T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
3322.1 | | GUCCI::RWARRENFELTZ | Follow the Money! | Fri Aug 12 1994 07:31 | 5 |
| sounds like an idea that should have come alot sooner...i know IBM and
Motorola offered similar 'voluntary' plans, ultimately reducing the #
of TFSO's.
what's the possibility that the US could get such a plan?
|
3322.2 | East coast power does it right | NEWVAX::MZARUDZKI | I AXPed it, and it is thinking... | Fri Aug 12 1994 08:12 | 16 |
|
good luck UK.
I don't think we will see this in the US of A anytime soon. Like can
you say NEVER. Given such a plan in the US of A would make more than
enough numbers out the door. IMHO.
You all locally on the East Coast seen what is happening with Virginia
Power and the early retirement program they were conducting? Well it
has been VERY successful. Happy employees and a very, very happy
company. Win, win for everyone.
A right-sizing plan conducted very well.
-Too bad for us.
-Mike Z.
|
3322.3 | | BALZAC::STURT | Totally wired | Fri Aug 12 1994 09:36 | 4 |
| Simple common sense. This is clearly the way to go. This initiative
should be made worldwide.
Edward.
|
3322.4 | It's not blanket coverage ... | BRIEIS::BARKER_E | test dummy | Fri Aug 12 1994 09:42 | 4 |
| Note the power of veto comment, both group-wide and on an individual
basis.
Euan
|
3322.5 | | TOOK::DELBALSO | I (spade) my (dog face) | Fri Aug 12 1994 10:29 | 6 |
| re: .1, Ron
The option will likely be offered in the US once the package isn't as
"attractive" as it currently is.
:^)
|
3322.6 | | PNTAGN::WARRENFELTZR | | Fri Aug 12 1994 10:35 | 1 |
| thanks for the insight Jack. Not too promising, I must say.
|
3322.7 | | BIGQ::GARDNER | justme....jacqui | Fri Aug 12 1994 10:46 | 8 |
|
Did I read this right that any outstanding accrued vacation time is
not reimbursed?
justme....jacqui
|
3322.8 | why *not* in the U.S.?? | AZTECH::RANCE | | Fri Aug 12 1994 10:57 | 17 |
|
right, it specifically said that since this is employee initiated,
no payments are to be made for accrued vacation. why it being
employee initiated matters in terms of whether one is paid for accrued
vacation is a mystery to me but it is a good deal, anyhow. just
apply for the package and use all vacation in the meantime.
also, i wonder why this would not bee offered in the U.S. it would
help morale and by virtue of the management veto clause, skills and/or
personnel deemed critical can be refused the package. this seems like
a simply win-win as someone else pointed out. it would also enable the
company to get the 'right-sizing' done very expeditiously, i would
think.
mark
|
3322.9 | | ROWLET::AINSLEY | Less than 150 kts. is TOO slow! | Fri Aug 12 1994 11:08 | 6 |
| re: .8
I won't be introduced in the U.S. because it is possibly a better package than
the current U.S. TFSO package.
Bob
|
3322.10 | | MNATUR::LISTON | CSP-PSC/E - When you need to deliver the very best! | Fri Aug 12 1994 11:19 | 9 |
|
RE: .9
>I won't be introduced in the U.S. because it is possibly a better package than
>the current U.S. TFSO package.
"Possibly"? One months salary (4+ weeks) for each year of service in the
UK vs. the 4/6/8 week payout totals here in the U.S.? I
don't think that's the correct adjective.
|
3322.11 | It depends... | ROWLET::AINSLEY | Less than 150 kts. is TOO slow! | Fri Aug 12 1994 11:23 | 7 |
| re: .10
In the U.K. they don't have to worry about a little thing called health
insurance like we do. If one is healthy it's better. If one has a health
problem, the current U.S. package could very well be better.
Bob
|
3322.12 | | NOTIME::SACKS | Gerald Sacks ZKO2-3/N30 DTN:381-2085 | Fri Aug 12 1994 11:37 | 3 |
| Yeah but... applying the UK package to the U.S., I'd get 6 months' pay.
I'd guess that the difference between 6 months' pay and 10 weeks' pay is
considerably more than 10 weeks' COBRA coverage.
|
3322.13 | Legal minimums | USCTR1::SCHILTON | MRO3-1/E9, DTN 297-7558 | Fri Aug 12 1994 11:44 | 5 |
|
There are higher legal minimums for severance/separation/whatever
the_correct_terminology_is packages in the UK than in the US. The
financial packages are even bigger in Europe for the same reason -
government mandate.
|
3322.14 | | WELSWS::HEDLEY | Lager Lout | Fri Aug 12 1994 11:52 | 4 |
| Anyway, the pay in the UK is crap so that package probably isn't as
much as you might expect.
Chris.
|
3322.15 | Salary being low here is an understatement! | SUBURB::POWELLM | Nostalgia isn't what it used to be! | Fri Aug 12 1994 12:03 | 4 |
|
Yer right on there Chris, People to whom I disclose my salary don't
believe me!
Malcolm.
|
3322.16 | | NPSS::BRANAM | Steve, Network Product Support | Fri Aug 12 1994 12:38 | 2 |
| Plus we in the US are not burdened with the Value-Added-Tax.
Ought to be called Value Depleted Tax.
|
3322.17 | .0 UK - Voluntary Redundancy Redundancy | MARVA1::POWELL | Arranging bits for a living... | Fri Aug 12 1994 13:24 | 1 |
|
|
3322.18 | | NOVA::FISHER | Tay-unned, rey-usted, rey-ady | Mon Aug 15 1994 13:29 | 2 |
| how appropriate that the base note on redundancy contains 2 almost
identical copies of the policy :-)
|
3322.19 | Why volunteer for a reduced package? | FUTURS::JENKINS | Norfolk enchance | Mon Aug 15 1994 14:09 | 9 |
|
It's worth pointing out that the current contractual UK package is
3 months + notice + hols + 1 month per year of service.
Much as it may not seem so in the US, this is an attempt to get
rid of people on the cheap.
Richard.
|
3322.20 | They're kidding , right? | ELMAGO::PUSSERY | | Mon Aug 15 1994 14:52 | 10 |
|
Exactly correct on both counts Richard. It is an attempt
at "cheap". But compared to my package consisting of 11 WEEKS
pay for seven years "continuous" service (forget the five before)
I'd volunteer for your deal faster than a speeding bullet.
Pablo
|
3322.21 | Accrued vacation time? | TOOK::MORRISON | Bob M. LKG1-3/A11 226-7570 | Mon Aug 15 1994 20:20 | 7 |
| Can someone in the U.K. explain why the voluntary package doesn't include
pay for accrued vacation time? For most people there would not be enough time
between being approved for the package and the last day (Sept. 30) to use up
all the accrued time. And one would not want to use up too much time before
being approved, in case he/she is NOT approved and stays on for a while.
Do people in the U.K. who resign in the usual way get paid for accrued vaca-
tion time?
|
3322.22 | By end September I'll have 2 days outstanding! | PEKING::RICKETTSK | Michael's dad - 21-Apr-94 | Tue Aug 16 1994 04:47 | 24 |
| > Can someone in the U.K. explain why the voluntary package doesn't include
>pay for accrued vacation time? For most people there would not be enough time
>between being approved for the package and the last day (Sept. 30) to use up
>all the accrued time. And one would not want to use up too much time before
>being approved, in case he/she is NOT approved and stays on for a while.
I would think few people have a full 26 days ( I think that is the
normal annual maximum here) of accrued holiday left by the end of
September. I don't know why it doesn't include it as a separate item;
presumably to reduce the cost, by lumping it all in with the final payoff.
The whole scheme will, I think, mainly act as an incentive to go for
those who were thinking of jumping ship anyway, but were just hanging
on in the hope of getting a decent package. If I was already considering
leaving, and had something else lined up, or at least in the pipeline,
outside DEC I would take it if I could (we're not eligible anyway, a
colleague has already asked). As I haven't, I won't; but perhaps I
should brush up my resume.
> Do people in the U.K. who resign in the usual way get paid for accrued vaca-
>tion time?
Normally, yes.
Ken
|
3322.23 | | WELSWS::HILLN | It's OK, it'll be dark by nightfall | Tue Aug 16 1994 04:52 | 23 |
| .20 "I'd volunteer for your deal faster than a speeding bullet."
Ah, but consider this...
For the last four years the _compulsory_ package has been 3 months
notice, plus 3 months, plus vacation, plus 1 month per year. A package
which I would grant is in the 'fair to good' range of schemes in use by
companies in the UK.
Now they come along with a package for volunteers which falls back to 1
month per year. With the added 'benefit' that if you go voluntarily
there is no state unemployment benefit to collect. In addition there's
no guarantee that a particular person will be accepted as a volunteer -
management have retained a veto over volunteers.
The only people to whom this might appeal are those who are considering
going without a package.
.21
If you resign, without the package, you get paid for unused vacation.
I believe that it's to a maximum of one year's accrual plus 5 days
carried over from the previous year.
|
3322.24 | Rock and Roll | JOBURG::SADLER | | Tue Aug 16 1994 05:11 | 15 |
| Actually, in the earlier rounds, they gave out an extra 3 months
'incentive to volunteer' for 'compulsory' redundancy. And being
'compulsory' we were entitled to Dole handouts quicker than if we'd
volunteered(?).
That's in addition to details in .23 - AND it was all tax free - so for
2.5 years service I got over a years' worth of pay....a damn good deal
by anyone's standards, but as Robert the Zimmerframe reminds us,
'the times they are'a changing.'
NEXT WEEK:
Redundancy on a nine-bob note and how to avoid having to hand in your
shirt as you leave!!
(-8-)
|
3322.25 | Not ALL Tax free! | SUBURB::POWELLM | Nostalgia isn't what it used to be! | Tue Aug 16 1994 08:48 | 8 |
| Re.24
>>> AND it was all tax free
Beg to differ! Only the first �30,000.00 is/was Tax free.
Everything over that is/was taxed at your highest Tax rate for the
Tax year in which you received the money.
Malcolm.
|
3322.26 | May be tax free... | WELSWS::HILLN | It's OK, it'll be dark by nightfall | Tue Aug 16 1994 10:20 | 7 |
| >Re.24
>>>> AND it was all tax free
> Beg to differ! Only the first 30,000 is/was Tax free.
True, unless you're over 50 and roll the balance into the pension fund,
when it is all tax free
|
3322.27 | I see no chips. | JOBURG::SADLER | | Tue Aug 16 1994 10:30 | 9 |
| Scusi, but as a lowly humble gravel scratcher I was never in any
smelling distance of 30 grand, (jeez what a dream?!!!)
Me I was happy with my humble 15 grand, after only 2.5 years...
Good point though, lots of folk especially the more senior ones,
probably came out with enough to go into business, say, sub-contracting
to, say, Digital, doing exactly what they did before, but for more
cash. Costs ++++++ Headcount ------.
|
3322.28 | Thanks anyway. ;-) | SUBURB::POWELLM | Nostalgia isn't what it used to be! | Tue Aug 16 1994 12:47 | 5 |
| Re.26
You are absolutely correct, but I was quoting the general case.
Malcolm.
|
3322.29 | I've only dreamed of sums like that! | SUBURB::POWELLM | Nostalgia isn't what it used to be! | Tue Aug 16 1994 12:53 | 7 |
| Re.27
I can only say that I know the feeling with my "similar," but I
know of senior Sales people who were made redundant in the earlier
packages (NON-voluntary) who walked out with closer to �100,000.00!
Malcolm.
|
3322.30 | Better to burn out than fade the lights? | JOBURG::SADLER | | Wed Aug 17 1994 04:31 | 22 |
| TO quote Life of Brian, "lucky, luck b......s"
No, really, my petty sum paid off the credit cards, paid our passages,
paid for our belongings to be shipped, and basically helped us trade a
cold and dismal country led by an exceedingly GREY spitting image, for
a (ooops it's winter here) GENERALLY sunny, warm country with the
beach, the mountains, the forests, and hey a LIFESTYLE, led by a cool
guy who dances, publicly, wears groovy shirts and is altogether more
awake....
So, for 100K we could have retired out here!! but what did those people
do with their money? Did they change their lives??? Probably banked it
against unemployment and the rising cost of keeping Fascists in power
oooops I mean the rising cost of heating.
Oh well, enough of this, good luck to those who have taken it and done
something with it, and very very good luck to those yet to enjoy(?)
Life, it's the only chance you'll get
So smile anyway (-8-)
|
3322.31 | Do Nothing, the company does! | WOTVAX::STUS::Stuart_Hatto | Look at the World we've created | Wed Aug 17 1994 09:24 | 14 |
|
The 'normal' package in use in the UK of 3 months + 1 month
per year plus holidays, still remains in force for those who
are made compulsorily redundant (legally it has to). Therefore
if you sit tight, don't volunteer, its a 25% chance you will get
made redundant anyway. The company has to lose 25% of its total
workforce, so if no-one volunteers, 25% of us will go anyway on
a much better, legally bound package.
Don't be bonkers, do nothing. Unless of course yu have been with
the company a hundred years and your salary is so high you won't
miss 3 months money in your pay-off.
Stuart
|
3322.32 | | FILTON::ROBINSON_M | It's only a flesh wound! | Wed Aug 17 1994 10:03 | 3 |
| should be ...
salary is LOW you won't miss three months money.
|
3322.33 | | SUBURB::VEALES::VEALES | More Undercompensated | Wed Aug 17 1994 10:07 | 3 |
| Re .31
Where did the 25% (in the UK) figure come from?
|
3322.34 | | TRUCKS::WINWOOD | A Legend is Afoot | Wed Aug 17 1994 10:16 | 5 |
| Either take 20,000/90,000 (worldwide) or using the Powell
target figure of 250 less in UK DC = 250/1300. The 1300
is apparently the UKDC population but not confirmed.
CW
|