Conference 7.286::digital

	I can't confirm or deny but I can comment. :-)

>    	1. BP has met with the Governor of Massachusetts ("secret
>    	   meeting") bemoaning the fact that the current severence-pay
>           requirement of 9-weeks pay is an undue hardhship on companies
>           and imploring that it be reduced to 2-weeks.  

	Sounds unlikely. What would be the point of doing this? A) It is very
	unlikely that Weld would go along with a cut and less likely that he
	could get it through the legislature. B) I hear that the 9 weeks rule
	is Federal not State C) Since we've been giving much better than 9
	weeks as is it seems that the company would have gone to the minimum
	for this round if it thought 9 weeks was undue hardship.
    
>    	2. The next big round of layoffs will be announced for Feb. 13

	Hey, pick a date. It seems unlikely that management would have picked
	a date for the next round before the current round takes place. The
	logical thing would be to at least measure the impact of the current
	round, see what the end of quarter results look like, and make firm
	plans based on good information before setting a date for a new round
	of layoffs.

			Alfred

    	The second rumor probably has some remote basis in fact. I'd
    basically expect a round of layoffs in the last month of each quarter
    until the company's in the black (or out of business, whichever comes
    first). So after the December hit, the next one would be in March and
    the next one in June and the next one...(you get the idea). I'd bet
    money that actual dates don't exist for any Q3/Q4 layoffs.

      The nine week rule is for plant closings.  It doesn't apply to
    regular layoffs.  The company, gives it to us though , for now at least.
    
    brian
    

    re.1  I can remember when this company was able to handle "the rumor
    Mill" because of open communication. Its crap like the closed
    communication we have that is creating much of the stress we have
    now not someone trying to clearify something they heard and asking a
    question.
    
    BTW, if you haven't noticed the sky is falling for many people in this
    company. When management makes a blanket statement to entire groups
    telling them layoffs are going to happen, you *could* be one that goes
    and simply leaves it at that the validity of any source in this company
    is questionible. Do you know what the criteria is for layoffs? Do you
    know how many are going in the next few quarters? Do you know what
    future packages are? Can you say without a doubt that the elite
    performers in this company are staying. Can anyone in this place answer
    that question? 
    

    There are so many rumors floating around here that the price has
    dropped....from "a dime-a-dozen"
                to  "a penny-a-gross"
    
    and *some* of the rumors are pretty gross!! :-)
    
    
    BUT,,,,,I strongly support the notion that open communications and
    honest answers are the ONLY way to squash the rumors.
    
    Doug                                                 

    I just *have* to add one more gotcha to this string.  Feeling kinda
    mean right now.  I recall seeing BP back in Oct when he took over the
    company telling us that he intended to communicate and let us know what
    is happening.  Haven't seen him since, has anyone else?
    
    					K (here today, gone tomorrow)

We've heard him in July, in October and on a video from the Circle of
Excellence held in Austria. The latter tops the lot...
								- Ian W.

The rumor about BP and Gov Weld that I have heard was that Weld told
BP to space out the layoffs because the Unemployment system could not 
handle all of them at once (approx 23-25 k).

Law states (not sure if federal or state) that when a person is layed off
they must be given 9 weeks notice. The 9 weeks of pay has been the notice
in the past. The 9 weeks will not change, whether we work the last 9 weeks
with a notice or we are told and given 9 weeks pay.

23-25k again...oof...


I've had it.  Will the person who started this rumor dance on a table on
nason street in maynard...Considering that DEC employs upwards of 27000 
people in massachusetts, that very few people would be left.  Maybe 23-25k 
WORLDWIDE...WORLDWIDE....


That means in England and Scotland and Ireland and France and Taiwan and
India and Brazil and Hungary and Egypt and Germany and Canada and New
Hampshire and California and Colorado and New Mexico and Washington (state)
and Israel and Greece and Italy and New York and Hawaii and ... ...
and Massachusetts.  


Will people get a grip.

In the absence of timely, reliable information from authoritative sources, 
rumors will abound.

Just a simple fact.

The overabundance of rumors simply reflects the complete lack of timely, reliable
information.   And this from the owners of the world's largest private data 
network.  We should be ashamed of ourselves...

Bob

    The overabundance of rumors is more likely due to a number of people
    who don't have anything better to do than make up something and get
    everyone all abuzz about it.  I'm getting rather annoyed with them
    all.
    
    The fact is that the "involuntary separations" will likely continue
    on an indefinite basis, as once a company starts doing it, it
    gets hooked and can't stop.  Too bad that it seems that all of the
    cutting is at the bottom.
    
    			Steve

    I started a rumour that BP had met with the Governor of Mass. to get
    February 13th moved to Friday because it seemed more appropriate.
    
    
    JohnK
    
    
    p.s. Sorry, I couldn't resist.

    From what I'm hearing now is TFSO will now be a base rate of 9 frozen
    turkeys (instead of 9 weeks pay) and additional turkeys based on years
    of service. So that means I can have thanksgiving day once a week for
    the next 30 weeks, but the catch is no single turkey will weigh over 
    12 pounds.

    i heared that DEC won the massussuesustess lotto and so no one will
    be TFSOed.
    
    /nasser
    
    the above is a joke, just in case ^:-)

And I hear that BP has bought a chain of gas stations?

Paul

P.S.  This rumor is at least as interesting as the one that had KO driving a
      Mitsubishi car.

    17 reponses later, what have we got?:
    
    	- one bitter response, indicative of the stress factor that I had
    	  acknowledged and sought (by way of a disclaimer) not to have
          aroused
    
    	- many responses netting to a feeling that the rumor mill is
          a symptom (rather than a cause) of stress (the cause of the
          stress being suggested as arising from lack of communication)
    	  and, 
    
    	- several "tongue in cheek" responses (enjoyable *and* a good
          medicine for stress)
    
    I once read an old adage (can't remember the source) which I"ll 
    paraphrase as stating:
    
    		- the general has lost control of the troops 
    		  when they gather amongst themselves and
    		  talk in hushed tones
    
    There's a lot of that going on these days.
    
    One solution is to charge these troops with seditious behavior and shoot 
    them.  Based on some responses to the simple request for confirmation,
    denail, or general comment of the rumors, I suspect that some would 
    prescribe that response.  The problem is that soon, you run out of troops 
    and the general has no army.
    
    Another solution is to address the *problem* (lack of communication,
    lack of inspiration, etc.) rather than the *symptom* (the factionalized
    troops).  In these times of turmoil, I'm comforted to learn that many
    feel *that* to be the preferred solution.
    
    Who knows when, where, or how all this will end.  Without
    communication, however, we'll all just never know.
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

From where I sit, the information flow has been better in the last six
months than in the preceding six months, and better in the preceding
six months than any time previously.  While management needs to 
understand the stress that rumors create, we need to understand that there 
are more people to create rumors than there managers who can put them out. 
No matter how good a job at communication they do, it will always be 
possible for the rumor mill to exceed their capacity.  Just look at the few 
ideas mentioned in this topic.  It's probably possible to come up with 20 
conceivable reasons why Palmer and Weld (or NH Gov. Gregg) might meet, and 
200 plausible rumors about future layoffs.

We need to help out by putting some extra effort into calm reactions.  I 
know that's a tall order, but we have to do it.  Before expending emotion 
and energy on a rumor, ask yourself "Does this really affect my work today?
Would I be doing my work differently if these proved true?  Do I need to 
find out this instant, or can I wait?  How plausible is this?  Is there 
something simple I can do to verify or dispel the rumor?"

I understand the strong responses to a couple of recent events -- the 
800-DEC-SALE situation, and the reorganization of TNSG products.  I'm in no 
position to judge the former, but management has acted quickly to 
communicate on the latter issue (not necessarily with the answer people 
wanted, but at least with an answer).  

But quite frankly, I don't feel that the rumors raised in the base note are 
at the same level.  I understand why they're important to you, and I agree 
that we always need better communication, but it simply isn't reasonable to 
ask Palmer or his staff to respond everytime someone comes up with a new 
rumor about him meeting with a politician.  I'd rather see him spend his 
time on the business strategy, selecting leaders for the customer business 
units, and making sure that we have the right strategy and business plans 
rather than rushing to get the wrong one out in the name of faster
communications.

   Gary

    re: - .19 I would agree that rumors drive anxiety & speculation but I
    think the "chicken is first" and is named "stress".  I also agree that
    calming reactions is paramount to reducing stress (thus more rumors are
    quenched), and one can sure waste time chasing "dry clouds" but then if
    you really DO need to be looking for a new job, the more time you get
    under your belt, the better.  If I could see one change, I'd like to BP
    do more communicating to the troops - especially given the TSFO
    environment that DEC seems destined to be going through, and our
    particular cultural inheritance being so adverse to this for so long.
    It is both necessary and an excellent opportunity to gain the "hearts"
    as well as the minds of those within and outside of DEC. I think it is 
    becoming evident how critical it is to maintain the thread of compassion 
    that marked DEC for 35+ years under Ken Olsen. Better & more frequent
    communication is the least one should expect. It needs to happen at
    every level, the recent reversal on RSS illustrates the unnecessary
    problems it's lack engenders. This "cake" needs a healthy dose of KO
    added to a main course of BP for the recipe to work.

    While this conference may contribute mightily to the rumor mill, it's
    also an unprecedented way to communicate what's going on and stop a lot
    of nonsensical crap that's being spread throughout the company.
    
    If some designated "official" would simply read this notesfile and
    respond with truthful statements about the questions raised here
    (within the bounds of propriety and legality), an untold amount of human
    suffering in the company could be eliminated, morale could be improved,
    and an unheard of measure of trust between the grunts and management
    would be effected.  Unless the intent of DEC is to become a more "us
    vs. them" culture, the bonding that can be created here can start us
    off in a positive new direction.
    
    Memoes, announcements, and position papers are good, but they're a
    one-way street.  The questions people want answered are HERE.  Why
    guess at what needs to be communicated when there are hundreds of
    people asking questions and thousands of people reading and speculating
    on those queries RIGHT HERE?
    
    Notesfiles have been used for years to provide unbelievable support for
    our products, getting out great amounts of timely information to a huge
    base of people, direct from the developers to the end-users.
    
    Why not use this model to help save the company and its people?
    
    -joe tomkowitz
                         

    ------------ANOTHER EARLY RETIREMENT PROGRAM????????---------------
    
    It keeps surfacing but I heard that DEC may be considering another one.
    Has anyone heard any more rumblings?
    
    Some say that DEC could never offer another early out program as they
    said in the SERP that "this would be the only one".  Does this preclude
    them from doing it again? If they did would they be opening them up to
    potential lawsuits?

    Re:22 
    
      I think it should start at age 30!!
    
    PC

    i dont think DECeees should retire at age 30, that is still too young
    an age , our brains are still growing by then and our soles in the prime
    of its creative and inspirational work, i think if you must change
    it, make 40 years, life starts at 40 anyway and that sounds like a good
    age to flip over board at too.

    /nasser

    I agree with early retirement at 30 but,if you are over 30 then all
    monies due to you should be back-dated.For the record I am 250.

    Re: 24
    
    Nasser,
    
       The 30 was said in jest. 40 would be more realistic, depending on
    years of service, but who are we kidding anyway! It'l never happen.
    
    PC

    re         <<< Note 2258.16 by STAR::ABBASI "i like to sleep" >>>

>    i heared that DEC won the massussuesustess lotto and so no one will
>    be TFSOed.
    
    
    Now I know why Nasser works in NH.
    
    q

    
    Well I am 45, and don't know quite how I got there. The last time I
    checked I was 25, and that was 2 years ago when I joined the company.
    

    Well, this afternoon, my district manager told my tfso manager
    that the next round of lay-off's will have only 2 weeks severancce 
    and HAS been approved by the board. So those of you whose groups have
    been wiped out with 50 percent or more and all that is left is the 
    2 and 1 performers, this is what you get for busting your hump all 
    these years. Am I bitter, yes in a way. I wish I was on the list.
    As for the rest of the package, he did not know..... so I will not add
    to the rumor mill. Facts is facts. BP will cut this company down at the
    expense of the worker-bee's and keep management and their committee's.

    
    re. .29
    
    When does "the current" round end, and the "next round" with 2 weeks
    start?
    
    			fred deady
    			wbc::deady

    .29 > the next round of lay-off's will have only 2 weeks severancce 
    
    Through an information channel that has always been reliable in the
    past, I understand that this is not correct.  Two weeks was considered,
    but rejected for now.  The package will be reduced, but not as
    drastically as that.  
    
    	- Bruce
    

    Maybe I wasn't being too clear. Yes the package is being reduced.
    The only definite thing is that the 9 week "period" is being reduced
    to 2 weeks + whatever else. This information came from my district 
    manager and he would not lie to my tfso manager and myself would he.
    Like the earth is flat I guess.
    
    
    Tom

    Since the 9-week period is defined in a federal (USA) law, the "WARN
    act" (something like "workers' adjustment and retraining notice"),
    Digital can't deny it.  There may be exceptions (like very small
    layoffs) but I would doubt Digital could get one.
    
    All the rest is optional.

    The nine week period is for plant closings.  It has nothing to do with
    a layoff here or a layoff there.
    
    
    Brian
    

>    The nine week period is for plant closings.  It has nothing to do with
>    a layoff here or a layoff there.
    
The MA law, enacted a few years back, was for plant closings AND substantial
layoffs (> x threshold). It's almost certain that a DEC layoff wave would
meet the threshold in *some* facility, and it's not very palatable to offer
different severance in different facilities.

Disclaimer: I'm not a sn... um, er, lawyer, and I don't play one on TV.

--RS

    Latest rumor just in.The next round of TFSOs (next quarter) will
    require you to use any accumulated vacation time you have during the
    9 week notice period - AKA Wang.
    
                                      Rich

    Re: .33 & .34
    
    The WARN law is federal and it requires a written notice be given 
    nine weeks before >300 employees at a facility are laid off. And
    there must be legal proof that the employee recieved it. (I got a
    WARN letter by registered mail in Jan 91 when the Westfield plant
    had a major downsizing and found a job elsewhere during that 9 weeks.) 
    Anyway, that is all the WARN law requires. It does not specify the 
    severance pay, etc. And it doesn't apply, for instance, if your 
    facility has less than 300 or is getting rid of less than 300.
    

    Heard a rumor today that 24 VPs were notified of layoff... anybody else
    hear this?
    
    Nancy

	... going to empty the bird cage quite a bit!  I also heard the field
is in for again!

    Well, 
    
    If it is true, I wonder if these VP's or upper management are 
    offered a financial package?
    
    But we will never know... I don't think.
    
    Nancy

    	Maybe somebody just let them know about the Dec. 7th layoff...Could
    have been news to some of them!

    Re: .40
    
    If there are a number of VP layoffs under the TFSO program and
    they are given special treatment not given to all the rest, I'd
    expect to see a major class action suit.  I doubt DEC would expose
    itself that way since there'd be no way to keep that quiet.
    
    Steve
    

    re .42
    
    As far as I know, there is no law that requires every employee to
    receive the same termination package.  It is not at all unusual for
    high level executives to receive a golden parachute.   I'm not saying
    that its proper, or that they did anything to earn it, but I'll bet you
    a dozen donuts that any Digital V.P. that gets laid off gets a
    better termination package than the standard package.  In fact, I would
    guess that many of them get put on special assignment for six months to
    give them time to look for a job before they are laid off.  

What would you consider special treatment?

I've been seeing jobs given/created/etc. for management and upper level
employees without the formal interview process.  Just one day they are a 
TSFO'd Supervisor, the next day they are being trained for a lower level
"sales support" position while their own people had 5 days to find a job.

Is that "special treatment?"

    -lemmee unnerstand
    
    Are you saying that Management is taking over the positions of the
    folks that they managed?
    
    If that is what you are saying... then, it depends on a lot of factors
    whether or not that is fair.  Job performance, knowledge of the
    Digital, etc... of the manager versus the subordinate.
    
    Now, imho, if the manager is being *trained* because his skill set
    isn't up to snuff and he had subordinates that were, then THAT IS NOT
    FAIR... and there goes the good ol' boy/girl network.
    
    None of us, however, can judge those situations unless we are directly
    involved.  All opinions in here are OPINIONS.
    
    Anyone got facts?
    
    Nancy

re:  .45

Well, the facts are:

My group is split into 2 functions.  One function has 2 parts and we lost
3 people from the lesser of the 2.  The other function has 3 parts and lost
30 people plus 2 supervisors.  We then had 2 people who voluntarily left which
we ended up having to backfill.  One of those positions was given to a 
supervisor and they were asked which function they wanted to work in (i.e., 
we have a job where do you want it).  They do not have the actual skills, but
because they were a supervisor they figure they can be trained quicker.

We now have 1 job opening and I have some of the skills but not the test taking
background (but neither did the supervisor, Field Service or Corp. Customer 
Relations people that have been hired) and I'm not even encouraged to interview for it.  I asked
and was told there wasn't any point since there were more qualified people who
have shown interest.  I have the some of the technical background and knowledge
to handle the customer support.  The job consists of constant product/services
training.  Training is almost weekly!  That would more than cover my weak areas
of expertise.

Also, there is a "sister" group that had 15 new Customer Account Rep. positions.
A "top level" manager is responsible for those jobs and froze the reqs.  As of
Dec. 18th they were filled, but never posted.  Well yesterday I saw 4 of those
positions posted, restricted and (when I called to inquire) filled.  Today they
are still posted.  The folks that filled those Admin jobs (and they are mostly
adminsitration duties like resolving customer issues and quote/lead generation,
data entry, etc.) are all management, project leaders/specialists, marketing
specialists, etc. etc.

In my opinion, these two situations are not fair and are very demoralizing.
If you do not belong to TNSG or US Logistics or have a strong manager to help or
support you through these roadblocks, then you don't have a job with Digital.

But that is just my opinion.

>>Also, there is a "sister" group that had 15 new Customer Account Rep. 
  positions.  A "top level" manager is responsible for those jobs and froze 
  the reqs.  As of Dec. 18th they were filled, but never posted. 

Correction.  I never saw them on the VTX JOBS books, but there could have been
a system glitch.  But my Recruiter never told me about them and I heard from
the support person for that group that they were filled and were not to be 
posted anywhere.

    
    Re: .43
    
    > As far as I know, there is no law that requires every employee to
    > receive the same termination package.  
    
    No because Digital can change the package whenever it wants to, but
    during the same layoff you can't give some of those laid off one
    package and others a "better" one thereby creating a privileged group.
    You're inviting a law suit if you do that.
    
    > It is not at all unusual for high level executives to receive a
    > golden parachute.   
    
    That is true, but a golden parachute generally comes under the terms
    of a a specific employment contract which spells out what their job
    is, under what conditions, what their remuneration will be, under
    what conditions they can be terminated, and what they will receive
    if terminated under those conditions.  Many companies will do this to
    get the particular person they want into a particular job.  It ends up
    very much like the process that athletes undergo where they know before
    they take the field that all the bases are covered so to speak.  For
    example, you can be sure that Iaccoca didn't go through the normal
    hiring process when he took the job with Chrysler.  I expect he told
    them what he wanted and got it in writing in an employment contract.
    
    Steve
    

  
  re <<< Note 2258.48 by GSFSYS::MACDONALD >>>
             -< Golden Parachute isn't what we are talking about. >-

    
    
>    No because Digital can change the package whenever it wants to, but
>    during the same layoff you can't give some of those laid off one
>    package and others a "better" one thereby creating a privileged group.
>    You're inviting a law suit if you do that.
    
What is the basis of the suit?  That life isn't fair?!?  While I don't like 
that I am a peon that might get laid off because of the (in)actions of 
managers that get a better package, I can't see where DEC is limited from 
giving a better package to some than others.  By your reasoning, the 
longevity is equally arbitrary and perhaps those who were at DEC longer 
shouldn't get a better package.  "Rank hath its privaleges," and DEC rank 
is no different.

There have already been several cases where general manager level people 
have gotten better packages than others getting fired (sorry TFSO'd) at the 
same time.  I know that is not a secret, have their already been lawsuits 
about that?

>    That is true, but a golden parachute generally comes under the terms
>    of a a specific employment contract which spells out what their job
>    is, under what conditions, what their remuneration will be, under
>    what conditions they can be terminated, and what they will receive
>    if terminated under those conditions.  Many companies will do this to
>    get the particular person they want into a particular job.  It ends up
>    very much like the process that athletes undergo where they know before
>    they take the field that all the bases are covered so to speak.

There are many times golden parachutes are used, this type is only one.  
they were also heavily used during the merger and aquisitions days of the 
mid and late '80's.  Any time a senior person gets a better deal when 
leaving than the standard deal peons get it is a golden parachute.

While I would like to think that the world will be fair, I have learned 
that there is no hope of it.  Oh well.

Matt

    
    Re: .49
    
    You are missing my point.
    
    > What is the basis of the suit?  That life isn't fair?!?  While I
    > don't like that I am a peon that might get laid off because of
    > the (in)actions of managers that get a better package, I can't
    > see where DEC is limited from giving a better package to some
    > than others.  By your reasoning, the longevity is equally arbitrary
    > and perhaps those who were at DEC longer shouldn't get a better
    > package.  "Rank hath its privaleges," and DEC rank 
    
    Perhaps I haven't made my point clear enough.  Of course longevity
    can be considered.  DEC has the right to develop a formula that
    gives a greater benefit to employees based on things like length of
    service, but if they announce a formula to be used for awarding
    severance benefits they have to apply that formula to *everyone*
    equally.  The formula itself could be arbitrary, but they can't be
    arbitrary in *applying* it.
    
    > There have already been several cases where general manager level
    > people have gotten better packages than others getting fired (sorry
    > TFSO'd) at the same time.  I know that is not a secret, have their
    > already been lawsuits about that?

    Are you saying that they were treated differently in some way or that
    based on the formula they qualified for more money than some others?
    If the latter then that is what the formula is for, but if the former
    they are open to litigation.
    
    Steve
    

>    service, but if they announce a formula to be used for awarding
>    severance benefits they have to apply that formula to *everyone*
>    equally.  The formula itself could be arbitrary, but they can't be
>    arbitrary in *applying* it.
    
    Like this?
    
    "9 weeks plus 1 week per year plus 1 week per year-above-10.
     And if you're a VP, certain other special considerations apply."

    
    Re: .51
    
    > Like this?
    > 
    > "9 weeks plus 1 week per year plus 1 week per year-above-10.
    > And if you're a VP, certain other special considerations apply."
    
    Chuckle.  Not quite.  What I meant by arbitrary was that they
    could just as well have said 9 weeks plus 2 weeks or 3 or 4 per
    year-above-10.  The choice is arbitrary.  Just the fact that there
    were previous, more generous packages is proof enough that contents
    can be at the whim of Digital.
    
    Steve
    

	... "best wishes in your next job" to 5 VPs who will be leaving DEC
tomorrow, among them Jay Atlas, Bud Keating, and Bob Long,!