[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference 7.286::digital

Title:	The Digital way of working

Moderator:	QUARK::LIONELON

Created:	Fri Feb 14 1986
Last Modified:	Fri Jun 06 1997
Last Successful Update:	Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:	5321
Total number of notes:	139771

3289.0. "A little security might go a long way in today's Digital" by KHUFU::EVENSON (Don Evenson @MWO DTN 446-2470) Mon Aug 01 1994 17:42

    I have an idea that would help get everyone re-engaged for the somewhat
    monumental job we all have ahead of us for FY95. IMHO the next couple of
    quarters is our last shot at returning to profitability and continuing
    to be a major player in the computer industry. And we need every last
    remaining employee spending 150% of their energy on getting that job
    done. Not on worrying about how to get their next job.

    Rather than pay cuts (voluntary or otherwise) as mentioned elsewhere, I
    would suggest a one year "no cut" contract with each employee. This
    would be a simple agreement between the employee and Digital that says,
    "I won't quit, if you don't lay me off".

    Now this would assume you were doing well at your job (laggards, if
    there are any left, could still be fired) and you were willing to sign
    on for a year.

    In order to put some "teeth" into the agreement the employee would
    agree to give up their vacation pay if they reneged on the deal. And
    the company would agree to pay double TFSO if they HAD to downsize you
    during the year. At least we'd all be able to focus our undivided
    attention on moving Digital forward for the next 9 months, then I
    suppose we'd all start wondering about FY96.
    
    On the other hand with legal things being what they are in the US, I
    suppose it would take more than a year to work out the details....
    
    I would sign up for such a deal. Am I the only one?

T.R	Title	User	Personal Name	Date	Lines
3289.1	nope!	ICS::BEAN	Attila the Hun was a LIBERAL!	`Mon Aug 01 1994 23:38`	1

3289.2	0 + 0 = 0	STRATA::JOERILEY	Legalize Freedom	`Tue Aug 02 1994 02:51`	7
	>the company would agree to pay double TFSO if they HAD to downsize you Double what their paying now for a package don't amount to enough for a good party. Joe
3289.3		HOCUS::BOESCHEN		`Tue Aug 02 1994 06:34`	11
	My manager only 2 weeks ago told me I was totally "safe" for FY95. Then they canned 60% of the salesforce, without branch/unit mgr input. Package for 8 yrs: 4 weeks further employment, 6 weeks TFSO + vacation. What a ******* deal! But the payments go back to 100% salary. "I pity the fool" who stays!
3289.4		TOOK::DELBALSO	I (spade) my (dog face)	`Tue Aug 02 1994 10:32`	9
	re: .0 > And we need every last > remaining employee spending 150% of their energy on getting that job > done. Please keep in mind that this opinion is not shared by the SLT. Continuing plans to downsize indicate the opposite.
3289.5	Reality Check	SULACO::JUDICE	May fortune favor the foolish...	`Tue Aug 02 1994 13:01`	14
	Unfortunately, signing binding agreements to pay full salary to 10's of thousands of people would be viewed rather dimly by the investment community. In fact, it probably would border on negligence to a senior officer's fiduciary responsibility. Wall Street likes to see progressive, incremental improvement - not dare-devil plays with their money. I personally think DEC will pull through, though it won't be with dramatic steps like this. I think Palmer's comment in the DVN "...the only person who can insure your job are your customers..." is a more realistic model for us. /ljj
3289.6	Reality check of my own!	MPGS::CWHITE	Parrot_Trooper	`Tue Aug 02 1994 13:28`	13
	so tell me -1, what number do we give to the customer's working on deals with Salespeople that just got whacked to complete their deal? P.S. do think that a customer would want to call again if the company he selected to do business with yanked the person taking the order? The problem I see here is that EVERYONE in a management role (at least the ones I've dealt with in the not to distant past) think that WE ARE STUPID AND CAN'T SEE WHAT GAMES ARE BEING PLAYED! Parrot_trooper
3289.7	Used problems for sale here...	SWAM2::GOLDMAN_MA	Blondes have more Brains!	`Tue Aug 02 1994 13:35`	10
	re: -1: Not to downplay the issue you present, because it is certainly valid, but don't you think, really, that our customers are used to this by now? Even before we had these massive TFSO's and the fast-running waters of attrition, many of our sales reps swapped accounts and territories often enough to keep our customers on their toes. This is not something new for our customers, it is simply happening all too often now. M.
3289.8	Customers are basically fine...	POBOX::CORSON	Higher, and a bit more to the right	`Tue Aug 02 1994 16:42`	18
	Actually our customers don't really care about our internal "problems". Most of them have, or are, downsizing themselves. If they like VMS, they continue to purchase; if they are UNIX-oriented, they find OSF/1 "interesting" and "getting more robust"; if they are PC- centric, they like our quality and the "prices aren't bad". Fact is we can probably survive quite nicely with 50,000 employees. The hardest part is our acknowledgement (or lack of it) that we are a mid-range computer company; and the mid-range is good for about 40-50,000 systems a year cash sales. Problem is the prices keep getting lower, and even if margins remain the same, you have less dollars to spend. It's a tough world out here, folks - so what's new? Many manufacturing industries suffered through the 80s. Now its our turn. Remember the Boy Scouts motto - BE PREPARED. the Greyhawk
3289.9		DREUL1::rob	Rob Marshall - Customer Service Dresden	`Wed Aug 03 1994 08:48`	14
	Re .5, > I think Palmer's comment in the DVN "...the only person who can insure your > job are your customers..." is a more realistic model for us. WOW! now it all makes sense. Our new focus is supposed to be on the customer, that's it. We focus on getting the customer really mad at Digital, why didn't I realize that that was what Bob Palmer has been saying all along. If Bob can't guarantee anyone a job, and he does his best to chase away the only ones, ie the customers, that could, then we're all out of a job. Then Bob can go into realty and make big bucks selling off Digital property. Boy, what a relief. For a minute there I thought Bob had no plan at all. :-) Rob
3289.10	I've seen some people read it this way ;-)	CARAFE::GOLDSTEIN	Global Village Idiot	`Wed Aug 03 1994 12:43`	8
	re:.9 > I think Palmer's comment in the DVN "...the only person who can insure your > job are your customers..." is a more realistic model for us. No, you misunderstood him. He meant, "You're supposed to leave Digital and get a job working for the company that used to be your customer."