Conference 7.286::digital

    
    I've seen several temps come back, but not former employees.
    
    Gary

I know of one SERPer who was just re-hired as an employee!  Talk about
taking advantage of the system.

-steve-

re: .-1, -steve-

Why taking advantage? That was allowed by the program, wasn't it?

-Jack

Scott

G'Day,

	I know of at least one here in Sydney.  This lady got a *real* good deal.

	She was TFSO'd in the very first wave.  At the time she was on 12 months
maternity leave and was not planning on returning to work.  She got something
like $30k to leave so she was absolutely laughing!  She hadn't been working for
Digital all that long so that is why her payout was quite low compared to others
back then.  She has since had another child and recently returned to Digital as
a full time employee again.

	To be fair to this woman she has done nothing wrong.  The only reason
she got hit the first time was because they wanted her job to go away, not
because she was underperforming or anything like that.  She waited her two years
and now she's back.

David.

I was all-but-TFSO'd this spring, getting a job offer from the project I
had been on loan to the day before my termination date.

The TFSO form letter stated in no uncertain terms, quite explicitly (and
somewhat coldly) that Digital's policy was to NOT rehire former employees
except via a waiver process in exceptional circumstances.  There was no
two-year waiting period - it was NEVER.  This was a new policy to me.

>somewhat coldly) that Digital's policy was to NOT rehire former employees
>except via a waiver process in exceptional circumstances.  There was no
>two-year waiting period - it was NEVER.  This was a new policy to me.
    
    I don't think this has anything to do with TFSO specifically as it
    seems to be applied to _anyone_ that leaves Digital then returns. My
    hiring manager had to get VP approval to rehire me in '87.
    
    Harry
    

I think the two year thing, certainly as applied over here, 
was linked to tax implications of taking a heafty redundancy package 
and then working for the same company soon after - something about they 
shouldn't have given you the redundancy, just the new job. 

    	From what I have heard of French law, if you are made redundant for
    economic reasons, and later the company has an opening for an
    equivalent job, then they must give you priority in the hiring process.

> The TFSO form letter stated in no uncertain terms, quite explicitly (and
> somewhat coldly) that Digital's policy was to NOT rehire former employees
> except via a waiver process in exceptional circumstances.  There was no

  Please tell us more about this. I think that ALL outside hiring requires
VP approval (on each req, not blanket approval). Is this more stringent than 
that?

In "normal" times (if we ever get there again), does a VP need to ok the
choice of candidate, or just the openning of a req?

Here, the implication is that if the former employee posesses critical
skills/experience that nobody else in the job market does, then they can
get a waiver - otherwise, the former employee by policy must be passed
over - for all time.  The letters from the first (voluntary) TFSO only
stated that this was the case only for a two-year period following the
separation - not for all time.

    
    	I really love this thread. As an (unfortunate) survivor of TFSO
    here at the CSC, many of my friends were hit within the last two years.
    NOW, the CSC has posted (many) APPROVED rec's for the exact positions
    that were TFSOed. OK, so the business changed and now we don't have the
    manpower to handle it.
    
    	BUT the most amazing thing is that my friend who got it last year
    came in an applied for a position (with some very usefull/needed skills
    he picked up) and personel flatly refused to even let him in the front
    door. 
    
    	So, the reqs go unfilled eventhough the talent is out there...
    
    	Ya gota love it!!! ;-|

KO resisted layoffs for just this reason- when business begings to
rebound, you are stuck short.

Lee

    
    
    	I know of one person at a facility where I worked that took the 
    	SERP and then came back as a contractor working for himself.  How
    	the rules are applid is based on Digitals need.  So, if DEC wants to 
    	bend its own rules it can and does.  Seems the rules are there to 
    	give the control to DIGITAl and not to both digital and the individual
    	equally.  I don't have a problem with this, it's just the way it is!  
    	I personally feel that companies are constantly loosing ground on 
    	controlling their own destiny.  People want job security for example 
    	and companies argue that they are being forced to retain people in
    	a money losing situation.  The issues are complex and solutions
        don't come easily.

    This is a rule that needs to be changed.  It originated to discourage
    people from using their Digital job as an insurance policy - quit their
    job to go with a startup and then, if it failed, go back to DEC.
    
    Now, apart from the blatant injustice, refusing to hire former Digits
    for their old jobs simply means we have to pay the cost of training a
    new person.  It's not only cruel, it's stupid!
    
    \dave

    
    .15 is right.
    
    When DEC believed that "people are our most valuable resource", and held
    onto its most valuable resources through lean times, it made sense to
    discourage people from job hopping for personal gain by not letting
    them back into the fold.
    
    Now that Digital has learned how to release people for short term
    benefits, it should learn how to bring them back as needs require. Until
    it does so, it cannot make optimal use of its new belief that "people are
    our most flexible resource".
    

  I don't know of any other U.S. company that has refused (with rare exceptions)
to rehire people who have been laid off. The only rationalization I can think
of is that, as one reply said, this policy was put on the books to prevent
people from voluntarily leaving the company and then coming back at a much
higher salary and now people are interpreting it to include people who have
been laid off as well.

    At the company where my wife works, Fluor Daniel Inc, whenever there is
    a layoff (yes they just call it layoff's no TF***Os'), there is a
    little box at the bottom of the release form which says "Qualifies for
    rehire? Y N).  They normally mark that Y and the first opportunity,
    the employee is rehired.
    
    I think that's a great rule.  In fact she should me the personnl policy
    where they even indicate in what order and how they recall employees
    back which sounded ver fair and humane...
    

    I grew up in Detroit, and just about every summer the auto companies
    did a lay off for model changeover. But a layoff meant a temporary time
    off, people were always called back from a layoff, based on prescribed
    union rules of seniority, etc.
    
    The new use of the word layoff is just a polite word for terminated, by
    managers that dont want to admit whats really happening.
    
    I just looked "lay off" up in my old American heritage dictionary. "To
    suspend from employment, as during a slack period"
    
    Damn the new doublespeak.

    You know the saying "rules are the last resort of the unimaginative"?
    (can't remeber who said it).
    
    I'm inclined to think that for a healthy _thinking_ __business__
    oriented company there aren't any rules. How can you stay flexible,
    responsive and a risk-taker when you're tied up by rules?  
    
    	my 2FF worth, martin

    
    There's an employee here in Detroit that was TFSO'd back in summer
    1990, and was recently re-hired (away from Bell Atlantic Business
    Systems, a third-party service provider/competitor of Digital's).
    
    And another who was hired from the outside, he resigned, then was
    re-hired not a month later....
    
    Strange, but true. Where is Ripley when you need him?  :-))
    
    Java

    
    		He's right here but I don't know if DIGITAL knows they
    	need me!!!!!	8^)    8^)
    					Couldn't resist....
    

    Does anyone know of a person who was TFSO'ed then rehired with their
    previous yeas of service (AKA for vacation purposes)? Is this
    negotatable?
    
    Thanks
    

    	You can start up your 401K, stock (ESPP) on day 1, and your 
    pension continues, but, your vacation accrual starts at ground level.  
    
    	To my knowledge is isn't negotiable, but there are always
    "exceptions"...
    
    joyce

    the cases I know of were a complete new hire. I even got invited to an
    induction training :-)
    
    ..Kevin..

    	I had to go through "Orientation" as if I was a new hire.
    
    joyce

>>    Does anyone know of a person who was TFSO'ed then rehired with their
>>    previous yeas of service (AKA for vacation purposes)?
                                ^^^

AKA?  Also Known As?  This doesn't make sense, did I miss something?

						Brian

    When I was rehired in '82, I was supposed to participate in a new-hire
    luncheon. The luncheon was cancelled because I was the only new hire in
    Maynard that week. Four years later, I made my manager buy me a
    sandwich at the caf.

    After 1 year intermezzo at AT&T I came back last year, and Digital
    carefully pushed the reset button. Whatever it takes!
    
    Hung

    	.30   There is a difference in benefits if you leave, vs. being 
    TFSO'd, and come back within a year.  
    
    	I was TFSO'd in '92 - came back as a temp in '95 and rehired in
    '96...
    
    joyce

    
    I can speak from recent experience on this.  I left
    Digital(voluntarily) in 1993 and re-hired in 1995.  I was gone for a
    total of 20 months.  I had to start over as far as vacation goes but my
    prior service did count for becoming vested in the retirement program. 
    I was re-hired in May and had to wait until December to start
    contributing to ESPP but was able to immediately start 401K.  The ESPP
    may have just been because I was re-hired on May 22 and the next ESPP
    cycle started on June 1.
    
    John
    

    
    	RE: .28
    
    	Substitute IE for AKA if you must.
    

I know of a person who left voluntarily and was rehired and _did_ get credit
for his prior service in determining vacation eligibility.  I'm pretty sure
it was due to a fluke, not to hard-nosed negotiation on his part.

I would think that you would have to start accruing vacation from day 1. But
that the rate of accrual (e.g. 2 weeks per year vs. 4 weeks per year) would also
be negotiable.

> Title: everything is negotiable
> I would think that you would have to start accruing vacation from day 1. But
> that the rate of accrual (e.g. 2 weeks per year vs. 4 weeks per year) would
> also be negotiable.

	Absolutely 100% correct.  Whoever is negotiating for the company
	will tell you (this is regardless of company) that it's not
	something they have control over, that it's never been done, etc.
	But that's BS and part of their negotiating skills to be able to
	lie through the teeth like that.

	And this applies whether you worked at the company before or not.
	It's very similiar to buying a car.  And you have to be able to
	walk if your bluff is called.  If the dealer (the company) knows
	you are bluffing they'll call you.

	A friend of mine who left Digital last year didn't believe me
	that the amount of vacation time was negotiable.  But he's a
	believer now.

	And don't forget do get everything in writting!

I know of someone who rehired at DEC (left voluntarily earlier).
She was not able to negotiate an official vacation accrual 
higher then 2 weeks, but she was able to negotiate an informal
arrangement with her supervisor.  I don't know what happened/would
have happened had her supervisor changed, and, on her 2nd 5-year
anniversary, I believe that she began officially accruing the
3 weeks/year vacation.  I'm not sure what happened to the informal
arrangement -- I suspect it expired.

So, Jeff, teach me how to negotiate!  What does one say after they say 
"We never do that"?   Is it a matter of saying "If I can't get
 3 weeks vacation to start, then I don't want the job" and meaning it??

> So, Jeff, teach me how to negotiate!  What does one say after they say 
> "We never do that"?   Is it a matter of saying "If I can't get
>  3 weeks vacation to start, then I don't want the job" and meaning it??

	Well you do have to mean it, ie. be willing to walk, just like
	when buying a car.  However you should still be polite, hence
	I wouldn't say/phrase it the way you did above.  Also timing
	when negotiating is important.  It's probably not best to state
	all your job benifit requirements up front.  For example, when
	buying a new car, if they know you are trading in a used car prior
	to negotiating a selling price, there's a good chance you're not
	going to get the best price.  That's how come if often looks like
	they are giving you a great price on your trade-in, with out you
	realizing the reason they can do that is because they soaked you
	on the price of the new car.

	And if you really don't care about getting only 2 (or whatever)
	weeks vacation, you could still use it as a bargining tool after
	you've negotiated and they've agreed to a certain salary, to
	up the salary some more (ie. tell them you agreed to the salary
	because you factored in that you were also getting X weeks of
	vacation per year, so to compensate, you want y% more salary).

	And remember, practice makes perfect.  So practice your
	negotiating skills with companies you really aren't serious
	about going to work for.  Or even if with some serious job
	offers, if they offer you something you would just rather
	walk away from, don't, instead consider it a challenge because
	you are then in a position where you didn't want the job anyways,
	so can really test their limits.

	And one thing I learned the hard way, don't let them know how
	much you are making at your current job, and don't provide
	them with your salary requirements.  That information gives
	them an edge in the negotiations (like you showing some of your
	cards in a poker game).  If they have to make an offer without
	that information, then the first offer, in my opinion, will be
	more in line with what the job pays, which may be higher than
	what you were looking for.  Had you told them your salary requirements
	and it was less than what they were willing to start negotiations
	at, then they'd lower their offer (though you'd never know it)
	accordinling.  And if you didn't provide them with your salary
	requirements, but did provide them with your current salary, then
	what you're likely to find is that the first offer is higher
	than your current salary, but only enough so as to not to
	insult you.  Though another technique is that if they ask you
	what your current salary is, state something higher than what
	it really is, but make sure to not get too greedy and state
	something too high that it's higher than what their best offer
	would be had you got to the negotiation stage (ie. they won't
	even make an initial offer).

    Re: .38 Though another technique is that if they ask you what your
    current salary is, state something higher than what it really is
    
    Grounds for termination of subsequent employment, I believe, just
    like any other instance of lying on a job application or
    misrepresentation in the interview process.
    

> Re: .38 Though another technique is that if they ask you what your
> current salary is, state something higher than what it really is
>     
> Grounds for termination of subsequent employment, I believe, just
> like any other instance of lying on a job application or
> misrepresentation in the interview process.

	Don't fool yourself, if the company wants to terminate your
	employment on that item, then they want you terminated for
	other reasons, and would of found some other justification 
	for your termination anyways.  And in reality, they probably
	would find some more substantal justification than that you
	lied about your previous salary (even if they could prove it).

	In any case, unless your interviews are being audio and/or video
	recorded, it's your word against the interviewer.  I've never
	signed anything where I attest to my current salary at any company.
	If it comes up in an interview, it's verbal only.

	It's also only fighting fire with fire.  The interviewer during
	negotiations is lying also as mentioned previously.  I can't remember
	how many times I've been heard that you aren't supposed to be able to
	get a salary increase or promotion by switching jobs inside Digital?

	A white lie about your present salary when asked during salary
	negotation is quite different than submitting a resume with outright
	lies on it about your education, job history, etc.

	And to get back on the subject, the reason I've learned the hard
	way is that the last time I was asked what my current salary
	was, and I told them, the initial offer was like only 1.75% 
	higher.  The other lesson I learned the hard way is that if
	you say during negotiations "I want at least $x", then they offer
	you $x, and it's hard to negotiate up from there after you said
	something like that.  Would of been better to say "I was expecting
	a higher than that", or other language without giving a specific
	dollar figure.

    RE: Always be prepared to walk away.
    
    Yes indeed. I came back on contract at a lower rate with expectations
    of a reasonable increase at renewal time. This did not arise. 1 phone
    call later I have another contract, a 25% rise and a sad feeling as I
    pack up my desk ready to depart on Feb 14.
    
    Another thing: never say 'resign' when you haven't the intent to do so.
    If you have an argument with your boss (perhaps over money) and say you
    are resigning, then do so. Reneging on this weakens your position
    forever. Never make a promise you cannot keep.

    re:40
    >A white lie about your present salary when asked during salary
    
    when you say that you will lie about this, you lose credibility and
    folks wonder what else you will lie about.  it's not OK to lie.

    	While doing admin work, I saw more than one request for salary 
    verification on a new hire to the company, as well as an internal 
    transfer...
    
    	When you lie - white, purple, blue or whatever color - you lose
    credibility. 
    
    joyce

      >>When you lie - white, purple, blue or whatever color - you lose
        credibility
    
    Except of course if the interviewer is asking a question he is not
    allowed to ask, like
    
    "Are you pregnant?"
    
    Giving an untruthful answer to this is legitimate defence against the
    intrusion.
    
    ..Kevin..

Digital's policy regarding vacation accrual for re-hires has ALWAYS been less 
than 30 days absence = no lost seniority.  over 30 days absence= start off 
at 2 weeks per year.  It was that way in 1980 and it's that way now.

tfso'd employees are not allowed to apply for re-hire or for temporary 
employment until the term of their settlement is over.  The term length is 
always over 30 days.  .....so they start with 2 weeks per year.

    I presume asking about current salary is NOT illegal ?

    
    The only difference that is worth mentioning here is that management
    usually has a chain of command to blame the lies on.  Where as the 
    individual only has him/herself.  
    
    THAT'S the difference that makes lost morale the reality that it is
    today.
    
    chet

    Interviewer question:
    
    "What's your current salary"
    
    Plausible answers that are truthful and retain your negotiating power:
    
    	"Over $X per year..."
    
    	"Between $X and Y times $X per year..."
    
    	"Insufficient... part of the reason I'm looking..."
    
    	"How much do you plan to pay for this position?"  Reply, "...er,
    mumble,mumble,..."  I see, then you certainly understand the need for
    me to retain my options and flexibility as well..."
    
    
    And so on as long as necessary to retain your bargaining power.  If you
    must put a number out, make it a projection of your desired or expected
    new salary with no reference to your current salary.  This projection
    should be high enough to allow the to negotiate you down to where you'd
    like to end up being anyways.  Shock power of a very high number helps
    to unbox their thinking, and move their range/bracket toward your
    goal...

I believe there is a 30 day reinstatement policy to recover vacation.


jb

    
    	Yeah, that guy in .45 seemed to think so also.
    

re: .48

>   Interviewer question:
>   
>   "What's your current salary"

    	"None of your business.  What's yours?"

    
    >Note 2796.49 by CX3PST::CSC32::J_BECKER "There's no substitute for a
    
    >I believe there is a 30 day reinstatement policy to recover vacation.
    
    When I 'transferred' from the UK to the US, I had to resign from DEC
    UK. As there was less that 30 days between my resignation and my
    subsequent rehire, I still kept my 7 years service and the 3 weeks
    vacation that goes with it.
    
    POL (who used to have 26 vacation days a year in the UK)

    re: .48
    
    >   Interviewer question:
    >
    >   "What's your current salary"
    
  and .51          "None of your business.  What's yours?"
    
    Now that is a little bit up front isn't it ?
    
    How about,
    
    "Well, I have private business interests, it varies depending on how
    things are doing really. (Smile) I'd have to ask my accountant really,
    you are not from the Tax Office are you?" 
    
    ..Kevin..

    re: .48
        
        >   Interviewer question:
        >
        >   "What's your current salary"
        
    "I regard that as personal and confidential information, but if you
    will tell me the salary range that you envision for this job, I will
    let you know if my current and my desired salaries fall within
    that range."
    
    M

Of course all of this only works if your current employer hasn't already given
your prospective employer access to your current salary, salary history and
salary planning.  In which case the question by the interviewer would only serve
as a test to see whether you were telling the truth or not.

--Scott

    
    	If they're that nosy, I don't think I'd want to work there anyways.
    

re .54

	Yes Yes!  That is an excellent way to handle it.  Also, you want to 
delay any salary discussion to the very end.  Once a company is hooked on 
getting you, then you have leverage.  I always say "Let me hear about the job
requirements, and after we have established there is a match, we can talk
compensation."  Do the interviews, and look for signs of pay, does the company
spend money of nice office furnishings, are there nice cars in the parking lot,
do people seem well dressed.  These things can clue you about whether the 
company can afford to pay.  If an interviewer is insistant about knowing your 
salary up front, it is probably a tight outfit...

Good string of notes...

Brad.

    And if I'm not mistaken, the only information this company gives out is
    the fact you are/were employed here and your job title. I would be very
    upset with an employer that gave out salary information - and I believe 
    it is actionable.

I can't remember the details but on NPR the other day they had a story about
references and companies can be sued now if they say someone is OK and they
know they aren't. They can also be sued by the individual if he feels he
was shortchanged. The commentator was saying that other lawsuits about
invasion of privacy and such may cause employers to stop giving any
information, good, bad or merely factual for fear of being sued. liesl

Of course, there have also been suits over unflattering 
references too.  The sword cuts both ways.

Wes

    re: Poms moving around...
    
    a mate of mine finished inthe CSC in Basingstoke, UK and was hired here
    in Oz with much the same job. Had to 'resign' from DEC UK after 11
    years service. Even to the 'exit interview' and hand in is badge.
    "Different Company" was the excuse for that little bit of bureaucracy.
    
    Started here less than a month later, in the CSC in Sydney. Went to HR,
    and said 'can I have credit for my service in DEC UK?' - they said
    'sure', and he was immediately entitled to a number of weeks long
    service leave :') And he gets 4 weeks A/L p.a., plus a large number of
    public hols.
    
    Ah, the 'Banana Republic' - gotta love it :')
    H

>                Do the interviews, and look for signs of pay, does the company
>spend money of nice office furnishings, are there nice cars in the parking lot,
>do people seem well dressed.
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I assume you're not talking about engineers.

> >do people seem well dressed.
>  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> I assume you're not talking about engineers.
    
    To a significant degree, this goes for the 'nice cars in the parking
    lot' yardstick as well!  Some of us engineers take pride in seeing how
    long and far we can get a car to go, regardless of whether we could
    "afford" a new one or not.  :-)
    
    	Steve

The point is if everyone's dressing like K-mart, the lot is full of beaters,
people are fixing their eyeglasses with duct-tape, and the office furniture
is circa 1950, chances are they aren't going to pay.

    ..or the people there aren't into the appearance of wealth.

    
    	Yeah, who was that Ken guy who used to work at that run-down
    	Maynard building.  Drove a Pinto, I think?
    

    
    
    	Escort.
    

    NO.  Pinto.

    And given that it was a Pinto, he probably had no need of a radar
    detector...

> Yeah, who was that Ken guy who used to work at that run-down
> Maynard building.  Drove a Pinto, I think?

	He's moved up in the world.  Last time I saw him driving 
	(around 1993) he was driving a light brown Ford Taurus.  I 
	think it was a station-waggon.

    I believe I read/heard that Ken was in fact on the Board of Directors
    over at Ford, thus why he drives Ford products. He probably drove the
    Pinto to counteract the negative publicity about them so long ago when
    they blew up in accidents as the gas tank was under the rear passenger
    seat. I used to wonder what VolksWagen did differently as the gas tank
    in my Scirocco was also under the rear passenger seat.
    
    rtt

    Small nit:
    
    The "gas tank was under the rear passenger seat" wasn't the problem. 
    That's actually a pretty safe place.  It was further back, and a bolt
    from the rear bumper could puncture it if rear-ended.
    
    Tony

    re: .71
    
    As I heard it, when Ken got to be a member of the Ford BOD, they
    told him he could have any Ford car he wanted, gratis.  They assumed,
    of couse, he'd choose a Lincoln or something.  He chose the Pinto
    because he wanted to see what Ford products for the average-to-low-end
    buyer were like.  It was his own version of consumer testing.
    

    My vague recollection is that the Pinto Ken drove was a Pinto
    station wagon, so it wouldn't be vulnerable to the problem
    atributed to the Pinto sedan model.
    
    Bob

My vague recollection is that Ken had his Pinto long before
he was seated on the Ford board.  (I had one too at the time.)

>My vague recollection is that Ken had his Pinto long before
>he was seated on the Ford board.  (I had one too at the time.)

My recollection was that sitting in a Pinto was not that different
from sitting on a board...

RE: <<< Note 2796.74 by NETCAD::BATTERSBY >>>

>                  -< Wasn't it a station wagon Ken drove?... >-

Yes, I vaguely recall the same from one day when. after biking to the Mill, I
was locking my bike to a small covered rack somewhere behind Building 12, and
saw him leaving his car parked in the same courtyard.
						-- Tom

    .75
    
    That's my recollection also.  
    
    ex Millrat

    geee, and I thought ALL pintos were Bic lighters!!!   ;*)  at 
    least that was the rationale that hubby used to trade his in 
    for a VW!

    I drive a 1993 Ford Escort Stationwagon, the least likely car to be stolen
    in america... it's got 80,000 miles news tires and brakes and gets the 
    oil changed every 3,000 miles, Washed and waxed every two weeks and 
    best of all:
    
    It's paid for... I own it, and It's mine...not the bank's not the 
    Credit Union, ME... 
    
    Yeah I could drive and pay for almost any car on the market today.
    
    But for me the status of the nameplate, I mean the comfortable ride,
    isn't worth the Extra 10 or 20 thousand dollars for a car that would
    cost 2.5x it's inital value if financed and will depriciate every year
    I own it no matter what the inital investment or nameplate or the 
    Dealer says.
    
    Ken owned and drove a Pinto;-)  I feel better about my Escort now;-)
    
    I'd rather keep the money in my pocket, invest in or save the money
    I don't spend on a Car payment or lease.  
    
    BTW:
    My Escort wagon has fuel injection, 4 speaker AM/FMstereo cassette,
    AC, automatic transmission, and automatic seat belts.  I've driven
    in across country many times and it's not only comfortable and
    economical (32mpg) I've hauled PDP-8s, DECUS literature, Alphas and
    VAXen, monitors, storage works disks, and taking 4 adults out to 
    lunch...
    
    I've even used it for my job:-))
    
    Invest where it counts.. Cars offer very little return after
    transportation... Except to one's inflated ego, the money's 
    better spent on cloths or getting those teeth capped.. at least
    people notice those things when you're inside with them;-)
    
    You could buy a 20 or 30k car but why would you do that when you 
    could have 2-3 escorts (of different colors) for the same money?
    
    JMHO,
    
    John W.

    John,
       I would have a hard time fitting the wife and seven children into an
    escort.
    
                                Steve J.

    >Invest where it counts.. Cars offer very little return after
    >transportation... Except to one's inflated ego, the money's 
    >better spent on cloths or getting those teeth capped.. at least
    >people notice those things when you're inside with them;-)

    Wow is that a telling statement.  You would prefer to spend money on
    something so that other people will think you look better?  Talk about
    ego.  I drive a nicer car for me.  It makes driving a pleasure rather
    than a chore.  It keeps the stress levels way down in a high traffic
    situation.  It does wonders for your mental health, and when I had a
    longer commute, I arrived at work every morning with a smile on my
    face.  Not that I spent tons of money on a car, just about twice the
    cost of an Escort.  It's more comfortable than an Escort, has a better
    sound system, more power, handling, braking, and is safer (boy that 
    last one is a sticky topic in itself).

    Hmmm.  We seem to be a bit off topic.  This note also came out as more
    of an attack rather than an opposing viewpoint which is the way it was
    meant.  Sorry.

    Cheers,
    --Dave

      <<< Note 2796.82 by CADSYS::SHEPARD "Overwhelmed by trivialities" >>>
               -< Cars are religious for some, tools for others >-

    >>Invest where it counts.. Cars offer very little return after
    >>transportation... Except to one's inflated ego, the money's 
    >>better spent on cloths or getting those teeth capped.. at least
    >>people notice those things when you're inside with them;-)

    >Wow is that a telling statement.  You would prefer to spend money on
    >something so that other people will think you look better?  Talk about
    >ego. 
    Not Ego.. Practical  people judge you more on your smile and the cloths
    you wear then the car you drive.. At least you can't leave your smile
    and cloths in the parking lot and still impress a customer...
    
    Of course if you don't meet with the public you could save your money
    again...
    
    
    > I drive a nicer car for me.  It makes driving a pleasure rather
    >than a chore.  
    
    If you believe that you've bought into the media hype;-)
    
    >It keeps the stress levels way down in a high traffic
    >situation.  
    
    Hook line and sinker...
    
    >It does wonders for your mental health, and when I had a
    >longer commute, 
    
    Looking for ways of justifying 2x the price for something that
    moves you from here to there...
    
    >I arrived at work every morning with a smile on my
    >face.  
    
    I have a job I like to do... That's why I smile in the morning...
    My car ride is transportation to and from it...
    
    
    >Not that I spent tons of money on a car, just about twice the
    >cost of an Escort.  
    
    With financing costs rolled in that means that I could have an
    escort (with different colors) for evey work day if I payed that
    much cash...
    
    >It's more comfortable than an Escort, has a better
    >sound system, more power, handling, braking, and is safer (boy that 
    >last one is a sticky topic in itself).

    All that is debatable too...My couch at home is more confortable than
    my escort but I don't expect to drive around town on my couch;-)
    
    I've never had an accident and I've driven it in rain, snow, ice
    and on long trips...
    
    
   > Hmmm.  We seem to be a bit off topic.  This note also came out as more
   > of an attack rather than an opposing viewpoint which is the way it was
    >meant.  Sorry.

    People spend their money on what they're convinced is important to
    them.  I'm just making the rational comment that Cars and Car Luxury
    is conspicuous consumption at it's worst... I'll save or spend my 
    money elsewhere... Other people can waste money on cars, pamperthme,
    buff them with diapers and give them pet names... it's just
    transportattion to me....  Now ask me about my computers... there's 
    where I won't compromise, but then, it's a less expensive hobby
    then cars;-)
    
    >Cheers,
    >--Dave

    JMHO
    
    John W.
    

    >> I drive a nicer car for me.  It makes driving a pleasure rather
    >>than a chore.  

    >If you believe that you've bought into the media hype;-)

    Pffft.  You obviously don't know me.  My idea of a nice car is a late
    60's musclecar, not one of the overhyped luxury cars that are sold today.
    The car I have now is as close a modern day equivalent as I felt was 
    reasonable for my needs.  By the way, it's also a Ford, eight years old.

    >>It keeps the stress levels way down in a high traffic
    >>situation.

    >Hook line and sinker...
    
    It keeps the stress levels down because it is quieter, it has a better
    stereo, and it is fun to drive.  This keeps my mind off the traffic and
    on having fun.  Having a bunch of extra power lets you zip around slower
    cars such as your own rather than getting stuck behind them.  I also 
    have a Ford Tempo.  I expect it is similar to your Escort in many ways,
    and driving it does not yield anything close to the same experience. 
    Don't knock it til you try it.

    >>It does wonders for your mental health, and when I had a
    >>longer commute, ...
    
    >Looking for ways of justifying 2x the price for something that
    >moves you from here to there...

    I agree I am looking for ways to justify it.  However my car does more
    than move me from here to there.  When my life was less busy, I would
    go on weekend drives just to have fun.  No destination.  Just 60-90
    minute round trips to have fun.  This is not just a people mover.  It
    is an entertainment machine.  It happens to work as a people mover as
    well.

    >My car ride is transportation to and from it...

    My car is a hobby and a toy as well as transportation.
    
    >>Not that I spent tons of money on a car, just about twice the
    >>cost of an Escort.  
    
    >With financing costs rolled in that means that I could have an
    >escort (with different colors) for evey work day if I payed that
    >much cash...

    Nope.  I already included all those extras.  Twice the price is my
    bet.
    
    >>It's more comfortable than an Escort, has a better
    >>sound system, more power, handling, braking, and is safer (boy that 
    >>last one is a sticky topic in itself).

    >All that is debatable too...My couch at home is more confortable than
    >my escort but I don't expect to drive around town on my couch;-)

    We can debate the power, handling, etc with timeslips from the racetrack.
    You'll have to get a few first.  I already have a bunch.
    My car is more comfortable than my couch.  Much to my chagrin, I've been
    in a pretty significant accident in my car.  I hesitate to say I would
    have made it through in one piece in my Tempo, much less your Escort.
    I've been in more minor accidents with cars the size of your Escort, like
    a Honda Accord.  The results were scary enough to make me nervous about
    smaller cars such as those.  My prime concern with respect to safety in
    a car is the beefiness of the structure and the mass of the vehicle.  No
    amount of airbags, anti-lock brakes, FWD, etc that people pass off as
    significant safety enhancements is going to do much when something big 
    and solid hits you.

    I hate the thought of going back to life with an econobox.  It made 
    driving worth only its transporation value.  How sad.  I agree with you
    that if my goal was just transportation, I would also probably own an
    Escort.  But that is not my goal.

    Cheers,
    --Dave

    
    	Yes, Dave does have a nice car.
    
    	But the last thing I want to do is change his spark plugs for
    	him.  8^)
    
    	[I don't think I could even see his spark plugs when I peeked
    	 at his engine.]
    

    In a recent exit interview, the point was made that it is 
    much easier to return to Digital now than it was in the past.

    re: .86
    
    No doubt this has something to do with the difficulty many employers in
    our industry are experiencing in finding good people these days. 
    Digital is no exception.
    
    	Steve

    re: .86, .87
    
    A company that's easy to return to is in keeping with the new "flexible
    workforce" concept.  They want people to leave when their current skills
    aren't needed anymore, but they'll be glad to have them return when
    they possess skills that are in demand.
    
    The new "ideal" situation seems to be contractors or contractor-like
    employees that come in and out on demand.  If done frequently enough, 
    a person may put in several years at a company and yet not work enough 
    continuous years to qualify for pension, etc.
    
    Wow.  What a rush...  :^(
    
    -- Russ

  Maybe Ken can come back.

  I'd certainly rather see his Taurus than the other guy's Porsche.
  At least Ken didn't park in the Customer Parking Lot.

                                   Atlant

    Every time I've seen Bob in the parking lot at MSO2, he was not parked
    in the customer spaces, but rather with us plebeians.  I would note
    that I haven't seen him that often.
    
    brian

    If Jobs can do it .. why not Olsen? Sell Modular back to Digital as
    a CSS group and then take over the shop again. 

    >Per

Brian:

> Every time I've seen Bob in the parking lot at MSO2, he was not parked
> in the customer spaces, but rather with us plebeians.  I would note
> that I haven't seen him that often.

  Years ago, when we owned an old woolen mill in Maynard, and Bob
  was merely a VP, I used to walk into the 5-4 lobby every morning
  past the customer parking lot. And after I walked past the same
  white Porsche parked in the customer parking lot every day for
  a few months, I finally asked the security guard "Whose car is
  that?"

  "Bob Palmer, VP of manufacturing" was his response.

  My opinion of Bob began forming that day, and has only been
  confirmed by his actions throughout the years.

                                   Atlant

    BP isn't the only one :'(
    
    Some (well, at least one ;') of the 'suits' in SNO do the same. Even
    after repeated em's around the facility for the 'grunts' not to park
    there, but rather to use the multi-level carpark.
    
    {sigh}
    
    "do as I say, not as I do"
    
    H

This starts a rathole, but it is good...

Way back in the old days at Data General, Herb Richman, founder and VP Sales/
Marketing used to park in the visitor spaces all the time.  DG had a policy
of no preferred parking.  So DeCastro instructed his secretary to call the tow
truck if she saw Richman's car in the visitors lot.  We used to have several
pools going on what time the tow truck would cart Herb's Mercedes away.

Ah the good ole' days of 70% gross margins...

gc

RE: Reserved parking.
I understand that KO had a "reserved" parking space in the Mill, behind the gate right of 
the building where his affice was (ML12?).

    If I remember right, Security begged Ken more than once not to park out
    in the general spaces, especially after he started getting publicity in
    Forbes, Business Week, et al.
    
    Geoff

    I often saw Ken park in the general spaces.
    

    When I worked at the Mill in the late 70's, there was a lot inside the
    yard where people with a lot of tenure were allowed to park. 
    Presumably, Ken was among those.  I was relegated to the big lot behind
    the shipping dock.  Every day, there was an old Ford - perhaps a Torino
    or a Maverick - with a Mass. licence plate "KEN O" parked across the
    "no parking" stripes nearest the door.  He never got a ticket.  One day
    a woman I worked with saw a guy getting into the car; he said his name
    was Ken and his last name began with an "O", but he figured the license
    plate would make sure people left his car alone.
    
    Ben

    
    	What a jerk, eh?
    
    	Anyone not knowing better wouldn't know it wasn't "the" Ken O.
    

    >	Anyone not knowing better wouldn't know it wasn't "the" Ken O.
    
    Three negatives and it still makes sense ... I think I should give up
    and go to sleep now :-)

That was Ken Okin. We worked together on the 11/730. He departed for
greener pastures several years before the real KO left. Good sense of 
humor.. he got a lot of hoots out of that license plate.

   /dave

    Ah - Ken Okin - there's a blast from the past. A real funny fella.
    He must have had a penchant for personalised "vanity" plates - I saw a
    little while ago that he had staked his claim to [email protected]
    
    By the way - what were those "greener pastures"?  not a VP position at
    Sun Microsystems perchance?
    
    /Chris/

    i think he is in charge of ultrasparc engineering.  I remember he left
    DEC for a really good package at a growing company called Apple.  Left
    there at the right time.

    I believe there was also a period when Ken parked on the street
    out in front of Building 12 and had his secretary go out 
    periodically to put nickels in the parking meter.

Hard to believe that.  Ken was anything but a lawbreaker.

/john

    
    	Only you would point that out, Covert.  8^)
    

    Is it illegal to feed parking meters in Maynard?
    

Yes.  As it is in most places.

There is a two-hour parking limit.

/john

    RE: .107
    >Is it illegal to feed parking meters in Maynard?
    
    It's not recommended, as over time they will lose
    their instinctive predatory habits.

    Given the jackal behavior of the Maynard parking enforcers, Ken's
    actions were justified.

    I remember one time seeing a cop bang on a meter to force the flag to
    pop (didn't know that was possible) and he then started writing the
    ticket.  I asked the cop if he was on commission.  Can't repeat his
    answer here.

    Don't know Ken's reason for parking on the street, but the rest of us
    that had to do multiple daily runs to other facilities hated the parking 
    (and the jackals).

>    Don't know Ken's reason for parking on the street, but the rest of us
>    that had to do multiple daily runs to other facilities hated the parking 
>    (and the jackals).

when I worked on the main street side of the the mill in building 21 (yikes, it
was around 17 years ago!) if you didn't get there by 8 or so, you had to park
in the big parking log on the other side of the pond and hike into your office.

also, if you parked in the "3 deep" section, once in you couldn't leave until
the people blocking you in left too, which was usually around 5 + or - 1/2 hour!

given that, and the need to come/go at random times I could see parking on the
street at various times.

-mark