sandy
    

    digital                   Worldwide News                      LIVE WIRE
                                                         
    
                      Digital announces resignation of David Stone;
                    Dennis Roberson to head Software Engineering Group
    
    Digital today announced that David Stone, vice president of Software
    Engineering, has accepted a position as president of AT&T's
    Operations Systems Business Unit in Montvale, N.J. and will be leaving 
    Digital effective Friday, Nov. 13, 1992 after 22 years with the company.
    
    Dennis Roberson, vice president, Corporate Software, will be assuming
    responsibility for the Software Engineering Group effective with
    David's departure.  Dennis joined Digital in 1988.  His responsibilities
    involved providing software and associated support requirements for 
    Digital's largest customers.  He spent 17 years at IBM prior to Digital.  
    While there, he held a variety of technical, managerial and executive 
    positions.  Dennis holds a BSSE and a BS Physics degree from Washington 
    State University and an MSSE from Stanford.  He currently serves as a 
    member of the Open Software Foundation's (OSF) Board of Directors.
    
      "David has made many contributions to Digital's success during his
    years here and we wish him well," said Bill Strecker, vice president,
    Engineering.  "I appreciate Dennis' willingness to accept this leadership 
    role during this time of transition for the company and within the 
    engineering community.  His experience and knowledge will be valuable in 
    carrying through the work David began in restructuring and downsizing our 
    software organization and implementing Digital's software strategy for the 
    future.  Please give Dennis your full support and cooperation as he 
    continues to develop Digital's software strategy and plans."
    

    >> Reading about the Vietnam memorial wall in Washington, DC, today led
    >> me to wonder if DEC should have a "wall of shame" outside of corporate
    >> headquarters (preferably by the entrance that most senior VPs use)
    >> with the names of all employees ever laid off by DEC, and maybe the
    >> number of dependents for each in parentheses.  It might serve as a
    >> good reminder of the human consequences of their mistakes to those who
    >> attain positions of power and alleged responsibility in this company.
    
    That, of course, assumes that the folks who attain positions of power
    and alleged responsibility in this company give a rodent's derriere
    what happens to those who get laid off ... 
    
    						... Bob
    

re: .166

The conference in question is the SHIRE::SWE_CONFERENCE, which is 
essentially the Ask David Stone conference for TNSG (as described in its 
EASYNET_CONFERENCES note).  Claudia has since apologized for her earlier 
note, saying that she didn't find out until last night, and that Stone kept 
this under very tight wraps to avoid interfering with the Alpha 
announcements yesterday.

   Gary

    So now you know who to trust...:-)

    shire::swe_conference appears no longer to exist

    Oops.  I got the file name wrong.  It's SHIRE::SWE_QUESTIONS
    
    
      Gary

    The conference Shire::swe_questions is still there.  Is this the
    conference you tried to access?
    

    There was a previous note listing a handful of products from TNSG
    that were apparently cancelled.  This is not a correct statement and
    I would like to clarify.
    
    	DROPPED PROJECT FUNDING <> PRODUCT CANCELLATION
    
    I can only speak for my own projects in SDE (the tools part of SDT).
    
    We have been asked to make some significant cuts in our budget in order
    to reduce the engineering run-rate.  Decisions were made at higher
    levels regarding which products are central to supporting the company's 
    core mission and which are note central.  The DECdesign and DECplan
    products are two products thatwe will no longer be able to fund.  
    We do not have the budget to maintain these products and need to find 
    others entities (internal or external) that can pick up these products.  
    The primary issue is out run-rate - not the profitability of these
    products.  
    
    To summarize:
    
    	Not funding a project <> cancelling the product!
    
    	We are committed to support the customer commitments that have been
    	made and finding ways to carry on these profitable products.
    
    DECset was also mentioned - the outplacement of the product commitments
    is something that has already been underway for some time.  As for the 
    people, most of the people will still be maintained on the pay-roll 
    for backend CASE work.
    
    I hope this helps.  I know there are lots of other issues that could be
    discussed but I think it would be more appropriate to have upper level
    management explain the details of our financial state, mission, etc.
    Unfortunately, I won't have the time to address issues in this notes
    conference given my other responsibilities but I and others in
    management will be communicating information as soon as we have details
    resolved.
    
    Rudy Bazelmans
    Acting SDE Engineering Manager
     
                         

    Rudy,
    
    Could you (or anyone familiar with the concept) please explain the term
    "run-rate"?
    
       Gar

    
    Re: run-rate
    
    It is a term to describe the rate at which current engineering
    expenses force us to spend money without regard to profit or loss
    of any particular product.
    
    Steve
    

    The term "run rate" is normally applied to a relatively steady
    (predictable) level of expense, revenue, unit-shipments, turkeys -
    whatever you happen to be counting. In my business (APS/DCS, soon to be
    Professional Services) our expense run rate encompasses direct/indirect
    labor and related personnel costs, facilities cost, etc. The revenue
    run rate is (unfortunately!) not as predictable, but can be forecast
    from our backlog of business and opportunities.
    
    I imagine that similar things apply to the SWE business, although the
    run rate Rudy referred to is probably "licenses sold" or "license
    revenue" for the products involved. Sounds like we weren't selling
    enough, and couldn't forecast strong enough opportunity, to justify
    continued investment in these products (which is damned inconvenient
    since a major customer of mine made a strategic decision less than a
    year ago to use DECdesign for all software development).
    
    Life goes on.
    Tom

    .183 Thanks for the clarifications.

    When I mentioned run-rate - I was referring to the expense structure
    in SDE Engineering (pay-roll, capital equipment etc) not the licenses
    sold.  The products we have dropped the funding for ARE profitable.
    The issue is cashflow which is critical to a company's success.
    
    Rudy
    

Bandying "cancellation" rumors around internally can terrifically negatively
impact Digital sales.  Inevitably something (probably something incorrect)
gets out to the Globe.  So please be extremely careful with your use of
words such as this in this notes conference.  You may inadvertently be
expediting a negative financial outcome for Digital and I doubt that is
your intent!

    re .back some.
    
    David Stone, going to the O/S division of AT&T...
    
    Gee, that'll definitely strengthen his commitment to the U*x O/S...
    
    q
    

    OperationS, not OperatinG - I made that mistake too.
    
    At AT+T he'll stand a good chance of delivering the Information
    Utility - a line into every home, more or less.

    re: non-cancellation of DECdesign and DECplan  :-)
    
    Although I understand the statement made by SSPADE::BAZELMANS in both
    prior note entries (I'm using a char cell interface and cannot go back
    as DECw intfc can), that DECDesign and DECplan will be non-funded by
    the existing org, and will need to be funded by some other org -- but
    the customer who already have these products will be supported,and ....
    
    well... one of those customers is DARPA, Boeing STARS, who has
    committed with DEC to ATIS, and DECxxx products (CDD/R, CDD/A,
    DECdesign, DECPlan, DECWrite, etc), and want to use these products on
    their SEE (Software Eng Envir) platform they sell (we sell) to 100's of
    other customers (as soon as next year).
    
    How will we support Boeing?? DUAL?? DARPA?? with these products if they
    go into a "maintenance mode" now?
    
    thanks -- Bruce Evans

    What we have here is a failure to communicate.

    Exactly what is implied by:

    "non-funding"
    "canceled"
    "maintenance-mode"
    etc.

    ...needs to be clarified by people in a position to do so.  Certainly
    anyone who picks up that phone and calls their customer or Digital News
    and Review or whomever based upon what's been written here isn't helping
    themselves or others.

    I'm as interested as anyone in the outcome, but if you don't know, then
    your speculation or interpretation isn't the reason I open this
    conference for reading.

    Ultimately it may be true that a dozen products are going to be no
    longer enhanced, or that Digital no longer possesses a rational software
    product strategy, but I'd wait a little bit longer before drawing that
    conclusion.

    I heard from one of our District Sales Support people that is in Nashua
    this week that a big layoff of over 1000 people just took place today
    in Nashua.  He also stated that one of the products affected (not sure
    what that means) is RALLY.
    
    Can any one clarify/verify any of this?

    
    The 1800 laid off in ZKO is a rumor of dubious validity. The entire 
    population of ZKO is 2800. 
    

    No layoff happened in ZKO today.  We are in the process of informing
    project teams which are affected by the budget cuts.  The disposition
    of the various projects is currently being worked with the goal of
    maintaining customer satisfaction for the affected products that are
    already shipping.  Stay tuned...
    
    -Ken

re: .194

>    Exactly what is implied by:
>
>    "non-funding"
>    "canceled"
>    "maintenance-mode"
>    etc.
>
>    ...needs to be clarified by people in a position to do so.  

The clarification is being requested through official channels, Patrick.
I can guarantee you that.

								paul

    I'd just like to clarify the term "engineering runrate" for the
    readership. You can take this as an official answer at least for how
    the term is used in my CC.
    
    Run rate is typically calculated on a FY quarter basis. It is the
    amount of expense money that hits a cost center in a quarter. Cost
    center expense is made up of salary, fringe benefits (ie healthcare
    etc) plus a load of expemses for things such as equipment depreciation,
    field service charges, travel, training, costs for offices you occcupy
    etc.
    
    The 'run rate' is the currebt quarters expense * 4. Ie how much you'd
    spend over a year if you continued running at the current rate.
    
    The reason it is an important metric is because groups often have a
    budget target to plan to for the FY. What has happened in the past is
    that in the first 3 quarters a group spends less than 3/4 of their
    budget in the first 3 quarters. The person managing the group then says
    "oh shit" if I carry on like this I'll underspend my budget and next
    year I'll get a smaller budget. Hence a tendency for groups to hire
    massively in Q4 and make a lot of discretionary expenses so they come
    in at their budget. Now of course this means they spend more than 1/4
    of their budget in Q4. So in the last few years quarter run rate is
    looked at and if 4 * Q4 actual expenses > FY budget you are deemed to
    have a too high run rate ie you have a built in budget need for the
    next FY. Not a good idea if the company needs to trim expenses.
    
    By the way a lot of this poor budget management is one of the MAIN
    reasons the company is now having to TFSO so many people. There was far
    too much hiring based on no good reason. Unfortunately the people that
    blew their budgets were not held accountable. Instead somebody just
    wacked the birdcage and most found perches elsewhere.
    
    As far as I can see so far the only person that has lost their job due
    to mismanaging their budget is our former CEO Ken Olsen. Unfortunately
    I feel the fault was only his in that he didn't wield an iron hand on
    those that were really to blame. In my view the people who are really
    to blame are the segments of engineering that have made enormous losses
    and the so called marketing groups who couldn't market a Budweiser to
    the local drunk.
    
    Dave

    There are a lot of assumptions being made in this note.
    
    My note about the fact that we we did not have the budget to fund
    some of the SDE products has obviously put these products in a
    temporarily risky position because we have not finalized the plans for
    how these products will continue to be maintained and enhanced (yes
    enhanced!).  Work is aggressively being done to make sure that these
    products are carried forward and that customer satisfaction is
    maintained.  Outside entities are showing considerable interest in 
    these products.

>    There are a lot of assumptions being made in this note.
    
Maybe if you used plain english and said what you meant instead of filling your
replies with euphamisms, we wouldn't have to guess and make assumptions
about what you mean.

You stated that some products would be de-funded.  To me, if no money is
being spent on a product, then no work will be done on it.  Hence, no
enhancements, and the product is for all intents and purposes, dead.

You stated that other products would go into "maintenance-mode".  In my
experience, products in maintenance mode are given a half-hearted (or
good-hearted but half-staffed) effort to see that they run on the current
version of the O/S, but customer requests for enhancements, or even bug fixes
usually fall on deaf (or nonexistant) ears.  Thus the product is virtually
un-sellable.

You stated that still other products would be "outplaced".  I must admit that I
hadn't heard that one.  I've seen PEOPLE outplaced, but never products.  I can
only ASSUME, then, that product outplacement involves another company taking
over Digital's product (as we have bought products like Intact).  Thus, Digital
as a corporation is disavowing any commitments it may have made regarding
support.


Now, there are a LOT of customer relationships which have been built on the
trust that Digital will stand behind what it sells.  That is one of the prime
differentiators in my observation.  If we now put out the message that
customers can NOT trust Digital to continue to back its software products, they
will only trust us for hardware.  Isn't that going backwards???

How many customer relationships will we RUIN with this move?
How many contractual relationships are in jeopardy with this move?
Can we afford either of these things to happen?

You stated that some of the products were profitable, but we "couldn't afford
the run-rate".  Can we really afford to DECREASE our revenue stream??

Concerned,
Kevin Farlee

    Kevin,
    
    I think you are expressing exactly the dilemma that has faced
    software engineering for the past six months. 
    
    It was clearly a requirement to reduce engineering investment for FY93.
    Various amounts have been quoted, but $50m seems to be popular.
    
    As I understand it, every time the VP in charge (DLS) came up with a
    plan to implement this, it was deemed unacceptable by one or more of
    the business managers due to it impacting their future revenue
    projections or customer commitments. This has gone on for months now.
    
    (Maybe this process contributed to DLS's decision to accept AT&T's
    offer?)
    
    So here we are in November, still deciding what product investments to
    cut. But the chilling fact is that if in July to save $50m in FY93 you
    needed to cut x heads, here in November you may have to cut 2x heads to
    make the same saving by the end of FY93. And that probably means 2x
    products too.
    
    The good news seems to be that Strecker is approving the plan in terms
    of an overall product strategy. The bad news has to be, that whatever
    is cut *will* affect future revenue projections and require us to back
    out of customer commitments. The screams will be heard right across the
    Corporation.
    
    I worry that if we procrastinate further there'll be an exponential
    requirement to cut, if there's anything left to cut, that is.
    
    JohnK

    But John, all that is no excuse for obtuse, unclear statements around
    what is actually happening.
    
    Surely we and our customers have a right to know what is going to
    happen. Or, horror of horrors, has it been a case of "cut first, work
    out what happens as a result later"?
    
    I have a horrible suspicion...
    

    
    since I believe there are legal committments involved, out and out
    abanndonment will not happen.
    
    There are cheaper ways to continue support than having it done
    in-house.  I would applaud out-sourcing some of this support, and
    perhaps out sourcing follow-on versions.
    
    being in software engineering myself, yes i certainly feel threatened
    but i also know if we continue as we have there is an even more certain
    end waiting for us.  
    
    bob
    

  Re .203 (Andy)

> Or, horror of horrors, has it been a case of "cut first, work
> out what happens as a result later"?

  Why not ?  That seems to be how some of the products were created in
  the first place ...

  Re .204 (Bob)

> I would applaud out-sourcing some of this support, and
> perhaps out sourcing follow-on versions.
 
  I'd be grateful if anyone would post [or mail me] definite information
  about out-sourcing support / future versions (eg., products & contact
  names).

  Frank

    Well back to the base noters request to track all layoffs. Our group
    will be gone on or before December 7th. We are the Applications
    Information and Distribution Group (AIDG) located in MRO4. We were
    developing an Desktop Software Distribution and Management system. Th
    sad thing is we have our first customer lined up and ready to go into
    testing. There is alot of good people in this group that will sure make
    DEC's competition look good after they get there.
    I can understand Digital needs to reduce headcount,BUT this "Cluster Bomb"
    approach will certainlly shove the company off a cliff because of near term
    sightedness. - go figure -

    I wonder if Digital would give up the rights to some of the products
    we are cancelling and turn them over to a group of soon-to-be
    ex-employee developers who might want to form a company to bring the
    product to market. The expertice of the people being layed off seems
    sufficient to form viable companies to develop, market and support
    these products.

    
    Harlo you get the prize!  That was my unspoken message earlier about
    out-sourcing.  Whether it happens or not I have no clue, but it does
    seem to have some merit, and would keep a few good folks employed
    although not as DEC employees.
    
    bob

re .207:

DEC isn't going to give away what it can sell.  If products that are losing
their funding are indeed profitable, they're sure to be bought by software
companies with deep pockets (Computer Associates used to do this sort of
thing).

I still don't understand this run-rate business.  If run-rate is total
expense (including overhead), doesn't "run-rate too high" mean a product
isn't profitable (enough)?  Is client software losing out simply because
it doesn't leverage the sale of other software?

    I rather expect that the software was used to leverage hardware sales,
    but that the full value of this contribution didn't show up on the bottom 
    lines of the software cost centers.  The proof will probably involve
    seeing what happens to some hardware sales without the leveraging. 
    Probably won't show up over the short term since the software is still
    available and hopefully up to date.  I am hopeful that Windows NT on Alpha 
    will be able to get "leverage" from Windows software which is more widely 
    available.
    
    Steve

    I believe that Digital would consider licensing software in
    such a way that another company could pick up the source and
    carry on the product.  This is one way for us to keep some of
    our needed software products.  If someone sees an opportunity
    in this space, this is the time to make a proposal.

    "Run-rate too high" was across Digital Software and Hardware
    Engineering.  This was not specific to any project that may have
    recently experienced a change in funding levels -- in fact those
    projects may well have had profitable products.  The challenge
    was to achieve a total engineering budget that provided focus around
    an achievable strategy and that would allow Digital to once again
    become profitable.  The goal is of course to have those profitable
    products continue to be supported and enhanced to meet the needs
    of our customers (and to make $'s for Digital, though perhaps through
    royalties.)
    
    Regards,
    Leslie

  Re .209 (Gerald)

> DEC isn't going to give away what it can sell.  If products that are losing
> their funding are indeed profitable, they're sure to be bought by software
> companies with deep pockets (Computer Associates used to do this sort of
> thing).

  Who would hear about these actions in advance please ?  How would I find out
  if a product I was interested in was about to be licensed to a third party ?

  Re .211

> I believe that Digital would consider licensing software in
> such a way that another company could pick up the source and
> carry on the product.  This is one way for us to keep some of
> our needed software products.  If someone sees an opportunity
> in this space, this is the time to make a proposal.

  Not being funny but what would be required for a "proposal" ?
  To whom should it be addressed ?  Where this has been done in the past, what
  order of magnitude are we talking about for licence fees [ie., is there a
  "standard rate" or is everything priced on an individual basis ? By whom ? ]

  Frank

Re: .211

Must admit, I thought this was already happening. VAX Cobol Generator went
that way for one. And that's without the activity of the Components Business
who every now and then tout our sw technology around where we may be able
to make money (though that's really a sublicensing business).

Take away all quotes of leverage. The software business could succeed if it
was allowed to stand on its own two feet and fully address the channels to
market issues that currently undermine it.
								- Ian W.

    A new venture proposal should be addressed to the engineering org
    currently responsible for the product.  There probably aren't any
    rules about how to write these proposals--maybe a business plan that
    shows the benefits to Digital and how the new venture is going to
    survive.  The amount of license fees probably depends on whether
    or not the spun off product is an application we need to sell
    in our target markets.
    
    There is a new ventures group in Stow that does licensing of
    s/w to new companies started by Digital employees.  They could
    probably give you a briefing on what's been done and what
    they expect to see in the form of a proposal.
    
    Digital's bottom line is that we need to have lots of applications
    on our platforms, but we need the cost of developing/maintaining
    the applications to be lower.  If your new venture helps
    Digital solve this problem, you're off to a good start.

    
>>    There is a new ventures group in Stow that does licensing of
>>    s/w to new companies started by Digital employees.  They could
>>    probably give you a briefing on what's been done and what
>>    they expect to see in the form of a proposal.
    
    
    	Good idea, except the New Ventures Group has just been
    dissolved.  The entire group will be gone by the end of December 92.

After a long search and many referrals for someone to help with getting
a license for a course that we had developed I finally discovered the
Corporate Licensing Office over at MSO2.  They were just written up
in the Digital Today newspaper too.

The contact was Dick Greeley, Marketing Mgr. (POWDML::RGREELEY).  He
mentioned that his office has worked with many folks who have SERP'd
to "license" their 'intellectual property' so that they could work
on the same project outside of Digital.  Digital retains full rights
to the work and even gets upgrades to the product.  An example was a
software project for doing QFD (one of those "quality" analysis tools).

I'd suggest that anyone who has done application development or
provided consulting services contact his office.  Document your meetings,
too, as this could help after leaving Digital if there's every any "test"
of "who" owns "what" intellectual property.

Good luck!

Nick

This note is being posted for an employee who wishes to remain anonymous.

    Today has been a crazy day...

    Imagine yourself going down the freeway at 65 MPH and suddenly
    somebody reaches over and shifts your car into reverse.

    This morning my manager called me and told me that he wanted to meet
    with me on Monday morning, December 7, with personnel, and that I would
    be getting the package at that time. This afternoon my manager called
    me and said that he would not be meeting with me on Monday, and that
    the sales and sales support hits  had been put on hold by a last minute
    message from corporate. He also told me that supposedly Bob Palmer and
    Russ Gullotti had met and were 'not happy' with the number of sales and
    sales support people that were going to be hit. I don't know if they
    felt that it was too many or if it was not enough.

    My manager could not say if this change was temporary or permanent. I
    guess I'll stay tuned to find out.

    Is this a fun place to work, or what?