Conference 7.286::digital

Re generosity: I heard on NPR the other day some comments that France's
social security and welfare systems are among the most generous
in Europe (from the descriptions, *very* generous to an American
listener!), and are a huge economic burden on the government and 
businesses, to the point where some businesses are starting to
complain that it is too expensive to hire people (!). Proposals 
to trim these programs back create huge protests. I got the feeling
that French employees would have higher expectations of what they
should receive in a severance package than American employees.

    	I am told that what DEC France has announced is the legal minimum
    redundancy pay. They couldn't pay less without declaring bankruptcy,
    and even then a company is required to maintain a special bank deposit
    account that will pay all employees 3 months pay on the bankruptcy
    declaration. If the 6 months or so for a 10 year employee is correct
    then DEC France are giving nothing away that they are not forced to by
    law.
    
    	There are other legal provisions too. I believe that if someone is
    made redundant for economic reasons, and some time later the company
    has a vacancy for a similar job then they must give the ex-employee
    priority in the hiring process.
    
    	There are certainly strong incentives for French companies to plan
    their business rather than hire-and-fire at a whim.
    
    
    	French social security is not bad, but there are sufficient
    homeless that in cold days in winter they keep some of the Paris Metro
    (subway) stations open at night to avoid people freezing to death, and
    volunteers serve soup. Another voluntary organisation is "Restaurants
    du Coeur" started by a French comedian called Colouche - volunteers ask
    people outside supermarkets to donate a tin or a packet of food, and
    then serve it up for the homeless. I have no idea what might be
    provided in the U.S., but in France what is provided by the state is
    poor enough to inspire people to do voluntary work.

    re.2
    re. preventing people form freezing....
    Same out here in Holland, when winter gets bad, the Salvation Army and
    other organisations provide for extra shelter.
    Mind you, the mimimum welfare out here is good enough for people not
    needing this, but there's a few people who are too proud to go to
    Welfare (and somehow I *have*to admire them) and the rest of the people
    are either too stoned to find their way to what's legally theirs (or
    have used it to get stoned out of their minds) or are illegal immigrants.
    
    And with respect to DEC laying off people in Tulipland, they're not
    doing a bad job.
    Those who get axed, stay on the payroll for six months, and DEC has set up
    a foundation, which helps people finding a new job or start their own
    business.
    When someone finds a new job, he/she hands in his/her
    resignation and DEC pays  a lumpsum based on years of employment.
    
    Charles 

    
    Hi over there,
    
    	some details...


					Evry 25 March, 1994,


	Dear colleagues,

	The fifth wave of layoffs in DIGITAL FRANCE was
	officially announced today to the Work Council. 
	The project announced by management is to get rid of 
	471 persons from a total of 3,148 as follows:

		- Sales And Marketing	82 (70 +12)
		- DC and IM&T	       225 (190+35)
		- LSS			21 (9+12)
		- MCS			 2 
		- CDG			76 (46+30)
		- Other Functions	40 (7+33)
					   (Professionals + clericals)
					--
				       446
					--

	( The difference between 471 is still not explained. )

	Financial leaving conditions proposed by the management
	are very low.

	They are as follows:		
		Clericals:


		- 2 to 3  year seniority -> 10% of monthly salary per year of 
						seniority
		- 3 to 15 year  	-> 25%
		- 15 and more		-> 30%

		Professionals

		- 1 to 3 year		-> 20%
		- 3 to 7 year		-> 25%
		- 7 and more		-> 60% 


	Plus 3 months of notice time pre-paid due to French law.


	We consider this layoff plan UNACCEPTABLE.
	Yesterday, the Work Council associated with the Unions
	representing DIGITAL FRANCE called for a 1/2 hour work stoppage
	(Stop Working and meeting on the street) 
 	More than 1,500 persons took part in this initiative.
	It is the first time this occurs in the company.
	All majors newspapers and labour authorities are informed.
	We thank you very much for strongly supporting French 
	employees. 

	
Work Council and Unions (CGC/CGT/CTFC/CFDT - those are French unions )

To Distribution List:
    

>>We consider this layoff plan UNACCEPTABLE.
Exactly what many think of the ongoing right sizing (or whatever its
called theses days) here in the US. Welcome to digitial (thats burgundy
with round dots).

    Business Week (1/17/94):
    "In France, fewer than 10% of Digital employees are in sales, less than a
    third of the market average.  Sales per European employee are 40% under
    the $500k industry benchmark".

    It seems DEC-France has been on a work stoppage for some time now.

    Oh!  So the US is being remade after the French model!

    RE: .4

    Do I understand this table correctly. In other words, an engineer
    with 10 years in the company would get 9 months pay? This sounds
    almost irresponsibly generous. What are you asking for?

    			Alfred

    
    re .8 - 60% of monthly salary per year => 60% * 10 years => 600% of
    monthly salary = 6 months pay.
    

    
    re .9
    
    From .4
    
    >Plus 3 months of notice time pre-paid due to French law
    
    added to the 6 months = 9 months
    
    

    My wife was laid off in January (call it what it is, TFSO is
    nothing more than a layoff with a pat on the ass and a couple weeks
    salary). After 11 years with this company she was given 15 weeks of
    salary plus accumulated vacation. That isn't 15 months, that's 15
    weeks.
    
    If the techies in France are getting 9 months of salary for 10 years
    servitude, I for one don't have a clue what they're bitching about.
    
    GET A LIFE!
    
    tim moffitt

>    Do I understand this table correctly. In other words, an engineer
>    with 10 years in the company would get 9 months pay? This sounds
>    almost irresponsibly generous. What are you asking for?
>
>                        Alfred
Alfred,

	It is not as generous as the people who were laid off a year or so
	ago. It seems very unfair to people who stayed and tried their best
	and worked hard to make the difference. It would seem that the 
	people who Digital (in most cases) wanted to leave got rewarded for
	leaving while people who stayed are now getting penalised. I know of
	someone who asked to leave and was refused because Digital needed this
	person, now that the site is closing this same person may only get a
	1/4 of what they would have got, seems unjust to me.

Ren�

    re .-1
    
    And didn't those poor folks who stayed around get to collect their
    salary and accumulate additional vacation? 
    
    Welcome to the real world kids. The packages here in the states aren't
    getting better with time, why in the world would you expect yours to
    continue as they were in the past?
    
    You're getting more than we are. Stop bitching.
    
    tim m.

	This does not help Digital, the better people will leave and those
	that stay will probably only stay until they find something else.

	All this is not helping Digital improve sales. Only when stability
	and equality are restored will Digital have a chance of coming out
	of the red.

	Ren�

    re: .8
>    Do I understand this table correctly. In other words, an engineer
>    with 10 years in the company would get 9 months pay? This sounds
>    almost irresponsibly generous. What are you asking for?
    
    	As I mentioned earlier, I believe it is the legal minimum - that is
    hardly irresponsible generosity. Strikes are hardly good for the
    company image, but having the company taken through French courts for
    failing to meet legal requirements would probably be worse.
    
    re: .6
    	DEC France provides various support services to a number of
    developing countries and markets. The salesmen in those countries are
    not on the DEC France payroll. Maybe a contrast of "sales" to "others"
    in New Hampshire would be interesting as a comparison. Incidentally,
    the figures will now be much worse, because the company I work for
    (DECTE) is just being merged with DEC France, and has around 500
    employees and *no* salesmen.

    
>    	As I mentioned earlier, I believe it is the legal minimum - that is
>    hardly irresponsible generosity.
    
    Then perhaps the law is irresponsibly generous. There is quite frankly
    no way you can convince me that that payment is not generous. And if
    the company really needs to cut people then who ever is demanding
    this sum is not acting in the better interests of the company or
    those who remain in it's employee.
    
>Strikes are hardly good for the
>    company image, but having the company taken through French courts for
>    failing to meet legal requirements would probably be worse.
    
    Image? Is that all you think a strike hurts? In the US they also
    cost time, money and lost customer satisfaction. Hardly the acts 
    of people interested in turning a company around. If the company 
    is so bad that it requires a strike perhaps people should just go
    work for some more reasonable company? If the company is meeting
    legal requirements that would seem reasonable and no moral
    justification for a strike. If the company is not meeting the law
    then a lawyer should easily be able to correct things in a single
    meeting.
    
    			Alfred

    I don't know what the pay and conditions are like in France but  I
    would suggest that people compare eggs with eggs before emotive
    comments are made. 
    
    By that, I mean the whole pay and condition package, not just
    redundancy payments
    
    Frank

    
    
    Perhaps this package is below standards in France.  That's what they
    are looking at with regards to the TFSO.  I do think it would help the
    good folks over in France if someone could post what has happened to
    the package in the US over time.  Anyone have the data?
    
    
    Mike

    RATHOLE ALERT!
    
    In Europe (excluding Germany and Switzerland), you get your money when
    you're payed off. In the US you get it when you work.
    
    Translation: salaries are lower and costs are higher over here; I'm sure
    you don't begrudge us a better redundancy deal do you?
    
    Jim

    More details are posted in BONNET::VALBONNE note 4081.6, but I have not
    requested permission to cross-post.

	Everybody should realize that salaries, benefits, and yes TFSO
	packages will and must vary from country to country. Does anybody
	think that the folks at the new storage manufacturing facility in
	Malaysia will be making US-standard wages? Or that our PC plants in
	Taiwan pay the usual Western Europe manufacturing wages?

	I can't get all broken up about a TFSO package in France that would
	pay me nearly a year's salary. On the other hand, I think that the
	self-centered "don't come crying to us" attitude displayed by some
	of the US-based noters here is very disappointing. As if anybody who
	gets a better package should just shut up and take their medicine,
	because *YOU* didn't get it that good. My, misery loves company,
	doesn't it?

	Roy

RE: <<< Note 2957.22 by NOVA::SWONGER "DBS Software Quality Engineering" >>>
   
>>        On the other hand, I think that the self-centered "don't come crying 
>>        to us" attitude displayed by some of the US-based noters here is 
>>        very disappointing. As if anybody who gets a better package should 
>>        just shut up and take their medicine, because *YOU* didn't get it 
>>        that good. 

          Just rest assured that such an attitude is not the ONLY opinion
          of US-based noters.  Some of us felt the same way you do about 
          those worse-treated-than-thou replies.

                                       Greg

    
>	self-centered "don't come crying to us" attitude displayed by some
>	of the US-based noters here is very disappointing. As if anybody who
>	gets a better package should just shut up and take their medicine,
>	because *YOU* didn't get it that good. My, misery loves company,

    You just don't get it do you? It's not that the package someone else
    is getting is better then US employees are getting that bothers me.
    It's that the package is so generous that it seems designed to punish
    those who stay behind that bothers me. I have no problem with a
    reasonable package but really, if a company is in trouble because it's
    losing money then increasing the flow out doesn't seem like a good idea.

    			Alfred

    Let me assure you that in Europe it's a lot cheaper to offer a generous
    package than having to fight umpteen battles in court, very often
    resulting in the judge awarding the employee an even more generous
    package.
    
    Charles

    .24 and your others
    
    Alfred -- thanks for valuing differences, which I understood to include
    many, many aspects of live, the universe and everything, plus how
    companies treat their workforce within a socio-economic framework.
    
    Having experienced your 'sympathy' I trust you get more sympathetic
    treatment if/when you bring a problem to this conference.

    It is quite an interesting era we live in in the information age.
    When else would people from different cultures and countries have
    instant access to what other people are experiencing in their work
    lives including layoffs and "packages".  Nowhere else in our lives
    have we had this available to us in a widespread company.  This 
    network medium has opened up a new world of information exchange.
    With this comes the inevitableness of bumping up against different
    pays for same work, different hours for same work, different holdi-
    days for same work, different vacations for same work, and now 
    different payoffs for same layoffs!

    Who'd a thunk it?

    justme....jacqui

    RE: .26 Do you have any sympathy for Digital employees who will
    remain after the layoffs? How do you express it? By demanding bigger
    buyouts so that those who stay behind will be out of work sooner?
    
    			Alfred

This notes stream reminds me of a Monty Python sketch....

"You had it good.....We used to work down mine for 10 hours a day, live
in a cardboard box......"

A box ... a box ....luxury ... we lived in hole in road and worked 26 hours 
per day......


KR

    Yo Alfred, read note 2961. and see if that changes your attitude.
    
    I've been "left behind" and don't want anyones sympathy.  I'm glad to be
    here and excited about getting this company back on track.  I've been
    here 12 years and plan to be here many more.  How do you figure that
    by France demanding bigger buyouts that those who stay behind (you and
    I) will be out of work sooner....
    
    IF Digital goes, it will go with a bang and everyone will be out of
    work at the same time.  TFSO packages won't break this company. 
    Employees "hanging around" feeling "left behind" and not contributing
    to the turnaround of this "global" company WILL.
    
    My tuppence.....JP
      

    Canada has by US standard a good package...no complaints here
    But I think that some of you are missing a major point.
    
    I dont think that there are a lot of employees that truely believe
    that Digital is overstaffed. The real problems are in mismanagement
    and poor, convoluted business flows. The only surpluss staff seems to
    be at a managerial level or "project managers". Until this company
    gets it head out of its ass and starts making changes that count I 
    think it should pay (and pay well) for letting employees go.
    
    Just my bitter opinion
    
    
    Brian V
    

>    You just don't get it do you? It's not that the package someone else
>    is getting is better then US employees are getting that bothers me.
>    It's that the package is so generous that it seems designed to punish
>    those who stay behind that bothers me.

	Well thank you Ted Koppel, but I do get it. It has been mentioned
	numerous times that the package being offered is the minimum
	allowable by national laws -- are you still ignoring that? How is
	this "designed to punish those who stay behind?"

	Anybody who is still working for this company because they're a
	martyr being "left behind" is in severe need of some serious
	introspection. Martyrs are one thing we don't need.

	Roy

    
>    Yo Alfred, read note 2961. and see if that changes your attitude.

    Yep, it did. It made me more determined to speak out against buyouts
    in general and overly expensive ones in particular. You want to help
    the company then tell management the cuts are killing the company.

>    by France demanding bigger buyouts that those who stay behind (you and
>    I) will be out of work sooner....

    Because capital that could be used to improve processes, improve
    equipment, and improve training will all go out the door. We need
    to spend money improving things not just cutting things.

>    IF Digital goes, it will go with a bang and everyone will be out of
>    work at the same time.  

    I disagree. I remember Wang. We're following the path they walked
    first. Cut, cut some more, cut still some more, until the company
    is now a shell of its former self. That's what will happen to Digital
    if we don't lose the focus on cutting for cutting sake.

    >TFSO packages won't break this company. 

    They're not helping either.

>    Employees "hanging around" feeling "left behind" and not contributing
>    to the turnaround of this "global" company WILL.

    I agree and that's why I oppose overly generous buyouts. Such deals
    leave those left feeling that they are not appreciated. Does it
    motivate you to see people paid 6-9 months pay to leave while you
    are told that your next raise will be 18-24 months off? Does that
    make you feel appreciated? Digital should reward the people it's
    counting on to turn things around more then it "bribes" the employees
    it's not counting on to leave. The people demanding bigger buyouts
    seem mostly to want to leave. They just want a good deal when it
    happens. I want to stay. I came to Digital to make a career and
    help build a great company. I didn't come here to watch it torn
    down.

    			Alfred

    
>	Well thank you Ted Koppel, but I do get it. It has been mentioned
>	numerous times that the package being offered is the minimum
>	allowable by national laws -- are you still ignoring that? 

    No I'm not ignoring that. You seem to be ignoring that the strikers
    were demanding more. That's where I have a big problem. Address that.

    			Alfred

    re .15
    Comparing the percentage of employees in Sales between New Hampshire
    and France is not a valid comparison.  Digital is not headquartered
    in France.  It *IS* headquartered in Southern NH/Mass.  It's like
    comparing the Sales/person percentages of IBM France with greater
    Armonk.
    
    Bottom line: there is absolutely no reason that over 90+% of DEC
    French employees are not in sales.  When compared to other US-based
    companies in France, or when compared to Digital in other countries,
    your revenue per employee is terrible.  Diamani is finally cleaning
    up the mess.  .02 KB 

>================================================================================
>Note 2957.31       Job Action (token strike) in Digital France          31 of 34
>KAOFS::B_VANVALKENB                                  15 lines  29-MAR-1994 12:45
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>    Canada has by US standard a good package...no complaints here
>    But I think that some of you are missing a major point.
>    
>    I dont think that there are a lot of employees that truely believe
>    that Digital is overstaffed. The real problems are in mismanagement
>    and poor, convoluted business flows. The only surpluss staff seems to
>    be at a managerial level or "project managers". Until this company
>    gets it head out of its ass and starts making changes that count I 
>    think it should pay (and pay well) for letting employees go.
>    
>    Just my bitter opinion
>    
>    
>    Brian V
>    
     Brian,

	You hit the nail on the head, there are some of the greatest people
	I have met in Digital, mostly technical and I have had and know a 
	few excellent managers, they normally don't go far in Digital, it is
	a great shame. 

     Ren�

>    No I'm not ignoring that. You seem to be ignoring that the strikers
>    were demanding more. That's where I have a big problem. Address that.

	We agree on that point, but that's not what you said in .24, when
	you said "it's the fact that the package is so generous that it
	seems designed to punish those who say behind that bothers me."

	Look, I agree that we can't cut oru way to success, and that the way
	that cuts have been handled is a major reason we haven't been able
	to turn this thing around, and that I have little sympathy for those
	who think that 9 months of severance pay isn't enough. I'm willing
	to leave it at that.

	Roy

>================================================================================
>Note 2957.35       Job Action (token strike) in Digital France          35 of 36
>MSBCS::BROWN_L                                       12 lines  29-MAR-1994 14:13
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>    re .15
>    Comparing the percentage of employees in Sales between New Hampshire
>    and France is not a valid comparison.  Digital is not headquartered
>    in France.  It *IS* headquartered in Southern NH/Mass.  It's like
>    comparing the Sales/person percentages of IBM France with greater
>    Armonk.
>    
>    Bottom line: there is absolutely no reason that over 90+% of DEC
>    French employees are not in sales.  When compared to other US-based
>    companies in France, or when compared to Digital in other countries,
>    your revenue per employee is terrible.  Diamani is finally cleaning
>    up the mess.  .02 KB 
>
     Why should a profit making entity be absorbed into a loss making entity,
     that is the question. The problem is that in France there are strict
     hierarchical structure which suppresses any decision making by anybody
     who is not a manager.

     I worked as a sales executive for a French company representing them
     in Ireland. On one occasion I had a major deal to close and normally
     I would and should have consulted with my manager, this would have lost
     me the customer. We had local importers who could make decisions 
     relatively quickly and the customer didn't want to have to wait a few
     days before deciding. The process was that my manager would have to ask 
     his manager etc. I made the decision and got castigated over not going
     through the hierarchy. This decision brought over 40K pounds annually 
     into the company, this customer had previously traded at 0 due to this
     problem which had lasted 2 years.

     Come here, work in a French or French a structured company and then you
     will understand the reasons why these companies have problems competing
     with more flexible companies.

     Ren�

    
    I don't see why the French employees are being dumped on.  It seems
    their complaint that those who stayed and tried to help are being
    treated less well than those who were happily ushered out the door
    earlier IS THE VERY SAME COMPLAINT that arose here when the packages
    started to get less generous.  At least let them have their feelings
    of anger and betrayal.  Lots of us here had them too.
    
    Steve
    

    Steve,
    
    Ther is also the fact that those who will be unemployed will not have
    the same generous state unemployment due to the economic circumstances
    today so they lose out twice.
    
    Ren�

    Generous? Definitely! According to my trusty calculator,I'd get over
    1.5 years salary. You say it was better before? Geez,maybe I'll ask for
    a transfer. (French ancestry and all that)
    
    Ken

    RE: .5  by EVMS::GODDARD 
    
    >>>We consider this layoff plan UNACCEPTABLE. Exactly what many think
    >of the ongoing right sizing (or whatever its called theses days) here
    >in the US. Welcome to digitial (thats burgundy with round dots).
    
    Are the layoffs just in Burgundy, or is all of France affected?
    

Just take into consideration that the costs of living in France are extremly
high! Therefore I'm pretty sure, that you can't compare the package paid
in the US with the package payed in France or elswhere, even when it sounds
high.

Stefan� 

I have the feeling that there is a big misunderstanding. I doubt that our
French colleagues are only striking because they want more money for TFSOing.

It's maybe part of the strike but I'm pretty sure that the main reason why
they are striking is that they don't belive that layoffs will bring the
company back to profit. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Germany is laying off people since about 2 years and I can't see any sign
of profit until now. I have the feeling that Digital misses the point where
it should stop layoffs and concentrate on making profit.

Stefan�

Cost cutting and laying off people has not changed the economic situation
of Digital and in some cases has made it worse. I don't think anybody is 
against a coherent plan which would bring Digital back to profitability.
The management don't seem to held accountable. You can't even get a stationary
here due to cost reduction.

I played a football match last night against a large watch/diamond company in
Geneva and there were more comments about Digital laying off people. Digital
is getting very bad press. Personally if I was the IT buyer for a company, I
would hesitate in going to Digital, I would go probably to HP or even IBM. I
have heard nothing bad about the layoffs in IBM, they seem to have managed
it better. As long as Digital continues these protracted layoffs NOTHING will
get better and the losses will continue.

Ren�

    re: .35
>    Comparing the percentage of employees in Sales between New Hampshire
>    and France is not a valid comparison.  Digital is not headquartered
>    in France.  It *IS* headquartered in Southern NH/Mass.  It's like
>    comparing the Sales/person percentages of IBM France with greater
>    Armonk.
>    
>    Bottom line: there is absolutely no reason that over 90+% of DEC
>    French employees are not in sales.  When compared to other US-based
>    companies in France, or when compared to Digital in other countries,
>    your revenue per employee is terrible.  Diamani is finally cleaning
>    up the mess.  .02 KB 
    
    	Digital France is the operational headquarters for I would guess
    about 40 countries. This has impacts in all sorts of areas. For
    example, if there is a question about contract law in Burundi or
    Hungary then the DEC France legal department might need to find the
    answer quickly enough to avoid losing a customer. These countries don't
    have their own technical/legal/marketing/... backup support, but some
    of them have prospects of becoming very profitable. The last I heard
    DEC Hungary was growing at 50% per year.
    
    	I have other comments about the increasing use of contractors, who,
    because they are not direct employees can be fired on a week's notice
    with no payoff, but that should probably be a separate topic since it
    is not specific to France.

re. IT Managers and the choice to do business with whom (HP, Digital, IBM ect.)

My fathers is a market researcher. One department of this company where he
works made a market research with IT-managers. The result was that the 
reputation of Digital is getting worse and worse and the percentage of
IT-managers who would buy Digital-Products (HW, SW, Service etc.) is
sinking.

This market research company is now trying to offer Digital-Germany
to do a market research for their products since about 1 year. They
never received any answer from Digital. 

Stefan� 

>Just take into consideration that the costs of living in France are extremly
>high! Therefore I'm pretty sure, that you can't compare the package paid
>in the US with the package payed in France or elswhere, even when it sounds
>high.
    
    That might be a valid point *if* the packages were some arbitrary
    sums. But they're not. They're based on salary which is local and
    related to cost of living so the package is already indexed to it.
    
    			Alfred

How long does it take to get another job after being layed off?

    	They are also related to the fact that it is relatively difficult
    to get new permanent jobs. Of the people from Valbonne that I know
    personally that have been TFSOd during the last couple of years I know
    of none that have found normal regular employment (not quite true - one
    got a "permanent" job, but the company went bankrupt two months after
    she joined it). I know a number of people TFSOd by DEC here that are
    now 2 years or more without *any* work, not even temporary.
    
    	I know nothing of conditions in the U.S., but a comparison either
    absolute (your package runs out a year before you find another job) or
    relative (your package runs out 45% through your search for another
    job) might be relevant. The first comparison applies if you have large
    fixed costs such as a mortgage. The second applies if you can largely
    lower your cost of living while looking for a job.

    In the area to the north of London -- a 'dormitory area' for
    professionals working in London -- there are now:
    
    	16 people available for every job opportunity
    
    	after 12 months 50% still lack permanent work 
    
    	after 12 months, if they're over 40 years old,
    		80% lack permanent work
    
    Some other facts about professionals in Europe:
    
    	disposable incomes are lower than in the US
    
    	sales tax is high, e.g. 17.5% in the UK, 18.6% in France
    
    	gas is around $1 per liter (no, not per gallon)

>================================================================================
>Note 2957.49       Job Action (token strike) in Digital France          49 of 49
>EVMS::GODDARD                                          1 line  30-MAR-1994 08:41
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>How long does it take to get another job after being layed off?

Only God knows that .-) It can take a month if you have saleable skiils and
it can take forever, it depends on the individual and the location. There is
work in Paris but nobody really wants to go there (unless they are mad).

Ren�

Right, what I was trying to discern was how far the severance pay
would take you. Im really not interested in an exact answer...just
an idea as to how good/bad the job market is in France. Here in the
US most (atleast the folks I know) got permanent or temp employment
almost right away. Those who didnt still got some form of employment
(usually permanent) before the severance pay ran out. From what I
can tell there are plenty of jobs here (in the US). The pt. I was
trying to make is that while 9 months (or more) pay sounds good if
there arent many other jobs available then it isnt all that great.

    .34  Alfred, your point 'why do they want more money than legally
                 regulated..'  - how much money would you get due to
                 US-law ??   0$ ??  Isn't 15 weeks payment still more than that?
                 Or have you ever been thinking about the fact, that the
    		 more painful it is for the company to layoff people, the
    		 less amount people they will layoff......!
    	 Anyway, let's stop this stupid pin-pointing - we never will be
    		 able to compare apples with apples - it's different
    		 countries, different people, different prices, different
    		 everything.....
    
    The real point is, that since Digital started to layoff people
    (regardless in which country!) SOME 40000 well trained persons are
    potentially working now for the competition (or at best with VAR's, but
    selling HP, IBM, CISCO and other stuff...)
    
    It harms several times:
      - they are missing now badly in our organisation (look at our
             troubles with supply chain, quality,... you name it!) 
      - we invested a hell of a lot of money for their training/education
      - for sure, they use their Inside-Digital knowledge now for Competition.
    
    I got notice of several 'blown projects' due to missing staff - the money 
    we lost just there would pay lots of people for lots of months....
    
    Does anybody really believe into the success of this 'downsizing'-
    strategy ?? 
    
    I appreciate Anker's Note 2961 very much, I like his approach and his
    Headline 'Let's do something about it'.
    For my point of view, the french colleagues did something, at least they 
    have shown courage! Let's stop destroying this company, it's supposed
    to be OUR working environment, it is really time to do something for
    it!
    
    Hubert

    .50�    	I know nothing of conditions in the U.S., but a comparison either
    .50�    absolute (your package runs out a year before you find another job) or
    .50�    relative (your package runs out 45% through your search for another
    .50�    job) might be relevant. The first comparison applies if you have large
    .50�    fixed costs such as a mortgage. The second applies if you can largely
    .50�    lower your cost of living while looking for a job.
    .50�
    
    
    You guys over in Europe (and your legislators) sure look at things
    different than here. In the US,employers aren't required to "hold your
    hand" after you're laid off. I guess in Europe,they are. (at least
    continental Europe) Good or bad?
    
    Ken

    re .46
    >Digital France is the operational headquarters for I would guess
    >about 40 countries.
    
    Do these 40 countries view France as their operational headquarters?
    I kinda doubt it.  kb
    

!re: Note 2957.50      PASTIS::MONAHAN 
!    Of the people from Valbonne that I know
!    personally that have been TFSOd during the last couple of years I know
!    of none that have found normal regular employment (not quite true - one

	Dave,
	I hate to correct you but you have not been looking hard enough

	R.K. my former cell mate is a product manager at MS in Paris
	P.K. our TOPS10/20 guru works for Andersen at our park
	C.R. our NSTC veteran and EVO veteran , moved from Paris to Sophia
	( our location ) for another US company.
	I.McC, independent consultant in UK.
	G.B - from your former group - independent consultant in Geneva ?

	There are almost no jobs exactly where we are, but if you move,
	especially to Paris, people find jobs ( with difficulty).

	One should not assume either that :

	- consultants dream about permanent job , I know of few at my
	customer's in US that preferred to terminate a contract.

	- all our former collegues are looking for a job. Some really don't
	need to work , for various reasons having nothing to do with DEC.
	
	The bottom line, skilled people that are willing to move find 
	( or have good chances ) for new position, this is what my former
	co workers tell me.

	The situation is much worse for non-techies or supervisors.

	Is a DEC-France package over generous, under generous ?
	I don't know and I don't care . This is a problem far outside 
	my ability of any influence, like an earthquake. Not worth to
	spent my energy on this burning issue.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
	There is something about the strike that puzzled me for a moment.

	What exactly did they want to achieve ? And why 30 minutes ?
	If you want to get something real, you should strike a week.

	Did anybody seriously counted on DEC saying, sorry guys, we will pay
	you more, take loan, get into a bankruptcy for you ( a possibility) ?	

	No, hardly. So, this is just a power demonstration.
	A trade union organises people around a popular issue to promote
	another hidden issue ( "hidden" like an elephant on a parking lot).

	The "hidden agenda" is to polarise DEC France and establish Trade
	Unions as a privileged intermediary of company/employee relations.

	This is a part of a more hidden agenda ("hidden" like Eifel Tower)
	which is political power. French trade unions are relays of political
	parties. The left ones assume social peace during leftwing governments
	and the other way around. 

	Is this a progress in DEC France employee relations ?
	Is it in my interest as DEC France employee ?

	I doubt that.

	Previous DEC France packages were generous and far exceeded the 
	legal minimum. Some people miss judged the company's financial
	strength and volunteered to be more generous and humane then 
	necessary. A unique attitude in France, that is plagued by archaic
	constant labour conflicts. Will any generosity be left in unionised
	DEC ? I know of a case when an arrangement was made
	for an employee that had a very vulnerable position on labour 
	market. Mutual confidence made that possible.

	I can't imagine a company making any concession ( like the previous
	French package) in an unionise company.

	So, DEC France strikers, you have been taken for a ride !
	
	Also timing of the strike is ugly. DEC Frnace got a new boss, that
	communicated honestly the state of the company and his action plan in
	a 30 page document. The document was sent to all emplayee reps ( CE)
	Unions, goverment and was circulated. The bottom line is that company
	could probably not do more without serious impact or going under.
	
	Having said that I must also say that I respect our local union
	reps. And don't doubt for a second their integrity, honesty and high
	motives. Theirs influence in a short term looks positive, more precise
	and timely information gets to us. What worries me is longer term
	effects, the win-lose arrangements, internal civil war.

	
    

>================================================================================
>Note 2957.54       Job Action (token strike) in Digital France          54 of 54
>VNABRW::REISENAUER                                   36 lines  30-MAR-1994 10:07
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>    For my point of view, the french colleagues did something, at least they 
>    have shown courage! Let's stop destroying this company, it's supposed
>    to be OUR working environment, it is really time to do something for
>    it!
>    
>    Hubert

	Hubert,

	The sooner Digital finishes once and for all the layoffs the better.
	This long protracted process that Digital has been applying for the
	last 3 to 4 years now, this is what is partly destroying Digital. 

	As long as Digital continues to treat its employees in the way they
	have been doing for the last 2 years, morale will get worse and any
	hope of getting out of the red will vanish.

	Digital has laid off or indirectly forced some of our best people to
	leave. I have seen some brilliant people get so pissed off that they
	rigned rather than support the rotting athmosphere within Digital.

	There are some very constructive, positive and energetic people left
	in Digital but there are becoming rarer and rarer every day. Maybe the
	U.N. will declare the DEC species and endangered one soon. Maybe the
	DEC species will become extint.

	Ren�

And from my point of view, the package for all TFSOd people is always to 
less, so it's the easiest way to fire the people, close the plants and get the 
money from the interests of the remaining cash!!!

In the other case, you should provide work for the people, invest in future 
products and think about other possibilities ...

Property is or must be an obligation for the human society.

    re .-1
    
    Welcome to the world of capitalism. We have investors who purchase our
    stock and look for it to appreciate so they can make money. If our
    stock isn't attractive, they invest elsewhere. If we need cash (and we
    have recently), we go to the investors and sell more stock. If we can't
    attract them, we don't get money and if we can't get money (while
    we're not showing a profit) we go broke. When we go broke, we'll all be
    out on the streets.
    
    Digital Equipment Corporation is not a welfare agency. The corporation
    exists to make a profit for its investors. It's nice to have platitudes
    about what the corporation could/should do to improve the human
    condition but the bottom line is that our first responsibility is to
    those folks who have invested in us. 
    
    tim m.

>    Digital Equipment Corporation is not a welfare agency. The corporation
>    exists to make a profit for its investors. It's nice to have platitudes
>    about what the corporation could/should do to improve the human
>    condition but the bottom line is that our first responsibility is to
>    those folks who have invested in us. 
>    
>    tim m.

	Greed and more greed. Companies should not be allowed to make the
	millions they are making without contributing in some way to improving
	the society we live in. I am not a socialist or in favour of welfare
	for welfares sake but every human has a right to live in humane and
	decent conditions. What would your tune be if you were on the receiving
	end unemployment with nothing.

		ARTICLE 25 (UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS)

	(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the
	health and well-being of himself and his family, including food,
	clothing, housing and medical care ans necessary social services, and
	the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability
	widowhood, old age or other lack of livlehood in circumstances beyond
	his control

	Wake up and see that they way corporations and individuals have been
	behaving over the last 20 years has not helped all the people but
	helped to increase the gap between the haves and have not. This is
	suicide for our society and as long as the human race continues to
	think along your lines, life will become worse and you could be next.

	Ren� 

    
    I hate the Layoffs, as I suppose everyone does.  I feel for the ones
    leaving and for the ones staying.  Never the less, each individual is
    responsible for their own welfare, NOT DIGITAL, NOT ANY OTHER COMPANY,
    NOT A NEIGHBOR, NOT FAMILY, NOT THE GOVERNMENT.  YOU AND I ARE
    RESPONSIBLE for ourselves.  We may not like it, but it is a fact none
    the less.  Someone may have been treated better, but who says life is
    fair.  If you think that it is the responsibility of business or
    government to provide for you, then by defination you are a
    SOCIALIST...  So don't try and change the meaning of the word
    SOCIALISM.
    
    It sure would be nice if we didn't have to take responsibility for
    ourselves.  To make it a little clearer;  I don't mind people getting
    assistance or a temporary handout to help, but when that handout is
    expected because the world owes us (SPIT GAG) then I mind.  Those that
    are taking are taking from others who are paying.
    
    Now for business.  As much as one would want a business to be a welfare
    agency, it won't happen...  It may sound good on the surface, but that
    is as deep as it goes.  To some people the desire to earn more money is
    GREED.  Maybe, but as long as it is EARNED, it isn't bad.  Greed is bad
    when someone wants something that they aren't willing to pay for.  In
    business, INVESTORS PAID for their investment to GROW.  They took and
    still take a RISK.  WE benefit from this by being employed.  It would
    be unfair to think the INVESTORS should just loose their money and time
    just to be a nice guy.
    
    Again, I hate the layoff's.  I think they are wrong, especially while
    we are hiring in other areas and bring in new VP's.  As much as I think
    it is wrong, I have the choice to stay or leave, and DIGITAL has the
    choice to keep me or tell me to leave.
    
    Jim Morton

re: .60
    
>    Digital Equipment Corporation is not a welfare agency. The corporation
>    exists to make a profit for its investors. It's nice to have platitudes
>    about what the corporation could/should do to improve the human
>    condition but the bottom line is that our first responsibility is to
>    those folks who have invested in us. 
    
"Our"?  You referring to you and your pet tycoon?  My loyalty to the company
is to the people that work here, the customers and the opportunities to do
something interesting, innovative and hopefully of some larger benefit to the 
world.  If we take care of those, the investors should make some money too.
Fine.  But if the company goes belly up, i won't cry for the investors--they
obviously have money to burn or they wouldn't be throwing it at us and the
other companies in their portfolios.  I will be sad for the hardship that
the people who have put their hearts and souls into working here suffer, for
the betrayal of the customers who believed in us, and for those lost
opportunities.  Let the dead investors bury their dead.

Sure, capitalism is better than communism, but let's not carry it to the
level of a religion.  Next you'll be saying that your first loyalty as far
as your home goes is to the bank that lent you the money to buy it.  That's
looking through the wrong end of the telescope (IMO).
								- paul

    re: .63 and our responsibilities to our stockholders
    
>Fine.  But if the company goes belly up, i won't cry for the investors--they
>obviously have money to burn or they wouldn't be throwing it at us and the
    
    Obviously you have overlooked a couple of things here. First of all,
    the stockholders own this company, not you or me. We are not serfs or
    slaves forced to work here against our will, we do so willingly in
    exchange for our wages and various intangible considerations.
    
    Second of all, the investors you decry as having money to burn are a
    figment of an overactive imagination. Most of the investors in Digital
    are pension funds and other institutions. Do you think *your* pension
    fund has money to burn and is looking for a quick buck? Think again.
    
    All that being said, it still makes good business sense for Digital to
    do its best to follow local business practices wherever possible. In
    France, that might mean being liberal with layoff terms. In Japan, it
    might mean wage reductions in lieu of layoffs. In the U.S., it means
    every person is on their own. Whatever it takes to attract and retain
    the best people we can afford to make our company successful, both now
    and in the future ...
    
    Geoff

    re: .61

    Interesting note Rene. It caused me to stop and reflect for a moment.
    Too often we find ourselves surrounded by people who are a mirror of
    our own experiences and perspectives, and it's good to stop and reflect
    on the alternatives.

    In the early 1800s, the United States was a very diverse land. We had
    large population centers (Boston, New York) and huge tracts of land
    that were mostly wild. Territories had different laws, life styles, and 
    standards of living. Every town and city even had it's own time - that
    is, those towns that were big enough to have a clock. Then along came
    transcontinental railroads, and with them came waves of change. Time
    zones were adopted (so schedules could be run). Contract laws were
    standardized, so business could occur. People were more mobile, and as
    a result cultures tended to become more homogeneous. Today, if you were
    blindfolded and put on a plane, it might be hard to identify where you
    were when you landed.

    Today, the world is still an incredibly diverse place, yet thanks to
    networks, computers, and global corporations such as Digital, the
    world's become very small. Different laws and economic models get in
    the way of business. Will all our different economic models and
    standard of living tend to get more homogeneous, or will we become more
    polarized? I know what I'd bet on...


    Anyway, thanks for the cause for reflection. I'd like to return the
    favor, if I may...


    From a financial perspective, life (either an individual's or a
    corporation's) is a zero-sum game. We spend everything we make, in one
    way or another. I make a fair income. Some I save, some I spend. The 
    money I save is put in places like DCU so people can borrow it to buy 
    houses and cars that they couldn't otherwise, and so improves their
    lives. The money I spend on cars and housekeepers and schools help keep
    other people employed, and so improves their lives. When I die at a
    ripe old age, I'll take nothing with me. Everything will have been
    spent or given away. None of my income is wasted - all my profits are
    recycled back into the economy.

    We improve other people's lives, and society as a whole, by simply
    making and spending money. Indeed, the more money I can make (greed?),
    the more I can spend and the more other people benefit. The less 
    money I make, the fewer people benefit.

    Similarly, the more profits a corporation makes, the more it benefits
    society. Those profits aren't burned for fuel - they are recycled back
    into the economy as well. The best thing a corporation can do for
    society is to be as greedy and successful as it can be!


    Where I live in Detroit, former auto capital of the world and home of a
    very cyclic economy, this 'capitalism in action' is very real and
    visible. When the auto companies profits are down, stores close,
    charity lines get long, and everyone scrimps. When profits are up, the
    auto companies spend a lot on R&D, hire more workers, buy more parts
    and tools, stores open, charity lines decrease, and all is well. We
    all want these big corporations to be profitable.

    
    A little over 50% of the world economy is now associated with the motor
    car and its sidelines (roads, oil, rubber etc.), and the internal
    comubustion engine is the world's biggest polluting agency. That's what
    happens with unharnessed capitalism.
    
    >When profits are up, the
    >auto companies spend a lot on R&D, hire more workers, buy more parts
    >and tools, stores open, charity lines decrease, and all is well. We
    >all want these big corporations to be profitable.
    
    Even if that destroys the planet we live on?
    
    Piers

    	At the moment, profitability for most companies seems to mean
    automating and reducing the number of employees. At the moment, in
    France, unemployment in young people has reached 25%, and is
    substantial amongst older people.
    
    	Unfortunately, France is a democracy, and if the trend continues
    and it is difficult to live as unemployed, people will rectify this
    with their votes. We probably have the technology to provide what
    society needs with 90% unemployment, but if we do this (and still
    remain a democracy) you will see 90% of the GNP going to the
    unemployed rather than the shareholders.
    
    	There is also the factor that shareholders need consumers. You will
    not have the majority of families owning a PC (or a car) if the
    majority of families don't have the income to buy one.
    
    	Unfortunately the shareholders don't realise this collectively. If
    the shareholders of GM, or DEC manage to reduce their workforce to
    miniscule proportions it is just a drop in the ocean of
    employed/unemployed. If the shareholders of most companies do this then
    they will start seeing some of the effects above.

>================================================================================
>Note 2957.65       Job Action (token strike) in Digital France          65 of 65
>CIM::LOREN "I <heart> OOPS"                          61 lines   1-APR-1994 00:29
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>    Where I live in Detroit, former auto capital of the world and home of a
>    very cyclic economy, this 'capitalism in action' is very real and
>    visible. When the auto companies profits are down, stores close,
>    charity lines get long, and everyone scrimps. When profits are up, the
>    auto companies spend a lot on R&D, hire more workers, buy more parts
>    and tools, stores open, charity lines decrease, and all is well. We
>    all want these big corporations to be profitable.
>
     I was in Nice a year or so ago and in one of the ports I saw a private
     yatch that must have cost at least what it would cost to run some Central
     American countries. I stared in amazement at how one man or family could
     spend son much when people are starving around the world. It was a Hong
     Kong registered yatch. I am not saying that this man should not have it
     but maybe he has factories in mainland China where the workers are housed
     6 to a room and work 16 hours a day. Profits made in this way are not
     just.

     As long as there is economic instability as is the case in France and many
     other European countries, people will not spend money on any non essential
     items and things will get worse. There is the dominino affect. We all have
     become too greedy (myself included). Do you remember the times when simple
     things gave us fun, a walk in the woods, a ice cream etc. Now even in 3rd
     world countries there is a rush to get a coloured television, a video
     recorder etc, this are not essential in life. In the rush to accumulate
     these things, people have become more insular and there is more 
     self-centredness. I don't advocate communism or the socialism of political
     parties or hand outs, just a little more justice so that more people can
     have the essentials to live and that there children have an opportunity
     to an education.

     Amassing wealth for wealths sake for me is a crime. A recent television
     documentary on television showed very wealthy Arab families employing 
     African and Asian girls in the household, they were treated like slaves.
     If this is the way some rich people contribute towards humanity then 
     count me out.

     A company can be successful and profitable without exploiting it workers
     and there are examples of it. Bewleys cafes in Dublin was owned by a 
     Quaker family who worked a lot helping improve the living condition of 
     the travelling people. Victor Bewley retired to dedicate his time to these
     people and sold part or all of the cafe chain to the staff. People need
     to distinguish the difference between their NEEDS and WANTS. This world
     can be a better place for all, you and I are responsible. This includes
     the environment we live in.

     Ren� 

    In spite of your atrocious grammar and spelling, Ren�, I have to agree
    with your sentiments.
    
    Piers

    Valuing Differences
    
    There are many things I could, and may very well in the future,
    contribute to this string. At this point, without "passing judgement",
    let me simply say that many of the thoughts expressed definately DO
    represent socialism. Is that bad? That;s up to the individual, and the
    community within which they CHOOSE to reside, to determine.  
    
    One thing DOES puzzle me, tho, from a few back.
    
    "Unfortunately, France is a democracy...".  Why, exactly, is that
    unfortunate???
    

>    From a financial perspective, life (either an individual's or a
>    corporation's) is a zero-sum game. 

This is ABSOLUTELY not true!
The purpose of a business corporation, and an interesting side effect
of the process of life, is the CREATION of wealth.
This is absolutely the opposite of the concept of "zero-sum," which
means that what there is is all there is, and sharing it depletes
one partner's portion to the expense of another's.
Businesses can be run in a win-win fashion, with all parties (employer,
employee, customers, suppliers) gaining from the synergy.
You seem to understand this based on later comments ("recycling
your life-long accomplishments into the economy").
Don't demean your and our contributions by mislabeling them as "zero-sum."

- tom]

Here's my knee-jerk socialist response :-)

I quite agree with the comment that "our" first responsibility 
is to those who have invested in DEC.

I believe that the investment of time, by the employees, should
count for at least as much (probably more) as the investment
of money by non-employees.   Time is obviously the more
valuable commodity!

    
>    "Unfortunately, France is a democracy...".  Why, exactly, is that
>    unfortunate???
    
    Actually I think the rest of his note explained that very well. A
    lot to think about.
    
    				Alfred

    This is progress - the $-Fr "comparisons" become odious enough that
    everyone realised that they are totally irrelevant.  You simply can't
    make such comparisons.  System of employment and methods of
    remuneration are inextricably bound up with the socio-economic
    organisation of a given locale.  Even the capitalism/socialism argument
    falls flat when you explore it.

    The fundamental difference here is an issue of worker power in the
    workplace.  US white collar workers have virtually no history of
    collective bargaining and are largely socialised into mistrusting any
    form of collective action.  The history is radically different in many
    European countries where collective action is acceptable, and in some
    cases preferential to other alternatives.  I think this is what brings
    out the negative responses - not a question of who gets what, but more of
    how they go about the business of getting it.  

    If a group of individuals choose to exercise a basic human right, form
    a collective and elect representatives to negotiate better terms for
    their living and working conditions should we be so quick to call them
    "greedy".  Happens every day in the US in hundreds of town meetings -
    only it seems they call it democracy here and "socialism" when it
    happens in other places.  As a European, I never saw it as anything
    other than democaracy in action - even though I sometimes exercised my
    right NOT to participate in it.   
    
    Having lived in the US for 5 years now, I've come to understand (and
    respect) the greater emphasis on self-reliance and on the individual.
    Many Europeans also do not want to be part of collectivism, it's not
    totally unknown in the US either so in comparing populations, we are
    not really that far apart.  

    All that is happening in this 30-minute token action is part of the
    standard recipe of European industrial relations.  Management of a
    corporation has made an initial offer and the workforce has made an
    initial response.  Like US town meetings, It happens many times a year
    in industries all over Europe.  Digital France management knows the
    process, is aware what the response will be and is preparing their next
    step already.  The management did not arbitrarily pick this figure out
    of a hat (unless they are completely incompetent).  It has been
    carefully calculated to be reasonably close to a figure for which the
    French workers will settle without going to a full walkout.  I predict
    that the workers in France will settle for something within 10% of this
    figure without a total strike.  In short, they'll gain little more
    financially but a great deal in knowing that they were active
    participants in the negotiation process rather than having a settlement
    forced on them.

    (There's a strong psychological component here - you feel that you
    "negotiated" your way out of a job rather than were dumped and it does
    make quite a bit of difference to one's self respect.)

    There's a note in here about negotiations in Germany.  Those of you who
    listen to NPR in the US might recently have caught an article in which
    covered The metal-workers union settlement with management that
    effectively traded pay raises for a certain amount of job security. 
    While the strike action got massive publicity, the equitable settlement
    made few headlines - yet this is the NORM in industrial relations in
    Europe.  Believe it or not, industrial action is rare and there is
    little relationship between it's frequency and the amount of industrial
    turmoil or economic depression in a given country.

    Germany is the most highly unionised country in Europe and has enjoyed
    the best economy for decades, exporting more goods than either the US
    or Japan. Different countries, different workers, different goals,
    different methods of getting there.  

    On a personal note related to the topic of layoffs,  I could have
    chosen to end my relocation by returning to the UK and then would
    probably have been laid off along with the rest of my group there.  The
    compensation would have been generous - some colleagues got 15 months
    pay.  Fact is, I don't think that any amount of money "compensates" you
    for being laid off no matter where you are.  I preferred to stay
    working and chose to take a job here in the US where I'll risk whatever
    minimal package is offered *if* I get laid off.  
    
    The same notion goes for full-blown strikes.  If you have to strike
    then collective negotiation has failed miserably.  No union ever really
    gains from a strike, neither does the company.  Most negotiations end
    as win-win situations, far from the popular notion that corporations
    are often driven to bankruptcy by unions.
    
     
    Regards,

    Colin

                                             

    
    Question for Rene:
    
    Did you work for another employer before coming to Digital?
    
    If you did, how come you chose to sell your labor to Digital and 
    left your previous employers? Did you compensate your previous 
    employer for his loss and inconvenience by paying back 9 months 
    worth of salary? 
    
    People come and go willingly all the time for their self interests.
    And thats the way life is.  

    I've followed this note and it's replies, and I think that the
    discussion has been entirely predictable, the europeans' norm is
    collectivism, while the americans view their action as 'greedy'. 
    Americans have been brought up in the 20th century on a 19th century
    standard, i.e., we're all pioneers out here on the prairie and it's
    every man for himself.  And this system has been intertwined in a
    thinly disguised class system.
    
    Yes, it's Digitals' obligation to see that the stockholders get their
    expected return, and we are supposed to be a profitable enterprise. 
    Couldn't agree more.  However the world unemployment rate is building
    at a destructive rate.  This has an indirect-direct affect on our
    ability to be profitable.  If the world's economy slumps, and we are
    selling to the world, then Digital slumps, it's as simple as that.  The
    alarming rate of unemployment should be a concern for CEO's of all
    multinational corporations.  We as a company are not separate from
    quality of life around us.
    
    I think that .74 enunciated more than I can ever do here, but I felt
    compelled to put my $.02 in.  It's way past time that companies like
    Digital and IBM put more effort and time into generating revenue, than
    in downsizing exercises.
    
    /d.c.

    re: .75
>    Did you work for another employer before coming to Digital?
>    
>    If you did, how come you chose to sell your labor to Digital and 
>    left your previous employers? Did you compensate your previous 
>    employer for his loss and inconvenience by paying back 9 months 
>    worth of salary? 
    
    	I can't answer for Ren�, but I would like to answer for myself.
    
    	I worked for another company, one which was at the time strongly
    implicated in the rather bloody fascist revolution in Chile. Having
    worked for them for 5 years I knew this as just one example of a
    complete lack of corporate ethics. In 1974 DEC had a very good
    reputation for corporate ethics.  I gave the other company the 3 months
    notice required by my employment contract.
    
    	In financial terms and family life I was worse off, since I had
    changed 30 minutes commuting per day for 4 hours commuting per day, but
    at least I was working for a company I could be proud of.

>================================================================================
>Note 2957.75       Job Action (token strike) in Digital France          75 of 75
>ICS::VERMA                                           12 lines   1-APR-1994 11:36
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                            -< it works both ways >-
>
>    
>    Question for Rene:
>    
>    Did you work for another employer before coming to Digital?
>    
>    If you did, how come you chose to sell your labor to Digital and 
>    left your previous employers? Did you compensate your previous 
>    employer for his loss and inconvenience by paying back 9 months 
>    worth of salary? 
>    
>    People come and go willingly all the time for their self interests.
>    And thats the way life is.  

The last company I worked for in Ireland went bust while I was on holidays. 
I go sweet f**k all, not even holiday pay. Our first child had been born a
week before that, it was a great home coming for my wife and what was worse
the directors of the company opened up on the Monday in a new location and
only offered jobs to trainees who were cheap labour and needed the experience.

After that I worked freelance for Ericsson in Spain before coming to Digital
so I didn't have to pay anybody. Digital wanted me at the time for my experience
in database design.

Ren�

>             <<< Note 2957.72 by MU::TRURL::porter "neoPCweeny" >>>
>
>Here's my knee-jerk socialist response :-)
>
>I quite agree with the comment that "our" first responsibility 
>is to those who have invested in DEC.
>
>I believe that the investment of time, by the employees, should
>count for at least as much (probably more) as the investment
>of money by non-employees.   Time is obviously the more
>valuable commodity!

Except we all get paid for our time, most of us within a week or two
of when we expend our efforts.
However, Digital has NEVER YET directly paid the investors for their money.
People who have made money as owners of the company have done so through
stock price appreciation (and, to a more limited extent, who have bought into
the company at a discount, through stock options and the ESPP).

So why would the fully compensated, nearly risk-free contribution by one
class of people be considered more important than the as-yet unrewarded,
unclear contribution from another class?

- tom]  (does it make me an ultimate capitalist or an ultimate socialist
         if I advocate that all employees should have to take restricted
         stock (not immediately resellable) as part of their compensation?)

    
    I am an unreconstructed capitalist. I happen to believe that
    capitalism gave (and is giving) the best possible quality of life
    to the largest number of people the world over.  As has
    been stated, the oft-cited "idyllic" life of previous
    centuries was, in actuality, "nasty, brutish and short".
    The profit motive has been largely responsible for the
    increase in lifespans and overall quality of life.  The
    Western democracies have outgrown other types of societal 
    structures, in material if not philosophical and spiritual 
    terms, as a direct consequence of the profit motive, in my 
    view.
    
    Having said that, however, I need to add a note of caution.
    Whether or not we like it, modern life (and its attendant
    quality or lack of quality) is governed by a society's
    institutions.  These institutions include religious organizations,
    government agenices, welfare systems, large charities, educational
    institutions, AND CORPORATIONS.  Like it or not, corporations are 
    an integral component of the web that enables functioning 
    societies in the waning years of the millenium.  For that reason, 
    their leaders must understand that they have a responsibility that
    goes a bit further than this quarter's bottom line.  As the web of 
    society frays at the edges, leaders of *all* these institutions 
    must not abrogate that responsibility. If they continue to do so, 
    society will begin to unravel.  If that happens, they will not 
    have served their shareholders or themselves.
    
    Glenn
                                        

    	In the early days of factories (14th.C England) the  interests of
    the capitalist and his employees and most of the rest of the population
    were identical. The capitalist made a percentage off the work of each
    employee. If he made enough profit then he increased the size of his
    factory and employed the original employee's wife and kids too. He was
    now making his percentage off 4 times as many people, and the family
    had 4 times the income. Both were interested in getting rid of the
    restrictions of the feudal system, which forced the capitalist to
    always be a second class citizen, and very often denied the people the
    right to work in a factory. With the capitalist's profit depending
    directly on the number of people he employed, both had an interest in
    getting rid of *that* system.
    
    	The capitalists might have preferred to have an oligarchy, with
    themselves replacing the aristocracy, but they were prepared to settle
    for democracy because of the common interests.
    
    	Now, with *every* company in *every* industry downsizing it is
    clear that the capitalist's profit is no longer proportional to the
    number of people he employs. The interests of the bulk of the
    population (which are likely to be democratically expressed) are
    becoming incompatible with capitalism in its current form. The
    population of France is downsizing because of a low birth rate, but
    employment in general is downsizing much faster than the population.
    
    	Capitalists need consumers. However, the tendancy to competition in
    capitalists has meant in the past that the only times they have acted
    in concert was in a war over a consumer base in another country. An
    extreme example of this was the opium wars in China, but it has been
    strongly suggested that WWI was largely over which country should own
    the trade with Africa. They are incapable of acting together to ensure
    a consumer base in their own countries when competitive pressure
    indicates they should reduce staff rather than increase it.
    
    	More and more, because of automation, capitalism and democracy will
    have conflicting interests. I can think of many possible scenarios.
    
    1) Disenfranchise the unemployed. This permits the government to give
    them the minimum to avoid open revolution. The number of consumers is
    reduced so the capitalists have to lay off more workers...  This is the
    way the U.S. appears to be going (to this particular outsider).
    
    2) Democratic votes strongly limit the actions of capitalists in a
    particular country. This ensures that unemployment is limited and
    cushioned, but reduces the capitalists' profit. The profit reduction
    reduces the capability of the capitalists to compete with those in
    countries that don't have such a system, and hence requires protective
    trade restrictions or government subsidies. This could be the direction
    in which France is moving.
    
    
    	Personally, I am nervous about capitalism winning out against
    democracy, and I am nervous about democracy winning out against
    capitalism. What other scenarios do people have?

    

    From the Corporate Policy Memorandum, June 1984:


    Profit
    
    We are  a public corporation.  Stockholders invest in our corporation
    for profit.   Success  is measured by profit.  With success comes the
    opportunity  to  grow, the  ability  to  hire  good  people  and  the
    satisfaction that comes with meeting your goals.  We feel that profit
    is in no way inconsistent with social goals.


    Quality

    Growth  is not our primary goal.    Our  goal  is  to  be  a  quality
    organization and do a qyuwality job, which  means  that  we  will  be
    proud of our product and our work for  years  to come.  As we archive
    quality, growth comes as a result.
 
    
    


    "...Digital  believes  that  employees are its  greatest  asset,  and
    counts on them to help reach its  goals  by  using  positive business
    ethics, and contibuting as individuals and as members  of  a  team to
    Digital's success."

                                Ken Olsen ('Digital and you' - June 1986)




    Thomas_fired

    re.                <<< Note 2957.82 by KBOMFG::TZRENNER >>>

>    Growth  is not our primary goal.    Our  goal  is  to  be  a  quality
>    organization and do a qyuwality job, which  means  that  we  will  be
                           ^^^^^^^^^
    
    Love it.
    
    Piers

    Re .70
    
    >    There are many things I could, and may very well in the future,
    >    contribute to this string. At this point, without "passing judgement",
    >    let me simply say that many of the thoughts expressed definately DO
    >    represent socialism.
    
    You need to be careful. 'Socialism' means different things to different
    people. I believe that the UK's Conservative party would be considered
    socialist in the USA, though no UK socialist would vote for them.
    
    Re .71
    
    >The purpose of a business corporation, and an interesting side effect
    >of the process of life, is the CREATION of wealth.
    
    This is not true. The purpose of most companies is to increase the
    wealth of the people that own/control them. Often this will be done by
    creating wealth, but not always.
    
    Re .80
    Life was short in previous centuries, but it got even shorter when the
    industrial revolution started and capitalism became dominant. However
    the Christian basis of Western society meant that some of the wealth
    that was created was then spent on the unprofitable (in the short term)
    area of public health leading to an increased lifespan.
    
    >Both were interested in getting rid of the
    >    restrictions of the feudal system, which forced the capitalist to
    >    always be a second class citizen, and very often denied the people the
    >    right to work in a factory. With the capitalist's profit depending
    >    directly on the number of people he employed, both had an interest in
    >    getting rid of *that* system.
    >        The capitalists might have preferred to have an oligarchy, with
    >    themselves replacing the aristocracy, but they were prepared to settle
    >    for democracy because of the common interests.
    
    Where did this happen? Certainly not in the UK or the USA.
    
    >        Now, with *every* company in *every* industry downsizing it is
    
    This is not true. Some companies are growing, and recruiting more
    people, and I would be extremely surprised if there were not some
    growth industries.
    
    >        Personally, I am nervous about capitalism winning out against
    >    democracy, and I am nervous about democracy winning out against
    >    capitalism. What other scenarios do people have?
    
    Pure democracy, and pure capitalism have never existed on anything but a
    very small scale, nor have pure socialism, or pure communism. People
    are too complicated for them to do so. We will just have to muddle
    along with a mixture.
    
    Peter
    

>    Where did this happen? Certainly not in the UK or the USA.
    
    	I did mention 14th.C, that is, anything up to a couple of hundred
    years before Columbus. Freemen were permitted to travel and live where
    they liked, but the majority of the population (those who might have
    been interested in factory work) were serfs in England. Any landed
    lord (even with a small landholding) would look down on someone of the
    merchant class (even if he were much richer).
    
    	Remember that Magna Carta gave a right to be judged by a jury of
    your peers, and it meant literaly that. A landed lord could only be
    judged by a jury of other landed lords. A freeman was judged by other
    freemen. Serfs didn't count. It was very much a class system with no
    promotion possible.
    
    	As far as I know, nowhere in the U.S. has ever had a feudal system
    in the strict sense of the term, though some of the southern states
    might have given that impression to a casual observer during the early
    part of the 19th.C, that is, 500 years after the time I was talking
    about. The U.K. didn't exist at that time. It was just England, with a
    rather precarious hold on Wales.

    
    re: .81
    
    Well put. The most important phrase being "capitalists need
    consumers."  Laid off or underemployed people do not by
    $20,000 automobiles.  If the auto companies cannot sell 
    $20,000 automobiles, they will not buy as much software
    or high tech iron (note the clever reference to the computer
    industry here to justify the continuation of the discussion
    in Digital Notes :-)).  And round and round it goes.
    
    The people running a huge corporation would be well advised to
    keep that in mind.  
    
    During the depression here in the US, there were a number of
    movements gaining serious ground that were antithetical to the
    capitalists' goals (union movements, a flirtation with Socialism, 
    the passing of major -- and expensive -- social security and
    unemployment compensation systems, restrictive banking laws, etc.)
    These trends of the 1930s illustrate .81's point precisely --
    democracy won out against pure capitalism for a time).  The
    1980s, many argue, were a decade where capitalism won out over
    democracy.  
    
    The real point, though, is that democracy and capitalism need
    each other to exist (I know, not in theory, but certainly in 
    practice -- at least barring out and out slavery). Capitalism
    and democracy are symbiotic.
    
    If enough people are unemployed, or underemployed, the corporations
    and capitalists will eventually suffer as well. Suffer, of course,
    being a relative term.  The money making abilities of capitalists
    were constrained by the laws passed in the 1930s. The job-anxiety 
    of the American middle class today and the misery being
    felt in the inner cities is an incendiary mix -- and could easily
    result in even more constraints placed on capitalists in the
    future.
    
    A fine line needs to be trod here. What is the maximum amount of
    pain a population will put up with before it spasmodically
    reacts?  What will be the result of that spasm?  What
    will be the event that stimulates it?  And certainly, we must
    understand that when it starts in earnest, it will take on
    a life of its own -- there will be no way to control it, predict
    its duration or effects, or go back to the old ways.  
    
    The words, "Let them eat cake" spring to mind.
    
    Glenn                        

    re .85
    
    Sorry, I did not make myself clear. It was not the feudal system I was
    asking about. It was the changes you mentioned. The UK did not change
    direct from a feudal system to democracy, and certainly the
    'capitalists' you talk about had little to do with the end of the
    feudal system. Nor where they powerful enough to have any choice in the
    matter until at least the 18th century.
    
    The black death by causing a shortage of labour was probably the major
    reason for the end of feudal serfdom. 
    
>It was very much a class system with no promotion possible.
    Promotion was possible, as was demotion. 
    A lord could not keep serfs if another lord who was short of workers was
    willing to hire them as freemen. A unemployeed freeman might volunteer
    to become a serf to get a way to live.
    
    Peter
    

    re: .87
    
    	Many of the things you say are only partially true. This is not the
    place for a histroy discussion, so I will just give a single example.
    
>    A lord could not keep serfs if another lord who was short of workers was
>    willing to hire them as freemen. 
    
    	This was not true in law. The first lord could ask for them back if
    he could locate them, and sometimes the law was actually applied.

    As pointed out this and every company is in business to make money.
    If it was not for import/export taxes and trade limitations this
    and any other non-service company would have the majority of thier
    employees in third world countries.
    
    But taxes and trade barriers are imposed by governments because they
    feel that companies have a moral/economic responsibility to the
    countries they sell thier product in. Just look at pollution laws
    and ask yourself what would companies do to reduce polution if 
    they were not forced . The same is true of companies responsibility
    to thier employees.
    
    
    Brian V
    

    Re .88
    
    I tried mail, but got
    
    MAIL> send
    To:     PASTIS::MONAHAN
    %MAIL-E-LOGLINK, error creating network link to node PASTIS
    -SYSTEM-F-REMRSRC, insufficient system resources at remote node
    
    Peter

	Hi I am from DEC France and sorry to have not seen this topic
	sooner because the whole discussion about Packages is biaised:
.34 :    
>>	Well thank you Ted Koppel, but I do get it. It has been mentioned
>>	numerous times that the package being offered is the minimum
>>	allowable by national laws -- are you still ignoring that? 

>   No I'm not ignoring that. You seem to be ignoring that the strikers
>   were demanding more. That's where I have a big problem. Address that.


THIS IS ABSOLUTLY FALSE ... The stop Work organized by 4 unions and massively
done by the employees the day before the annoucement of the layoff plan
had NOTHING TO DO with packages : It was to protest about the layoffs 
themselves. 

The employees (many...) represented by their representatives just do not want
new layoffs. The representatives and unions REFUSE to discuss about packages
at the moment.
  	
	see note 2970.0


If some day packages are to be discussed,  it was already said
that you cannot compare France with USA :

-> it is probably as far as i know more difficult to find 
   a job in France now ... because since the legal packages are 
   better the companies hesitate to hire ...

-> It is probably cheaper for a company to find acceptable solutions
   in France because of Government financial incentives, helps ...

-> we pay more taxes and the packages revenue is taxable ...

By the way, somebody said that in France 90% of people should
be in sales : reading the new DC org it seems that we want
to be very present in the consulting area ... Are the salesmen
going to do this kind of job ???

/Homi


    

    re: -.1 personal name... 
    
    			"Life is a lethal VD"
    
    				 ?
    
         (sorry for the sidetrack, but I've just GOT to know. :^])
    
    						Tex

    re .last
    >Somebody said that 90% of France should be in sales...
    
    That was me.  Currently less than 10% are in sales; I was trying
    to get the point across that it should be closer to the inverse
    of that.  kb
                

    to .92 :
    
    	"Life is a lethal VD " VD  = veneral disease
    
    	personal translation of the french phrase :
    	" La vie est une Maladie Mortelle Sexuellement Transmissible"
    
    	Hope this helps ...
    
                

     .91�The employees (many...) represented by their representatives just do 
     .91 not want new layoffs
    
    So *who* does? When layoffs loom in most other places,they can't be
    affected,when the French are faced with layoffs they can whine about it
    to the government and if the government agrees with the whiners,the
    layoff has to be cancelled.
    
    Ken

    I object to the term "whine" in the previous note. Have you never heard
    of fighting/negotiating/trying for the best deal you can get? Or is
    _that_ against the American ethic?
    
    Martin, an English employee working in France who remembers that unions
    struggled  for better working conditions which were eventually passed
    as laws, and that Americans apparently didn't want to.

    
.96
>    So *who* does? When layoffs loom in most other places,they can't be
>    affected,when the French are faced with layoffs they can whine about it
>    to the government and if the government agrees with the whiners,the
>    layoff has to be cancelled.
                      ^^^^^^^^^
    
 	Again this is FALSE : the government cannot CANCEL
    				the Layoffs ...
    	See note 2970.14
    
    /Homi
    

    Through their exercise of the democratic process the people of France
    have arrived at a particular set of active legislation and a government
    of a particular political formation.
    
    Part of the active legislation concerns the unemployment benefit that
    people receive following redundancy - benefit which could be considered
    more generous than in, for example, the USA.  Associated with this
    benefit is a cost to the state.  But of course no state has its own
    money - cost to the state actually means a cost to the tax payers.  So
    when a redundancy programme is planned it has to be reviewed by the
    Labour Tribunal.  Part of the review will be to ensure that it is,
    amongst other things, properly justified and cannot be avoided or 
    mitigated.
    
    I think this is a perfectly reasonable sequence of events and don't see
    that it can be fairly described as the "government agreeing with
    whiners".
             

	RE:           <<< Note 2957.96 by CSC32::K_BOUCHARD >>>
                        -< no wonder my ancestor left! >-
	Ken, 

	Don't worry, one day you will be able to come back:

From VOGON news:
>    Russian ultra-nationalist Vladimir Zhirinovsky has attacked western
>    Europe after landing in France. "It's all over for you once you're
>    Americanised and Zionised," Mr Zhirinovsky said at the airport. He said

	or maybe you won't, because he continued:

>    Arabs would dominate Paris in 10 or 20 years while Turks would dominate
>    Germany :"Only Russia will remain a white country". His visa restricts

re: .97

"Whine" is getting to be an Americanism for the noise other people lower
down the economic ladder make when you're stepping on their faces in your
climb to nouveau yuppiehood.  It's always something somebody other than
the speaker does, of course.
								- paul

> "Whine" is getting to be an Americanism for the noise other people lower
    
    We've also got some Americanisms to tell someone off, but they're not
    allowed in this file.  The anti-American sentiment in this note is a
    little TOO heavy.  If you want to disagree with the noter's views,
    fine, but let's stop tacking nationality, race, religion, or sexual
    orientation to it (funny, sounds like that's out of P&P, doesn't it?).
    
    THIS American SUPPORTS the French action and thinks we need a tad more
    protection here, too.  There, that blows the nationalist "All
    Americans..." generalisation.  Try replacing "American" in the previous
    note with "Zion" or "Black" or "Woman" and see:
    
    1 - if suddenly it sounds politically incorrect and rascist (it does).
    
    2 - if suddently it gets set hidden (it will).
    
    						     Tex

>================================================================================
>Note 2957.103      Job Action (token strike) in Digital France        103 of 103
>AEOENG::LEHY "Bizarre, vous avez dit bizarre ?"      23 lines  20-APR-1994 03:51
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Christophe

Glad to hear you are alive and well. 

Ren�

    Word has it that Digital France will be hit by an all day strike
    tomorrow. What's the news?
    
    			Alfred

    
    
>    Word has it that Digital France will be hit by an all day strike
>    tomorrow. What's the news?
    

       Well the strike took place on tuesday 3 May.
      It was the first strike in Digital France. I don't know
      what happened all over the country but in the Paris area
      they were more than 600 employees  that participated.
      I think there are about 2000 employees in the Paris area.
    
      By a sunny day, at 10 in the morning there was a meeting at 
      the town hall of Evry (the french headquarters) where the 
      employee representatives explained why they considered the 5th 
      layoff plan in France inacceptable in the presence of many
      journalists.
      The mayor of Evry made a little speech in which he expressed
      his total support with the employees.
    
      Then, the employees walked towards the town of Lisses where
      in a site called Leonard de Vinci (LDV) works the french SLT.
      The mayor of Lisses joined the walk.
    
      In LDV, a meeting was held by the employees during the whole 
      afternoon. At the same time the employee representatives 
      (the french works council) were helding with the French SLT
      the second extraordinary meeting of the layoff plan in 
      concordance with the French legislation. Jean-Paul Nerriere
      (the French General Director) was in the US but was represented.
    
      The object of this 2nd meeting was the presentations of the
    conclusions about the layoff plan of the accounting consultancy 
    firm nominatted by the Works-council : Secafi-Alpha (!)
      
    It appeared that   
    	
    -> the number of layoffs became 367 instead of 446 but the
       there was no explanation for that.
    
    -> according to the experts, the situation of Digital France cannot be
       examined separatly from the corp and Europe. They found that the
       financial position of the corp was not so bad and that the layoff
       plans could be more a strategic intent to abandon some activities
       (like services) than justified by the short term losses.
    
        The employee-representatives constating that the informations 
    	legally required from the SLT were incomplete asks the SLT
    	to suspend the meeting to gather them.

	This was accepted by the SLT so the meeting continues
    	on May 18th. Consequently the layoff plan is also suspended
    	for 15 days from 27/6 to 11/7.