Conference 7.286::digital

If the reason for posting this is to demoralize people, you're sure to
succeed. I liked the comment someone made about "try firing the cannons
outward for better effect": this post is a good example of firing a
cannon at one's teammates in blind frustration.

I suppose we'll now get a long, whining string of reasons why rubbing
this news in our faces is good for all concerned.

    re: -1
    
    AMEN!!!!  Couldn't have said it better myself.  Like the frustrations
    we have already aren't enough...
    
    Toodles.....JP
    
    

    I don't believe that I need to de-moralize people any more than they
    already are. I was quite upset at the news myself, but understand
    THIS! Us 'professionals' can produce even under de-moralizing 
    atmospheres. I have a job to do, I know what that job is, and
    aside from ruffling a feather or two, I get the job done. I'm just
    sick and tired of all the hush/secretive/don't tell anyone
    anything cause they don't need to know attitude that is peppering
    this once GREAT company. It WREAKS of don't do as I do, do as I SAY,
    and until we change that, it'll never get better.
    
    
    Are what your telling us in -1 that we shouldn't share in this
    information?  If it's untrue, then get the proof and put this
    article to rest!
    
    chet

    So what was in .0?

    I needed a good laugh today.  Just goes to show you the more things
    change the more they stay the same.

    
    
    re .1,.2
    
    Sounds like you'd rather play ostrich then to hear what the newpapers
    are reporting about your company. 
    Do you avoid watching the 6 o'clock news so you don't have to listen to
    the bad things that go on around you in the country?
    
    We don't need cheerleaders, we need to be informed. I appreciate
    knowing what the papers think of us, since popular opinion and the
    political happenings at the top do affect stock performance and,
    ultimatly, me and even you. 
    
    Sometimes you NEED to fire the canons inward and throw out the garbage
    once the dust has setteled.  
    The truth hurts, but I'd rather KNOW the truth then to walk around
    with a stupid grin on my face all the time while the place crumbles
    around me. 

    I'll take your advise in .1 and .2 and I deleted the note.
    
    But remember one thing. If you want to be a mushroom all your life
    and just watch as things pass by, then so be it.But it's this
    phenomenon that allows the problems to build to the point that
    everyone starts to suffer.  We in Digital won't ever turn
    the ship around until we fix the INSIDE first....... 
    
    I think of this stuff in the same way as 'taxation without
    representation'......you know the phenomenon that caused 
    the tea-party.   
    
    All I can say is that I'd personally feel a lot better if I was
    able to throw Gresham and Ed into the Boston 'haba'.........
    
    They did nothing for Digital except remove funds.  IMHO of course.
    
    

    I agree with .3!  I am sick and tired of being lied to.  Didn't Palmer
    say -from Stockholm- that he didn't get a raise....OK so he didn't get
    actually green stuff but he did get stock options.  Last week at a
    meeting we were told that salaries would be "looked" at for MCS. 
    Bottom line of the conversation was that there was the possibility that
    engrs would have to take a pay cut...Wouldn't it be a real boost to
    morale if the VP's all took a 10% pay cut...oh let's make that 20%!  
    
    And again in agreement with .3....I am a professional - that is the
    only reason my job is getting done.  I come from the generation where I
    work well as a matter of pride in myself and what I do!  
    
    I read that article the other day and laughed.  It only reinforced my
    belief that we are "shooting" ourselves in the foot.

    
    
    ...base note deleted. getting pretty bad around here.
    
       as the saying goes. "ignorance is bliss", I suppose.
    
    sad.real sad.
    
    

    
        Re .0:
    
           Oh, I guess the wage freeze is over... 
    
           If there is a wage freeze that is "corporate wide", how can
           someone get one.  (I'm sure there a loop holes and some are
           getting them).  But, I thought that they were circumventing
           the wage freeze dilema by handing out some other stuff like
           bonuses???  
    
           So, is an executive immune to this "corporate wide wage freeze"
           or does he have a seperate contract??
    
    	   Mike
    

    Sooooo - Okay -- I give -- What is the gist of the newspaper article? 
    I presume it was a news report of some sort -- We don't need to see the
    whole thing, just the facts, Jack!
    
    Dennis

    Due to popular demand, I will include the note again.
    
    after mails and phonecalls from concerned people that WANT to know
    what's foing on, I decided that I should put the note in again.
    
    Now folks, DONT get upset over this note..........I got enouogh
    problems already with other notes I've included in the past.
    
    But like they say, chet ruffles all the feathers he can,
    but gets the job done!
    

from the boston globe. yesterday.:


Payoffs at a DOWNSIZED DEC

	Re-structuring is painfull, what with layoffs and plant closings, b
but it can be lucrative work.  Take Digital Equipment, whose 2.1 BILLION
loss for the fiscal year ended July 2, is it's second worst ever. Total pay
for it's five top executives rose by 70% in that year.

A just released proxy says expanded duties for Vice-President Enrico Pesatori
earned him an 18% raise in the new year, and Charles Christ got one of 35% to
lead a new unit. Robert Palmer got no cash raise, but directors awarded him with stock options. Since wall street optimism on DEC is boosting it's stock lately,
Palmer has a paper profit that exceed his 900,000 salary.

Execs shed in the re-structuring didn't do shabbily. Earlier this year Edward
Lucente walked away with a 630,000 settlement, and consulting cheif Gresham
Brebach Jr., 500,000.  Outside director and compensation chairman
Thomas Phillips declined comment.

    

    The exact same article was in this week's Business Week, thought I
    wasn't going to bother to type it in since I am rather busy these days
    and I didn't think it would help.  Keep on keeping on, folks!
    
    /Charlotte

    If a person takes on expanded responsibilities, perhaps taking over the
    work of someone who used to get additional money, why *shouldn't* that
    person get more pay commensurate with the new job?  Makes sense to me.
    
    On the other hand, if some does the *same* thing but get a bunch more
    money for it in this business environment, that's cause for further
    examination (but not proof of malfeasance or duplicity all by itself).
    
    That report, saying only what it says, proves nothing -- but is typical
    of contemporary journalism.  We ought to all be mature enough by now to
    at least give it 30 seconds of enlightened critical analysis before
    freaking out in front of the whole world.
    
    -Mark

    Well, I hadn't even cooled my heels about the "San Diego Boondoggle"
    and then this news hits.  My husband and I were scheduled for
    raises in June (ha!).  We both consistently work 50-60 hour weeks, with
    him often having to do work on customer sites on Saturdays or Sundays
    so as to not affect production. We both bring work home,at the
    sacrifice of quality time with our 7 year old because we have to. 
    We simply do not have enough warm bodies left to do the work.  We've
    been with the company 12+ years, and we both would really
    like to see the company "turn the corner", both as employees and
    stockholders.  This kind of news really is demoralizing.
    
    What can we do to make our opinions known to the board, without
    being marked as troublemakers?
    
    Elizabeth   

    re:  .14
    
    You have a good point, additional responsibilities and increased work load
    should be rewarded......as long as they apply this formula across
    the board - from the top on down.  Haven't most of us taken on
    significantly more work over the last two years due to all of the
    cuts?  
    
    Elizabeth

    -1 what about when they lay off so many people that you're doing
    double/triple plus the work....I think that counts as taking on "more
    repsonsiblity." 
    
    Its also a bit frustrating as we are saying goodbye to good folks,
    skipping raises and doing more work all in the hopes of seeing better
    days, while the top guns don't seem to be suffering along with the
    rest of us.
    
    I'm really not surprised about the article.  Palmer put the writing on
    the wall himself after his raise from his first quarter.   Thanks for
    putting it back in here....you guys had me REALLY scared!!!! :):)
    
    RS 

    Sorry Elizabeth, my reply was for the response before yours!!
    
    I hope it turns around too!!!
    
    RS

    
    	I go with the tempest in a teapot note. To get worked over several
    senior LTs collecting more money to give to Bill Clinton's IRS machine
    is a bit ridiculous. That Lucente and Brebach "cashed" out is even more
    asinine; they had legitimate employment contracts that were terminated
    and they were paid accordingly. That is standard executive business
    practice world-wide.
    	I've said it before, and I'll say it again - this is the 90's. You
    want more money, better hours, more hugs and kisses, the only person
    stopping you is you. It ain't Digital's problem, it's YOURS. Now get a
    life and get back to making this place profitable agin.
    
    		the Greyhawk

     -< Is it a time of month, or what? >-
    
    gee greyhawk, I thought you were a little more enlightened than that
    
    
    

    re:.20
    
    Amen-Amen-Amen--
    
    rick

     Worldwide News                                              LIVE WIRE
      Text of Bob Palmer's Q1 'Employee Forum' ...       Date: 21-Sep-1994
    
    ...   When I talk about management and employees, I want to be very
    clear about one thing.  We are all employees.  We are all on the same
    team here.  I am an employee as is everyone else.  And I am as
    accountable as everyone else, if not more so.  Which is appropriate.
    
     						... I imposed a salary
    freeze on all employees worldwide with the exception of a few countries
    that have excessively high inflation.  That was my decision personally,
    so you can't blame it on anybody else.  I'm totally responsible. And,
    again, the reason was because I think it's so important to our
    customers that we become profitable as soon as possible.
        Now, I would like to lift that salary freeze as soon as I can.
    And what I would like to do is, if I can see that we're going to
    achieve our objective of being profitable from operations in Q2, as
    soon as I can be comfortable that we can do that, I'm going to lift
    that salary freeze.  It's quite possible that we'll begin to do some
    salary planning in the second quarter for implementation in the third
    quarter.  That would be my reasonable expectation.  If we do better
    than we're currently doing, we might be able to do that even sooner.
    So you can be quite sure that what I would like to do is lift that
    salary freeze, but I cannot afford to do that until I see that we can
    return to profitability ...

...and all I did was cut 'n' paste...

>I'm just
>sick and tired of all the hush/secretive/don't tell anyone
>anything cause they don't need to know attitude that is peppering
>this once GREAT company. It WREAKS of don't do as I do, do as I SAY,
>and until we change that, it'll never get better.

<<Amen-Amen-Amen--

   Storm in a glass of water. The only reason some care about this is because
   they think they are being screwed themselves. Almost like reading National
   Enquirer. Yeah .. lets cut their salaries too .. and see the last ounces
   of senior management walk away .. 

   Seriously, guys. A lot of decisions about raises and benefits for our
   senior managers are done in good faith. Sometimes it doesn't work out.
   Do you think BP would like to brag in front of demoralized troops about
   any new benefits he's gotten on the condition that he'll hang around
   a bit longer? He probably tries very hard to keep it as quiet as you
   did when you got a raise or bonus when others didn't. I doubt BP has
   to work for a living. He supposedly has enough money to stay on the
   green for the rest of his life. But that does not mean we can count on
   him doing community service at Digital.

   Given the payroll of this company it is not exactly big bucks that are
   set aside, despite the freeze, to keep important people around. And
   BP got $900K richer, on paper. And that was as a result of WS's
   appreciation of the good work we're doing, not by taking $900K out
   of your pocket. And, from the looks of it, the other guys got something
   in the order of one year's severance. At that level, unless you're
   lucky, it can take you a year to find a new job. So I'm not surprised
   they had it wired into their contracts.

   >Per

    re: .25
    
>>   Storm in a glass of water. The only reason some care about this is because
>>   they think they are being screwed themselves. Almost like reading National
>>   Enquirer. Yeah .. lets cut their salaries too .. and see the last ounces
>>   of senior management walk away .. 
    
    I don't think I'm 'being screwed'; I _do_ respect the actions of folk 
    like the Japanese VP who cut his own salary for its symbolic value.
    
    I don't envy (well not a lot) the severance packages they get; the
    terms of severance were called out in their employment contract, just
    like there are more restrictive constraints placed upon them than us.
    (see the SEC 10-K for Pesatori's employment contract/agreement) Also
    note that in some countries, severance/redundancy terms _are_ a part 
    of everyones employee agreement/contract.
    
    I don't mind bonus/incentive plans; they make a lot of sense in todays
    business climate compared to permanent salary actions.
    
    What does bother me are:
    
    1) the apparent disconnect between words (in .23) and actions; 
    	Pesatori and Christ are employees that received salary increases
    2) name someone who _isn't_ carrying a heavier load/more responsibilities
    	nowadays; I haven't seen the proxy letter referenced, but it sure
    	sounds like that was the justification for their salary increases.
    3) 'pay for performance' and 'accountability' and 'meritocracy' (see the
    	text of the DVN); has their performance in the little time they have 
    	had their expanded/new roles been so good as to warrant an increase?
    
    Dave

>   Do you think BP would like to brag in front of demoralized troops about
>   any new benefits he's gotten on the condition that he'll hang around
>   a bit longer? He probably tries very hard to keep it as quiet as you
>   did when you got a raise or bonus when others didn't.

Actually didn't he put together a {IMO} lame presentation about how underpaid
he was to justify his raise in the summer of `93? The one where he selected 
a number of computer company CEO and salaries in charts and such. The one 
where he neglected to refer to SUN computer's management taking a [was it
10%] pay cut until they returned to profitability?

At his talk in LKG recently I heard him do [what I perceived as] whining 
about how the entire executive staff was underpaid and how they didn't get
the bonus' they expected.

A small percentage change in productivity can make a big difference in 
the company's profit picture. Morale was recognized by Palmer as a problem
that affected productivity and hurt the profit picture. Perhaps some leadership
by example would have a positive effect on morale and make a change in the
overall productivity with a resulting improvement in profit? Perhaps a small
investment in morale now can yield a big personal return for Palmer when the
company returns to consistent profitability. It worked for Iacocca.

I would like to see this company return to profit and I work hard toward that 
goal too! I'd feel better and more emotionally invested in my work if:

	1) The executive staff made a gesture [10% of base salary] showing
	   an emotional and personal investment in the company's future.
	2) Palmer would please please explain this plan he keeps refering to
	   for Digital that is supposedly well on it's way to implementation
	   and never described. Mushroom management is *bad* for morale.

Sorry, it just hit a nerve!

	Thanks,
		-Stephanie

    Without justifying the lack  of  solidarism  of  these top executives
    with the rest of the "frozen"  employees,  I remember hearing/reading
    before that they had set performance goals  and  bonuses  attached to
    them.
    
    Well, we are telling everybody with big ads  about our performance in
    the  PC  and storage space, (there is a note  on  this  ad  elsewhere
    here),  so  the  company  had  made  that commitment to Pesatori  and
    Christ.

    Regardless of our personal feelings, this is what is being printed
    about us in the national press. From a stockholder's standpoint this
    looks BAD ! I would think it would be imperative to address the issues
    raised by this article by some kind of a press release. 
    
    On the issue of whether the article should have been posted here, of
    course not. After all Comrades, we should not be reading subversive
    anti-Digital propagana such as Business Week. :^)

    All the more reason to look outside - I'm tired of 'do as I say do, not
    as I do do....'

    re: .20 and wanting more $, "hug and kisses" etc.....
    
    I think your note is very rude Greyhawk.  I have stayed at Digital
    for a variety of reasons.  If it was just money I was concerned with
    I would have left a *long* time ago.  I happen to think that if Palmer
    is serious about Digital's return to profitability he ought to put
    some action behind the words.  If all of us grunts should have our
    long awaited compensation held off, at the same time we are all
    taking on more work and responsibility, then the same should hold
    true for the SLT.  I don't care if we are talking stock options,
    wage increases, country club memberships....whatever.  
    
    I don't just look at this situation as an employee, I am a stockholder
    too.  As a stockholder I would personally love to hear what objectives
    were met by Palmer to justify his raise.  Just laying off people
    shouldn't be rewarded, improving the revenue stream should. 
    
    Elizabeth
             

    One of the rules of leadership is actions speak (far) louder
    than words. If it is true that these men are accepting raises
    running to 20% or more on top of salaries that can only be
    described as extremely genererous while at the same time preaching
    pay freezes to people who may be earning 10 times less then these
    actions speak very loudly indeed.
    
    These men may be great managers but if .0 (at least when it was
    there) is even half way true then they clearly are not interested
    in being great leaders.
    
    Not by a long shot.
    
    And contrary to what some people may think about the 90's etc the
    concepts of great leadership haven't changed and apply as much now
    as any other period in history.
    
    This has shades of Animal Farm "All animals are equal but some or
    more equal than others." I just hope that those of us who apparently
    feel that they are more equal than others are fully aware of the
    damage they are doing and have done.
    
    The fact that this thread demoralizes you (and me) is not the fault
    of the base noter (who got hit by a classic case of shoot the
    messagerism) it is the fault of the people who carried out these
    actions of accepting raises while at the same time knowing and
    promoting pay freezes for the lesser fortunate.
    
    Either they did not know the effect of their actions or they did
    know. In either case, a severe shortcoming at best.
    
    I hope that somebody posts them this entire string. Again, I really
    hope this isn't true but if it is I can only say that I feel real
    disappointment. I not only expected better but I truly believe that
    I deserved better and I believe that applies for each and every
    individual who is apparently less equal than some others.
    
    re roelof
    

    re .14
    All promotions in Digital are done with no immediate increase in
    salary-this is a time honoured tradition and is probably even in FMDs
    somewhere.So IMHO,there is absolutely no excuse for the raises.
    And we wonder why RENEW 94 gave such crappy results?

Believe it of not, some information you can not only live without, but
can live better without. Polemic and junk mail fall into this category.
Information which distracts by getting people angry, when nothing can
be done about it, is exactly what the basenote contained. Not to
mention that it was already posted in at least two other places in this
very notesfile. The base note was not informative; it was purely inflammatory.

At least this explains why even though the population has been cut dramatically 
the costs and expenses comparing FY94 to FY93 are minimally lower. I think the 
word "we" means "us" and not "them". This reminds me of a joke that circulated 
when I was a kid:

The Lone Ranger and his indian companion Tonto are surrounded by a couple 
of hundred apaches. The Lone Ranger says to Tonto:
"Well my loyal and faithful buddy it looks like we ain't gonna get outa this 
one".
Tonto turns to him and answers:
"What do you mean WE pale-face". 

Mitchell

    
    Re .24:
    
    I disagree.
    
    Completely.
    
    Less information does not, has never, and will never make a problem
    easier to fix. And a "Do as I say, not as I do" mentality is senior
    management is indeed a problem.
    

    If senior managers/VP's have taken on additional responsibilities in
    order to justify their raises, where does their additional time come
    from?
    
    Were they working part-time before?
    
    Are they now spending less time on what they were doing before in order
    to make more time for the additional responsibilities?
    
    Have the old responsibilities been handed over to "managers" now that
    the problems have been solved and the processes defined?
    
    Are the new responsibilities graded higher in the "Book of Business
    Estimation and Valuation"?
    
    Where is this book?
    
    Is it available to the general public?
    
    Some years back, I and most of my collegues were "sent" on a series of
    courses called "AnalyticalTrouble-shooting" and "Problem solving and
    Decision Making".
    
    	The objective was to make us all aware of the implications of our
    decisions and activities, and to make us more cost concious in our
    handling of DIGITAL's business.
    
    	I personally found the courses very enlightening and helpful, and
    have been able to apply the principles to my own personal circumstances
    more than a few times with bebeficial results.
    
    	What I did find however, was that attempts to provide feedback
    based on my newly aquired skills was met with either no reaction, or at
    worst, a "don't be obstructive" response.
    
    	Objective decision making has been conspicuous by it's absence
    IMHO.
    
    	If the cause for this note (The press/news article) is true.......
    then I as a (minor) stockholder will want to have a detailed
    justification at the next AGM. 
    
    				Dave Clark

Re .36, then we agree: there's no such thing as too much information.

But there can be too much noise. Let it be clearly stated: the Globe
article contained precious little information, and a lot of noise. This
is their habit, as it sells newspapers. The reposting in this
conference added to the noise, not to the information, which was
already available here. In fact, for those who wish to be truly
informed, the information was publicly available within a matter of
weeks after Lucente left.

    
    
    
    Surely, the top exectutives who 'allegedly' received their additional
    benefits actully qualified for these after agreeing aand signing their
    goal sheets, and then meeting their goals!  like the rest of us ?
    
    
    	One could ponder on what the contents of each VPs Goal Sheet!
    
    
    
    	As for the popularity of these decesions, the only analagy I can
    	think of is, how the British Miners must have felt after two years 
    	of unsuccessful strike, and then finding out the size of Ian 
    	MacGregor's pay rise once 50% of Pits had been closed.
    
    	P.S. I think Mr MacGregor was Knighted soon after. 
    
    	

    .39
    
    MacGregor's job was to close pits.  He achieved his goal and was
    rewarded.  If one of BP's goals was to close Digital sites, then
    hasn't he also been successful?

    You miss the point. Even if us "regular folk" met the goals in out
    contracts, raises were not to be given. 
    
    Unless, evidently, one is above a certain level.....
    
    /john

Regarding. 20

Mr. Corson,

    I am confused by the title of your reply

		" -< Is it a time of month, or what? >- "

    My friends and co-workers are all saying that this is a callous reference 
    to a woman's menstrual cycle intended to explain a certain behavior. You 
    know, sort of like if a woman wrote the exact same reply (rude and 
    offensive language intact) and titled it:

		" -< Ain't gettin' any lately, or what? >- "

    But if this is so, a good manager would at the very least reprimand (and  
    re-educate) the author, an apology would be in order and disciplinary 
    action would be appropriate.  All this because in the context inferred, 
    that single reply complete with title would speak volumes about the 
    professional character of the author!

    I said no, not Mr. Corson! 

    As you can see, I really want to straighten these folks out. If you would 
    please, take a moment to clarify ASAP?
 
    thanks,
    Karen
    

    My friends and co-workers are all saying that this is a callous reference 
    to a woman's menstrual cycle intended to explain a certain behavior.

I read it as referring to the allegedly wierd behavior of young
children and the mentally ill around the full moon.

If you don't actually know that Mr Corson intended a crass reference to
menstruation, why not give him the benefit of the doubt, and just not
say anything? Modest savings in disk space; big savings in emotion.
What possible benefit is gained by confrontation?

    and I suppose we could play dumb about the phrase "ain't getting any
    lately?" too - "any what?  cookies?"

    
     Once again we attack each other instead of a problem -
     real or not.
    
     Wasted effort, wasted time.
    
     Find a problem, find a solution. Attacking each other does no one
     any good.
    
     - Rally round ME!
     -Mike Z.

    re .43
    	
    A good manager wouldn't waste time on the non issues (PC crap) in .43 .
    
    Mike

    
    Jim,
    I guess in a past life I could been a pied piper, or Patric Henry,
    or even Robin Hood.......All I can say is that something is rotten
    in Digital and there are TOO Many people that just want to bury
    their heads in the sand.  Let's face it the politics in this company
    rival the US Government!  And we all know what politics is about.
    
    Chet-ism "Politics is the science, or art of putting as many people, 
    friends and reletives between a problem and a solution as you can before 
    anyone understands the impact" and once they do....it's too late!
    
    It's the politics of this company that's preventing the turn around
    from happening.  Look at it, why do we HAVE to promote people to V/P
    to get a job done.....cause there are politicians in the company that
    just WONT talk to anyone from another organization unless they are
    V/P level!!! Thats GREAT, really addresses the issues of the day huh?
    
    Personally I'd rather have someone who can fix my problem than
    someone that will comfort me as to why they can't fix my problem!
    
    enough already, my oats and barley is getting cold......
    
    

    RE: .36, .38
    
    Wrong!  This NOTES file is a perfect example of, 'TOO MUCH
    INFORMATION'.  You folks aren't solving anything.  You've got to be
    able to handle the information you receive and since few are ready to
    receive everything...management must keep much info. from us.  
    
    Two points:
    
    Ken Olsen said it best, "People are always reluctant to change. 
    Teasing them, tricking them, manipulation them -- that's all part of
    the job of management."  Therefore, the less you know the easier it is
    to manage you...the less of executive decisions that is...more
    knowledge of your immediate job is necessary.
    
    Richard S. Sloma, "NO-NONSENSE MANAGEMENT", 1977;  "...Too much
    education and training will immobilize a manager..."  So management
    also has its limitations.  I've personally seen good decision makers
    turn into mush because of too much training...
    
    Sorry, but there is such a thing as, TOO MUCH KNOWLEDGE, because the
    average Joe cannot handle it (average Joe includes management). 
    How has knowing about Bob Palmer's raise helped you to do your job?  It
    hasn't helped has it!  Maybe its fun to talk about but it doesn' help
    you do your job.
    
    laters,  dave
    
    	P.S.  Henry David Thoreau once said that for every thousand persons
     	      hacking at the branches of evil, only one person chops at its
    	      roots.  The problem is a lack of morals  -- Palmer and most
     	      executives like him are after the green stuff so why waste
              time talking about it?  They appear to be getting it too :-(

    It may  not help people do their jobs, but it  may well help some who
    have hung in through multpile wage/promotion freezes figure out why or 
    whether they should stay with digital.  I can make up my mind on what I
    will do when I have the information.
    
    Information is power, and it is obvious we don't just get it  from
    notes.  We read outside publications, interface with customers who read
    others, and are informed UNOFFICIALLY, because no one in this company
    seems to have the backbone to inform workers directly.

        A few comments from a short-timer:

    First, Mr. Corson's original comments - I'm convinced that upper
    management is and will continue to be the problem at Digital.  When Bob
    is done restructuring the company, he'll have something he can manage. 
    As far as changing my situation, well I did Mr. Corson.  Your total
    disregard for the ethics of the situation amaze me.  Then again, you
    may have finally received your salary plan and goals.....

    Second, Mr. Corson's comments about that time of month.  Although
    crude, it *is* a generic term for, shall we say, being crabby?  There
    is a certain amount of truth to the issue - nevertheless, I would
    restrict the phrase to friends who wouldn't take it wrong.  Making
    it into a management issue is not something I'd want to do.  In the
    same vein, 'not getting any lately' would also be considered crude and
    impolite.  Same as cutting the cheese in someone's office.  You just
    ought not to say it / do it.

    Third, the very fact that Bob said one thing and then did another makes
    me feel that much better about leaving Digital.  It was a great place
    to work.  Although Ken had his problems, he at least had a sense of
    right and wrong.  Even *if* the contract had the increases in it, Bob
    should have enough sense to pass the money for the moment (for that
    matter, I'm amazed the VPs took it).  Some have argued that Digital
    must do this to keep talent.  Really?  Then why did Bob lower himself
    to our level saying we're all employees?  It's hypocrisy folks.  I
    won't miss it.  I'll miss you, but not the double standard.

    chg

    
    	Ok, OK...
    
    	Nothing immodest was intended by my title to whatever note it was.
    
    	Midwestern boys tend to "bay at the moon" and it is always the
    craziest time of the month (the full moon, folks). Ask any police beat
    reporter for any daily newspaper anywhere,
    
    	This is a crazy note. DECies are either wigged out over the SLT's
    compensation, information-sharing, or implied hypocrisy, or each
    other's comments in regard to the same. Come on - let us get real.
    
    	Who really cares what they make in $$. They are there, we are here.
    End of story as far as I'm concerned. My focus is what can I do, just
    me, to help Digital get out of the revenue death spiral, and it's
    attendent lack of sustained profitability. So I push, and push, and
    push. That is my job. I do it regardless of my bosses PC, or my own.
    If I get waxed for it. So What! I know I did my best as I saw what
    needed to be done. And believe me, there are tons of jobs out there for
    people will real skills, good business sense, and a demonstrated
    purpose to achieve. The rest, if you will, is noise.
    
    	Hey, nine years ago I was looking for a job when I found this one.
    
    	I do love you all.
    
    		the Greyhawk 

And if I may add to the last (.51) reply - how can an organization progress
without a common (as in understood by all) goal-vision-metric...take
your pick.

    re. 53
    
    Yes, I agree - the VPs salaries are so far out from us that its all
    funny money. So, they had an increase ? It isn't going to make/break us
    - whereas the attitudes of ALL OF US (from BP down) is what will either
    make us great or do us in.
    
    ME, I'm here 'cause its still fun!
    
    Alan

    Okay,
    
     I forgive Mr. Corson; however I am hooting, because I have never, ever
    heard the phrase 'that time of month' mean anything but PMS.  But, I'll
    let it drop.
    
    Let me clear up some confusion that Mr. Corson implies.  I do not care
    if Bob gets a raise.  I do not care if Bob makes 50 times my salary.  A
    person at the CEO level has a gift which I do not have.  We all seek to
    rise to our level of ability.  I don't care if Mr. Christ receives a
    35% increase (or whatever).  I do care when Bob says he's one of the
    boys (we're all employees drivel), sighes about how tough a salary
    freeze is, then goes off and demonstrates that it isn't as tough as we
    thought.  If Bob said, "I'm the CEO, you're peons.  I decided I wanted
    a raise.  You don't get one.  Why? Because I'm the CEO!" -- I could
    live with this.  It's consistant.
    
    As far as your other comments, well you sound like a poor businessman. 
    If I make an investment and it's managed poorly, I change the
    investment.  Whatever you do, don't start working in highway
    construction.  :-)

    
 >   Who really cares what they make in $$. They are there, we are here.
 >   End of story as far as I'm concerned. My focus is what can I do, just
 >   me, to help Digital get out of the revenue death spiral, and it's
 >   attendent lack of sustained profitability.
    
    
    But Greyhawk it isn't about the $$ 'they' make. The single most
    important contribution leaders can make is to build trust,
    focus and integrity into the organisation so that people are
    willing to go the extra mile _as a team_.
    
    The very fact that 'they' are 'there' and 'we' are 'here' is
    what is so disturbing.
    
    The fact that the company has gone into a revenue death spiral
    isn't for the lack of heroic efforts of individuals at all levels.
    And that's exactly the point: individual efforts are only _really_
    effective when done as a focused part of a team. The rowing boat
    is a simple and overused analogy.
    
    A company is nothing but its people and their relationships. No more
    and no less. 
    
    When a group of people carry out actions that drive such a deep
    wedge in the company, well, its painful, its disturbing but most 
    importantly it literally strikes a blow at the very survival of 
    the company.
    
    To _not_ speak out on this issue is to accept rot at the core of
    the company. Something that Digital has always publicly stated to
    be a situation that none of its employees should ever accept.
    
    It is hard to overestimate the importance of good leadership and
    its effect on the organisation. Its the lack of it which has
    brought Digital into the worst crisis in its lifetime. Integrity
    is the basis of leadership and that is unfortunately under 
    question.
    
    Maybe I should modify the title:
    
    Its not about $$ its about survival.
    
    re roelof

    re: .51, .54
    
    You progress as a company with different visions!  Upper level
    management is supposed to be able to turn EXEC level decisions into
    something that DIRECTLY RELATES TO YOUR JOB...passing on executive
    level 'talk' is stupid.  You and I are not supposed to be a worker bee
    and an executive too.  Therefore, we need to hear different pieces of the
    pie.  
    
    and to .51, 
    
    YES Knowledge is power but in business the careful dissemenation of
    infomation runs a company and well...loose lips sink ships...You cannot
    pass on everything to eveyone -- it has little to do with backbone. 
    Upper level management is not supposed to give you information that
    will encourage you to leave the company anyway!  
    
    I think information like  Palmers raise SHOULD BE PUBLISHED because it
    is outrageous.  However,  I'm attacking peoples reactions to it and I
    am NOT attacking the fact that we know about it.  One last nit:
    
    Knowledge is only power if you know how to use it.  Not everyone
    knows how to use it so its foolish to expect upper level management to
    give it out like it was candy.  Besides, those who want to know will
    find out anyway and the rest will remain blissfully ignorant.
    
    rgds...dl

    re: .57 -- well said.
    
    dl

	Well, in my not-so-humble opinion, the officers of this company
	show poor judgement in accepting large raises (anything double
	digit is large these days) during this time of corporate crisis.

	This is not to say that they shouldn't get a raise, but it is
	saying that they should follow the same policies that we all
	have too.

	I would applaud a VP who said to Bob and the SLT "Sorry, I won't
	accept a raise greater than my best worker" If his top worker got
	a 8% raise, then he gets that.

	It would bring a needed dose of reality into this world of 35%
	raises in times of corporate crisis.

							mike

|	This is not to say that they shouldn't get a raise, but it is
|	saying that they should follow the same policies that we all
|	have too.

While I agree with that principle the reality is that if enforced we may see
the departure of individuals who's loss could cost a lot of momentum. And
by these metrics some are more equal than others. Of course, we should not
use double standards except in emergency situations. But I think this is
a serious emergency. Hopefully, these increased compensations save more
DEC employees than they shed.

Enough said. Let us instead focus on some more creative threads of this
notesfile.

>Per

My mother taught me:

  Always tell the truth - If you don't wish to be honest better to say NOTHING 
  than lie.

A Leading (NATO) Air-force:

  When I was training to be a fighter pilot we learn that in a war situation, 
  team work and honesty is highest priority. It's people that trust you will 
  make a difference between life and death - your life and death.

Our Customers:

  When I was a consultant for our large corporate customers:
  The customer always tried to help you (and buy from you) when you never lied.
  Trust and reliability was the single most important element. 
  (A number of times VP's who were forced to buy machines from competition
   asked us for advise. E.g. one asked: "which of the two HP solutions was
   the better one?" - He actually went with Digital.)

In summary, be aggressive, fight the competition incessantly at all levels 
but be credible and never loose trust. Our customers, Our shareholders, Our 
employees and my mother expect a certain level of integrity; after that the 
speed of the fastest processor becomes important. 

    re: 58
    
    So Big Brother,
    
        Who decides what information (knowledge) I can handle and what I 
    can not?  
    
    If Upper level management is not supposed to give you information that
    will encourage you to leave, then they should make sure that it doesn't 
    inadvertently get leaked to the press.
    
    It would seem to me that if the press is going to get a hold of this
    type of information anyway, it would be far better for employees to 
    hear the straight scoop from management instead of the distorted truth 
    that sometimes appears in print.
    
    I think there would be far less complaining from employees if Bob
    Palmer and his staff made available the plans they have for turning
    this company around.  If these plans include providing incentives to 
    senior management then let that be known.  I think it is the feeling 
    of being led by the blind with occassional glimpses of light that 
    frustrates people so much.
    
    DH  

re:
>You progress as a company with different visions!

But not contradicting each other.

>Upper level management is supposed to be able to turn EXEC level
>decisions into something that DIRECTLY RELATES TO YOUR JOB...

Not to rathole this discussion, but my understanding is that we are
no longer in an "Industrial Age" where hierarchical management is
indisputable, but in the "Knowledge-Based Age" where everyone
is depended upon - based on their expertise and experience - 
to make decisions so that our time to market is as fast and efficient
as possible.

Obviously there must be some unifying principle(s) in order to make
this work..."Do the Right Thing" (not "Do The Right Thing For Me")
was one. Even in a hierarchical approach effort is expended on 
stating guidelines/ethics/principles by which your organization
is conceived and lives. 

>You and I are not supposed to be a worker bee and an executive too.  

The questions involved here are much more fundamental and hence
IMO do not succumb to this paradox.

>Therefore, we need to hear different pieces of the pie. 

I can't remember the last time I listened to a pie, but it appears you
are for sharing information when it affects our ability to function
and do business.
 

>Enough said. Let us instead focus on some more creative threads of this
>notesfile.

I on the other hand, thank you all for the stimulation...I think I just came up
with a solution to a problem...Keep It Going.

    [almost] Everything I needed to know about this topic, I learned from
    the 10K on the net.

It seems to me that there is a portion of the morale problem [as acknowledged
by Mr. Palmer and others] which may well be attributable to mushroom management
and a lack of employee relations skills on the part of senior management.

When I heard Mr. Palmer talk in LKG and say his job was "to decide what parts
of Digital to keep and which to sell" I was reminded to Tom Lorenzo of the
now defunct Eastern Airlines. Lorenzo so thoroughly alieniated the employees
of Eastern that he was unable to implement changes that might have saved the
airline. Lorenzo was widely described as out-of-touch with employees and the
realities of running the airline. It appeared to me he was out-of-touch with
building a team of labor and management.

Although Eastern Airlines was a union shop there may be some parallels with
Digital. Difficult times can be times when there is a bonding of employee
loyalty - a coming together to overcome obstacles in a shared and cohesive
way. It can also be a time of cover-your-ass and duck-for-cover and 
every-one-for-themselves. This is an issue of corporate attitude and attitudes
tend, in most organizations I've seen, to be strongly influenced by leadership
actions and attitudes. Trickledown?

It is my opinion that Digital's ability to pull together as a team is 
significantly affected by the perceived involvement, presentation, and 
actions of senior management. 

I believe that morale is one of the things in a company that management
is supposed to manage. It clearly affects productivity and creativity and
loyalty to the company. This in turn affects the bottom line: profits.

	Thanks,
		-Stephanie 

Re .50:

> ... This NOTES file is a perfect example of, 'TOO MUCH INFORMATION'.  ...

>    Ken Olsen said it best, "People are always reluctant to change. 
>    Teasing them, tricking them, manipulation them -- that's all part of
>    the job of management." ...

>    Sorry, but there is such a thing as, TOO MUCH KNOWLEDGE, because the
>    average Joe cannot handle it (average Joe includes management). 
>    How has knowing about Bob Palmer's raise helped you to do your job?  It
>    hasn't helped has it!

You may have 'Snapped' already from the information disease!  ("The sleep of
reason begets monsters.")

J. R. "Bob" Dobbs said it best in 1961, "You'd PAY to know what you REALLY
think."

$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1
$1			The SubGenius Foundation			      $1
$1			P.O. Box 140306 				      $1
$1			Dallas, TX 75214				      $1
$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1$1
				/AHM

    re: .58
    
    >>So big brother...who decides what information I can handle...
    
    Already discussed...a manager who knows (ie -- an experienced
    manager/executive that knows how you'll react to it).  Big brother is a
    cheap shot BTW.  I don't think my opinions are as closed minded as you
    imply that they are.  I think that managing people is very difficult
    and it is oversimplifying the situation to suggest that if they
    'told-all' it would fix this downward trend we're in.  What I mean to
    say is your opinion is not that important to the over all goals of the
    company and neither is mine and neither is the next guys...  Its
    certanly important and a wise manager will not only listen to it but
    would encourage you to give them you ideas.  But the company must have
    direction first and they supposedly get that information from studying
    the marketplace.  Do you have time to study the market?  To interview
    potential customers?  I know you probably could but do you have time? 
    Its supposedly their job to do this.  Then if you think you have a
    better idea then traditionally you'd tell your management and if they
    didn't like it you'd go start your own company like ex Deccies did with
    Sun....  Y/N ?
    
    And to reply to note .64 
    
    If they did tell you what they were thinking you might get real angry 
    and quit ... along with many others.  Then they couldn't sell an intact
    division and make money, which is their job.  The problem goes outside
    of Digitals executive level and beyond pay scales ...its our society.  
    I I I I I ME ME ME ME NOW NOW NOW NOW money money money  Management is
    just fitting in I guess.  :-)
    
    I already mentioned falling morals but nobody mentioned anything about
    that.  Thats what I was trying to communicate.  Most folks are 
    concentrating on what they feel or on what's affecting them right now
    (at least thats the impression these replies give me) which may or may 
    not have anything to do with the success or failure of our company.  The
    problem is that we all think we have the answer.  I always figure that
    the only way to find truth is to risk telling others about it then you
    can see if your ideas stand up.  Making fun of others ideas doesn't
    prove your ideas correct...
    
    The 'fun' you made of my pie  example, when I know you knew what I
    meant, just goes to show where part of the problem is.  Its easy to
    tear something down but difficult to  build something up.  I may have
    been too direct with my wording and asked for it...oops.   The problem
    is most are trying to tear down and management isn't doing a good job
    of stopping it.  But part of that is our job too.  
    
    Bad news is bad news...leaked out or told directly probably doesn't
    make much difference when you don't trust management anyway.
    
    dl

    RE: .69
    
    I may have already snapped... OK, now I'm curious.  What exactly did you
    mean ... or do I have to write this genius foundation to find out?
    
    thanks,
    
    dave

��When I heard Mr. Palmer talk in LKG and say his job was "to decide what parts
��of Digital to keep and which to sell" I was reminded to Tom Lorenzo of the
��now defunct Eastern Airlines. Lorenzo so thoroughly alieniated the employees
��of Eastern that he was unable to implement changes that might have saved the
��airline. Lorenzo was widely described as out-of-touch with employees and the
��realities of running the airline. It appeared to me he was out-of-touch with
��building a team of labor and management.

    Ummmmmmm, that's Frank Lorenzo.

    Eastern's problems really had to do with pay scales that
    couldn't be supported under deregulation; poor previous
    management -- Borman, Rickenback, et. al.; poor service;  and
    unions that refused to compromise.  Charlie Bryan 
    deserves as much credit for Eastern's failure as Lorenzo. 

    But basically, you're right -- Eastern failed because it
    wouldn't or couldn't change when the market went from
    regulated to deregulated.  

    Digital is in a similar situation, as the market goes from
    high margin proprietary systems to low margin commodities.

    Another parallel: Lorenzo was quite successful at
    transferring Eastern's assets to Continental, and selling
    valuable pieces of the business (e.g. BOS-LGA-DCA shuttle) to
    Quantum^h^h^h^h^hDonald Trump.  I think Oracle bought the
    Latin American routes, but it could have been United.

    it's all said in the 'business ethics principles':
    
    We reward (�) performance. Promotions and other advancement decisions are
    based on (�) competence and demonstrated (�) contribution. 
    
    (�) added to original text in publication EF-A2248-50 
    Rel.# 50/93 11 19 70.0 for clarification. 
    
    HJUhl 

    I think it is ludicrous to think that a manager knows how much knowledge
    another person can handle. What do you base your information on and how
    do you measure another persons abilities by? 

> 
> You may have 'Snapped' already from the information disease!  ("The sleep of
> reason begets monsters.")
> 

hey, cut him some Slack, will ya?

One aspect of the news item that hasn't been commented on much is the fact that
the additional compensation that Palmer got was in the form of Stock Options.

My knowledge of stock options is, as usual, limited.  However, I think the following
is generally true:

The value of a stock option rises and falls with the value of the related 
stock.

There's a value of the stock below which the options are worthless, because
the stock can be bought cheaper on the open market than with the options.

Most options are not open ended.  Rather, there's a window during which
they can be exercised.  If the option value turns out to be zero during
the entire window, then the option was worth nothing.

I don't know how universal these assumptions are, and I don't know what
the specifics are of Palmer's options.  Depending on those specifics, it
may well be that the BOD was merely giving Palmer a bonus that only materializes
if the company returns to health sooner than originally promised.

It was, shall we say, disingenuous and ill advised of Palmer to try to 
portray himself as being in the same situation as other employees, knowing
that he had gotten the options deal, and probably expecting that news to
be broken at some time.  It could be that his incentives to restore the
company to health are much the same as yours, but his message is weakend by the
apparent duplicity.

HOWEVER...

Much of the reaction in this note against Palmer and against the VPs strikes
me as symptomatic of the class warfare that is sweeping this country, and 
perhaps the world.  The folks in the middle (thst's us, folks) seem to be
increasingly consumed by resentment against those in better circumstances
and contempt for those in worse circumstances.  This is not healthy, people.

We are all on the same lifeboat and, with 5 billion aboard, there isn't that
much room for mutually destructive behaviour.  I'm not at all against
competition,  as long as it's kept in perspective.  If competition becomes
so pervasive that you can't accept the Palmers of the world and the unemployed
bum on the street as your fellow participant in this adventure, then competition
has passed the point of being healthy.

My two cents.

Dave

    First of all: Thanks to .0!!
    
    Second:    Think I don't have to add my indignation, it's all said in
               right words already (.. all animals are equal, .....)
    
    BUT third: What really scares me, are people (co-workers, comrades,
               teammembers, ...how ever you call it) who blame others for
               sheding light onto bad things!!! 
    	       Who call others 'whiners' when ugly matters are discussed!!
               Who close their eyes and say 'huh, now they can't see me 
               anymore...'!
               I'm not used to this. I am used to other habits in DEC since
               18 years now. (Having a backbone was a great thing once before
               a while.)
    
               Thanks to all of you, which are still not tired of defending 
               the rest of our culture.
    
    Maybe the ostrichs out there remember cases where  after a while they
    thought 'Shouldn't I have done something against it...'

    ref -.75
    
    Hi Dave,
    Think that's not the point. Let me give you an example: I'm personally 
    really unhappy with this whole issue (as said in.76) - but it's not
    sheer envy - Mr. Palmer could get double the money IF HE REALLY LEADS
    US OUT OF TROUBLE SOON! 
    Beside that e.g. dealing with the real poor folks have you ever heard
    of Yugoslavia  - and a social activity called 'Neighbour in misery' started
    in Austria where immediatly thousands of trucks with goods have been
    brought to this neighbourcountry? I can't see a turn you mentioned.
    If you are interested I can give you details offline 
    (VNABRW::REISENAUER)
    
    Hubert 

    Aaaaaagggggghhhhh!
    
    I replied and the thing went away -- Stupid computers!
    
    Anyway -- The thing that's gettin' me twitchy about this string is that
    is a repeat of many that are in this conference ---
    
    " Poor --- Poor me --
    Those SLT folks are bad boys and girls takin' advantage of poor me.
    
    If it they aren't stickin' it to me on re-structuring and such, they
    are riding my back to untold financial riches."
    
    I believe that the continual focus on the SLT is Bovine Scatology -- I
    have observed over the years here that there is a body of people, not
    exclusively limited to the SLT, who have made incredibly stupid
    decisions.  Those decisions have gotten us to this sad state. 
    
    I see this as a form of denial -- It ain't me -- It's them --- I'm
    doing a good job -- they ain't!
    
    I went into a Real estate office once and saw an interesting sign:
    
    Productivity is Doing things right
    Effectivity is Doing the right things
    
    We seem to focus on the former as opposed to the latter.  
    
    The fact is that Digital is in deep s**t -- Worrying about the
    compensation package and other things of that ilk isn't being
    effective.  It isn't focused on providing the solutions that will make
    the great company be successful in the new marketplace.  Having a hot
    product isn't enough.
    
    As an ex-navy guy and avid boater, I have to say:  If the ship is
    taking on water -- it isn't the wardroom elite that's gonna save her --
    It's the crew.  And folks, wasting intellectual cycles on SLT whatevers
    ain't gonna cut it.
    
    Soooooooo, my suggestion is, let's spend our cycles on being effective
    in returning this company to profitability -- To fail is to lose the
    company ---- To succeed is to soothe the sores that seem to be
    afflicting SOME of the employees.
    
    Again -- My MOST humble .02
    
    Dennis
    
    
    
    I have a stepson who constantly tells me the ills that befall him are
    not his fault -- Just happens that way --- And I have noticed that
    there seems to be a "thread" that says "It ain't us -- It's them."   

        Dennis,

      Sorry, I must disagree, go back and *read* what people are upset
    about.  It's not the money, it never has been.  It's the fact that at a
    DVN Bob associates himself with the poor down trodden masses of Digital
    (emphasis added for effect :-)), tells us how bad he feels about the
    salary freeze, tells us the *we* are all employees.  Then goes out and
    gives big raises to senior people (who may or may not deserve it).

      I don't care if Bob makes 1E6 per year.  He just needs to stop being
    disingenuous.

    charlie

    re .70
    
    
    >> Do you have time to study the market?  To interview
       potential customers?  I know you probably could but do you have
       time? Its supposedly their job to do this.  Then if you think you 
       have a better idea then traditionally you'd tell your management 
       and if they didn't like it you'd go start your own company like ex 
       Deccies did with Sun....  Y/N ?
    
    
    Yes, I do have time to study the market (Its obvious that I have time
    to read this notes conference).  I am very interested in how other
    companies run their businesses (and not just computer companies), and
    how customers view these companies.
    
    I think it is time to realize that just because someone has the word
    "manager" in their title, it doesn't always mean that they know what
    their job is.  Traditions reeked havoc on Teveye's life ("Fiddler on
    the Roof"), and it is reeking havoc on ours.
    
    And yes, I am trying to start my own business.
    
    DH

    RE: .73
    
    Tough for me to answer mainly because I have a difficult time
    expressing myself.  But in a nutshell I believe the following:  
    
    Would you agree that the older you get the wiser you can become?  (ie
    -- more life experiences = more wisdom)   What if most of your life was
    spent 'judging' your employees.  Whatching them grow, guiding them etc.
    In other words, my job is engineering...I don't work people, I work
    electrons (and sometimes those little critters are hard to figure out
    :-)  BUt anyway, what if my job was people.  What if it was management. 
    I have a hard time believing that given enough time that I couldn't
    figure out people too.  Even to the point of manipulating them towards
    a company goal.  I don't consider this ludicrous at all -- it seems
    logical in fact, that over time anyone who WANTED TO, could come to 
    this knowledge.  People are more complex than any circuit I've ever
    worked on but this just means that it takes longer to figure them out.
    Maybe you feel (I feel it sometimes too) that we don't have good
    management...if a manager doesn't care they wont learn much of this. 
    But, well, I guess that the things I'm picking up in this note suggest
    that the solutions are obvious.  I'm just disagreeing with you all.  I
    don't think they are as obvious as the notes seem to imply. 
    
    I was on a product line that taught me about politics and boy was I
    angry.  WE were obviously doing the wrong things and wasting lots and
    lots of money.  I've been (I feel) in your shoes and I was trying to
    pass on those experiences because you all seem to be frustrated too. It
    didn't work so well.  But folks, I've been here before (on a smaller
    scale) and you just don't jump in the 'fray' and stop the fight because
    you want it to stop.  That's what I learned.  MOst of you folks feel
    cheated just like I did in one of my previous jobs.  You will not solve
    anything going the direction you're going.  I guess that that was all I
    was trying to say.  So I've said it.  
    
    Maybe my view is idealistic and management will never live up to the
    ideals I hold for them but the direction folks are suggesting in this
    notes file probably will not solve the problem either.  I just wanted
    to stop it.  I agree that we (Digital) are in trouble.  I agree that
    Bobs antics are...well, hard to swallow.  But we're not getting
    anywhere here either.  Why, because management is in charge, they will 
    always be in charge, and only if you are really lucky will you
    find a manager who will listen AND will be in a position of power to do
    something about it.
    
    To fix this, we all need to petition for change.  What exactly is
    wrong?  What needs to be fixed?  Lets design a fix for it.  Then if
    management doesn't listen, we have a moral obligation to:
    
    	1) Leave the company.
    	   (so as not to interfere with what they've decided is best for
    	    Digital)
    or 
    
    	2) Change our direction (agree with management) and fall in line.
           (be part of the solution by having a positive supportive
    	   attitude)
    
    I think what you folks are trying to do is change Digital so that it
    matches what you want it to be...that's exactly what I wanted to happen
    on that previous job I mentioned.  It will not happen...at least not by
    this discussion because the wrong people are reading this (plus its not
    suitable for management to read -- needs to be a proposal).
    
    I guess that what someone said in reply .75 ("...Much of the
    reaction... that paragraph) and most all of what someone said in .78
    summed up for me what I was trying to say.  
    
    laters,
    dave

    
    I've learned the hard way that what Dave is saying in .81 is exactly
    correct.  I summarize it to myself as follows:
    
      If there's something you're unhappy about, you've only got three
      options:
    
        1) change it
    
        2) accept it
    
        3) walk away from it
    
      Anything else is a waste of your time and energy.
    
    Whining is just an expensive form of acceptance.
    
    len.
    

    
    re.82
    
    re choice number (1)change it........nah, can't even get the 
                                         most simple things changed  in
                                         this company.I used to try,
                                         but is bad for your health.It
                                         was bad for mine.
    
    that leaves.....(2) and (3)....."love it, or leave it".
    
    
    I see. Now didn't that appear in a speech just recently.
    
    Well if by q4 we ain't making money, the sky will fall anyway.
    
    
    

    
>    As an ex-navy guy and avid boater, I have to say:  If the ship is
>    taking on water -- it isn't the wardroom elite that's gonna save her --
>    It's the crew.  And folks, wasting intellectual cycles on SLT whatevers
>    ain't gonna cut it.
    
    Nice little boating analogy and here's another one: Suppose the 
    ships heading onto the rocks and you're upfront calibrating the guns. 
    What to do? 
    
    	- Calibrate faster because that's what you're  paid to do (and 
          calibrated guns _are_ important)
    	- Shout up to the captain that it's time he started changing course? 
    	- Put on a lifejacket and start lowering a dinghy because you 
          don't think the cap'n gonna listen anyway...and its best to
    	  have peace and quiet on deck rather than have some gumbo
    	  jumping up and down disturbing the rest of the crew, doubting
    	  the captains course and pointing over the bow and shouting...
        
    Wonder which course (of action) serves the ship the best...
    Wonder which analogy most reflects Digital reality...

    re: .75 Stock options can be given out at any price not just what
    	you are used to for a price (for those of you lucky enough to
    	get stock options).  When I worked at DG, we'd get options at
    	the current market price, but upper management got them at
    	discount prices.  What's more, the company would lend money to
    	the manager so he could exercise the options, then the company
    	would forgive the loan!  When I say "the company", I don't mean
    	the stockholders or 99+% of the employees either.
    
    re: .78 True about the ship taking on water, but if the captain is
    	sailing the ship toward the reef, it's not the crew "that's
    	gonna save her".
    
    re: .81 You are right, of course, but I assume all of the discussion
    	is a small attempt at bringing the problems to light so they
    	may be changed.
    
    As said before, it's not the size of the compensation.  It's a
    question of leadership.  When I've been in leadership situations, I
    try to lead by example.  Lee Iacoca and the Japanese executive
    mentioned a whil back made an example for the rest of the company.
    They showed they were willing to bear some of the burden.  The effect
    was a feeling of team spirit and an employee population that was
    more willing to try to do its part.
    
    Getting back to the stock options ... if they were given out at the
    then current price, they'd be worthless by today's stock price and
    thus wouldn't be counted as compensation this year, right?
    
    Mike ... not a whiner, but not interested in pulling more than my
    		fair share either

	Personally, I believe in pay for performance. My beef with the
        apparent SLT compensation strategy is the type of performance that is
        being awarded and the timing of the awards. Can anyone name a general
	that was given an additional star after losing a major battle and
	greater than half of his troops???

        So, here is my SLT compensation plan that should satisfy most people.
        We are all familiar with our countries legal system and the way it
	attempts to use suspended sentences to give criminals incentive to 
        stay out of trouble, right? Why don't we give our SLT members 
        suspended bonuses and pay increases??? Set reasonable criteria for 
        real progress in turning the company around based partly on "positive"
        metrics like revenue growth and increased market share and partly on 
        "negative" metrics like overhead costs and revenue per employee. Then,
        make the delivery of the suspended increases contingent upon satisfying
        those criteria. The pay increases would be retroactive while the 
        bonuses would be lump sum. This accomplishes the following objectives:

		* Provides superior motivation for our leaders to stay with the
                  corporation. One time bonuses and pay increases have a limited
                  effect on loyalty and motivation which causes the need for
                  further bonuses and pay increases. A suspended bonus or
		  retroactive increase would ensure an executive of a
                  predictable chunk of money for mobilizing the work force to 
                  achieve meaningful progress toward the corporation's long 
                  terms goals. Of course, this compensation would be in addition
                  to the overwhelming satisfaction of being part of the greatest
                  corporate turnaround in history, gag...
		* Helps preserve the morale in the lower ranks of the 
                  corporation by sending the message that we REALLY are a team
                  and we will win and lose together. BTW, employee morale should
                  be considered part of a true leaders job responsibility.
		* Prevents embarrassing news articles about the corporation.
		* Preserves corporate assets in a time of financial crises.

	Opinions?

	-Dave-

	PS - The analogy between criminals and SLT members is to help illustrate
             the proposed compensation plan and does NOT represent an 
             evaluation by the author of their character or leadership qualities.
             :)

I like the idea in .86 (deferred pay raises and/or bonuses)
This also sends the message that the leadership
EXPECTS the company to succeed. Taking $ now indicates that they might
not be so sure about a turnaround.

Another idea is what Scott McNealley (SUN CEO) did when Sun's results were
disappointing. He took a pay CUT with a large stock option grant to compentate-
but the option price was ABOVE the then-current stock price. How about granting
BP and the others a good option, at, say 40? 


And as for the military analogy, yes, the crew does not second-guess the
captain, but if the ship runs aground, it is the captain that gets in trouble.
He doesn't stay in charge, throwing the crew overboard to lighten the ship.

Isn't it interesting that in American industry, if the company is not doing
well, the blame (and the pain) is placed on the workers; but if the company does
well, the credit ($) is given to the management.

>	Personally, I believe in pay for performance. My beef with the
>        apparent SLT compensation strategy is the type of performance that is
>        being awarded and the timing of the awards. Can anyone name a general
    
    
    Agreed, and isn't it splendid how 'we' get salary adjustments *after*
    a review of past performance, and SLT gets the adjustment *before*???
    
    /Bob

Well, actually, *we* don't get salary adjustments at all anymore....  That
privilege is reserved for VPs.

					Steve

Re: .86 (the section on incentives and criminal justice system)

There *are* those who think that our criminal justice system is failing to
motivate possible offenders.  It might not be a good model to use for
*successful* behavior modification, at least for now.

Dave

    .86 -- defered compensation  - makes sense, logical, and therefore
    	   will not even be looked at!
    
    As others before me had said (in various ways) it's not the
    raise/options/bennies per se that's bothering folks; it's how
    it is done and the [alleged] hypocritical way in which the
    message is put across. I do agree this "we (the SLT) as 
    employees" stuff is hard to swallow!
    
    However not having seen BP's or CC's goal sheets (except the
    "profitability blurp"), it would be hard to evaluate if they 
    were successful or fail in doing what was **actually** asked of them.
    
    Maybe getting Digital headcount to ~50K, reducing floorspace,
    divesting nonprofitable businesses are indeed his prime metrics -
    who really would know for sure, but BP and his boss(es).
           
     

    I can't believe it.  Then again, maybe I can.  .0 got deleted?  By the
    moderator or the author?  Regardless, it should have ben left there. 
    
    In his address at Stockholm, BP said that we (the employees) should
    feel free to openly discuss  concerne we have regarding morale.  Well, 
    now it's time to see how much water these words hold.  Looks like it
    just sprang another leak.
    
    If .0 was deleted by the author, then I think you made a mistake by
    deleting it.  
    
    If it was deleted by a moderator then "for shame"!  It's not your place 
    to sensor this conference based on how you percieve to sway the
    direction of morale.  
    
    People use this conference as a source of information as well as a
    forum for discussion.  Bad decisions come from panic, panic grows on 
    fear and fear comes from ignorance.  Don't do this to us, we can't
    afford the sensorship!
    
    -dave
    

    The base note was deleted by its author, who reposted it as response
    .12 of this string.
    					andrew

    
    	Whew - it is getting hot in here!
    
    	Have an interesting thought - if we could get compensated like the
    SLT, ie. stock options over time at a fixed price today, what do you
    all think would be a fair plan?
    
    		the Greyhawk
    

    To all that have replied to this note, I thank most of you for your
    support in the non-censoring issues........I deleted the note mainly
    because of the first two responses......they were quite negetive
    and evidently did not understand the intent of the note. It was posted
    in exact context as written in the paper, and I bit my toung the whole
    time as I typed it in......after discussing it with fellow workmates,
    and the subsequent replies, I decided to re-post the note. I believe 
    that the employees of this company have a right to know what EVERYONE
    outside the company thinks, writes, and believes about the company.
    As the note reads, seems like the author of this article is just
    as pissed at Digital's senior management with the constant ramble with
    no obvious direction, substance or deliberacy of achieving these
    most lofty goals, as I would venture to guess, the majority of the
    individual contributor society of Digital.  How we percieve what's
    going on is simple......how can a golden parachute for someone that
    is seemingly only in the business to rape, pillage, and plunder the
    booty of a once GREAT company.  And I'm sorry folks, I can not feel
    sorry for someone who worked for Digital for one or two years, ie:
    Ed Lucente, at a really gross salary, screw things up enough that it
    will take years to turn around, then recieve a half million dollars
    to leave and go screw up another company, and get another half million.
    And all the time this is happening, I personaly see VERY GOOD Talented
    people getting shafted by callous management that will not take a long
    look at the value of that person with a long term outlook as to when
    we ARE finally back on the road to revcovery that person could have
    been paramount in getting Digitla there. How can you compare a $35,000
    settlement for an employee that served diligently for 20 years to 
    a company that he or she loved truly and would, has, and would continue
    to do anything required to help to that recovery, to a crude, rude,
    and generaly ignorant high level manager that in two years, caused
    more harm than any one individual could have in a whole career.
    
    I thought this would be a different note than it's turned out to be.
    And if it offends some people, then tough! For those people that
    don't get mad as hell at this crap I say "you don't like it? THEN YOU
    LEAVE"! and let the rest of us that care enough and have the testicular
    fortutude to make our feelings known, do so with a little more
    dignity than to be cast a whinner.  
    
    Chet White......AKA: the Parrot_Trooper!
    

     ok Chet,
    
     What is a parrot_Trooper?
    
     Personally I don't give a hoot what the SLT does with company funds.
    There is obviously a compensation plan that rewards something. Until
    we know what that reward system/compensation plan is, I IMO cannot
    comment. We do not know what the game is, we only see large amounts
    of $$$ and stock options going to a select few. The information on the
    compensation is public, so this fighting over posting is nonsense. You
    did the right thing in bringing this information to others. Too bad
    about the negative responses though. To each their own, can we change
    this attitude? Has *anyone* said to the SLT, gee your compensation
    plans really *look* bad to simple digital folk. Can you explain why
    some have rewards/compensation/$$$$/stock/bonuses in this time and
    others do not? Has anyone said to Mr. Palmer, Gee Bob, about your
    salary.... Until someone brings attention to the matter, we all are
    yapping at nothing.
    
     I personally would like to see a member or members of the SLT and
    Mr. Palmer at my customer sites. Without the protective/sheilding few. 
    I think that act alone would boost my morale, and others, beyond this
    salary thing. Spend a day in the front-lines, then you will have first
    hand knowledge on what needs fixing. You'll earn that money or options.
    
    -Rally Round ME.
    -Mike Zarudzki
     Digital Consulting

    
    re .86
    
    dunno if an an analogy is to be drawn (hopefully not)
    but Hitler promoted von Paulus to Field Marshal after
    his army was declared a "fortress" at Stalingrad..

      More re. .86, whose author obviously doesn't know much about military
    history.
    
      How about Douglas Haig? Became a Field Marshal and an Earl. He was
    thought a butcher in 1915, by his predecessor Sir John French, and Sir
    John was proved right at the Somme (1916) and Ypres(1917). Yes, he was
    in command of the British army when the Allies eventually won the war,
    but that result came about due to the naval blockade and the eventual
    entry of the USA, and despite, not because of, Haig's generalship.
    
      The analogy is quite a good one actually, as one of the reasons that
    Haig was such a poor general was that he and his staff stayed at his
    comfortable HQ, and avoided ever going near the front lines. They
    blamed junior officers and men for the repeated failures, not their own
    bad planning and lack of grasp of the situation. There is a revealing
    story of one of his senior staff officers who actually visited the front
    line near the end of the battle of Ypres. As he got nearer his car
    became more and more bogged down in the mud, until eventually, still
    some miles short, it got stuck, axle deep. The officer burst into tears,
    and said "Dear God, did we send men to fight in this?", to which his
    driver replied "It gets worse further up sir."
    
      Just be glad that the SLT is only in charge of a business, not a war.
    
    Ken

    O-K fellow noters. It's tomorrow, and I feel better already!
    
    Please don't get me wrong. My morale for the company is getting
    better and better. I truly believe in the organization I work for
    and it's eventual success. And damn it, we'll probably succeed
    'in spite' of everything we're conplaining about. Most of the group
    works looooong hours and unrealistic schedules, and this all adds to
    the frustration of everything we see/hear happening 'above' it all?
    
    I almost spit when I heard Bob state on TV that he was sure that
    EVERYONE in digital was happy he got a 220K raise. Well, he never
    came and asked me!  Cause he would have gotten an earfull!
    
    There are still a great many dedicated, caring, and professional
    people working to turn this ship around.  But beware, I still believe
    that the management structure from the top down needs to be trimmed
    AT LEAST as much if not more than the slaughter of the technical people
    that helped get Digital to the 13 Billion mark. Not saying they did it
    all on their own, but digital does not sell anything that ain't
    technical.  It's the business we're in, and it's sickening to see the
    company downsize all that technical talent, and instill in it's place
    management to deal with the customer's who are having technical
    problems. Take a look someday at the problem database, customer's
    bought digital equipment on good faith, an now are sitting waiting
    for a fix to a problem that they found with our gear that may never
    get solved cause the engineering group that was responsible for that
    product was downsized, and the engineer that knew that hardware or
    software ain't around anymore! Happens every day.
    
    That said, let's get to parrot_trooper. simple, I got too many of em.
    parrots, that is. want to buy a few?  ;^)
    
    chet
    
    	
    

    
    .. oh no ! Someone did it. Mentioned *WAR* that is...
    
    .. now we can look forward to rehashes of all those old notes about
    motivating people like Stormin Norman did in the Gulf, quotes from
    'Art of War', etc etc.  NOT. Please.
    
    
    
    AW - 'I think this rifle is jammed'
    
    

    re: Compensation
    
    The Globe had another article this morning on the golden handshakes for
    the departed and the compensation for Palmer and others.  The stock
    options were granted at 19.something, so unless there's some time
    period before they can be exercised, they fall into the immediate
    reward category.  They certainly don't look like they come under the 
    heading of incentives for future performance.
    
    /Butch

    
    RE: .94
    
    Well, Peter, profit-sharing is out for the time being. Although Digital
    did have an ESOP once upon a time (which resembled profit-sharing).
    
    It strikes me as reasonable to first get the company focused,
    profitable and at the correct operational size (which, BTW, I believe 
    is between 42 and 48K employees) before any alternative compensation plans
    could be implemented. 
    
    But, once there, profit-sharing and a strong, contributory 401(k) is
    what I would start looking at first.
    
    Any other proposals out there? And let's not get carried away.
    Remembering that the company has to be profitable first. 
    
    -dan
    
    PS. After 11 years, I'm leaving this great company. And, yes, I still
    believe that it is a great company. Unfortunately, the opportunities I
    desire are no longer here. The company I am joining has the above plans
    in place.

    RE: .101
    
    A little after 6 this a.m., I was in the kitchen about to have
    breakfast, when this was announced/broadcast on WBZ radio. As soon as
    it was over, my wife commented, "did you hear that?". I said, yes,
    that's old news!
    
    I also noticed the headlines in the business section of the Globe, but
    didn't have time to read it before I left the house.
    
    kjg

re Note 3413.96 by NEWVAX::MZARUDZKI:

>     There is obviously a compensation plan that rewards something. Until
>     we know what that reward system/compensation plan is, I IMO cannot
>     comment. 

        Not only that, but until we know what the reward
        system/compensation plan is, we won't be rewarded.  :-{

        Thanks to this comment, I finally understand what's going on
        here:  BP and the VPs know what the "something" is, and hence
        are able to do what it takes to get rewarded.

        The rest of us don't really know what it takes to get
        rewarded, and hence we don't do what is necessary to get
        rewarded, and thus aren't rewarded.

        Bob

	In support of my entry as .86

	I realize that I am not a military historian which is why I worded the military reference as 
	a question for others to answer. Actually, I was only thinking of U.S. generals. I did find
	the furnished examples quite illuminating though...

	I think it's amazing how the replies to note 3413 keep referencing leadership and character.
	Unfortunately, I have to remind everyone of one thing,...the best way to judge a leader is by
	the quality of his/her followers.

	Would the last one please get the lights?,...guess that's you Bob...

	:)

         <<< HUMANE::DISK$CONFERENCES:[NOTES$LIBRARY]DIGITAL.NOTE;1 >>>
                        -< The Digital way of working >-
================================================================================
Note 3413.105                      news flash                         105 of 105
KATRA::CATEISENBERG                                  14 lines  30-SEP-1994 10:49
               -< I stand humbled before those wiser than I.... >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In support of my entry as .86

I realize that I am not a military historian which is why I worded the military
reference as  a question for others to answer. Actually, I was only thinking of
U.S. generals. I did find the furnished examples quite illuminating though...

I think it's amazing how the replies to note 3413 keep referencing leadership
and character. Unfortunately, I have to remind everyone of one thing,...the
best way to judge a leader is by the quality of his/her followers.

Would the last one please get the lights?,...guess that's you Bob...

:)

re:.70
>Making fun of others ideas doesn't prove your ideas correct...
>The 'fun' you made of my pie  example, when I know you knew what I
>meant, just goes to show where part of the problem is.  Its easy to
>tear something down but difficult to  build something up.

Whoa.

'Making fun'? Let me get this straight...I'm supposed to sit quietly while
you lecture about how power exempts some from adhering to basically
fair standards, and criticize the dissemination of the information, and
criticize reaction to it...and you mix a metaphor -- then when the error
is _benignly_ pointed out to you, you accuse me of being "part of the
problem"?

First of all excuse me, but I think you've mistaken me for someone with no
backbone.

Second, I cut my teeth on NOTES via a conference called SOAPBOX 10
years ago. I have more than enough experience as to how ridicule is
directed but that's predominantly not my style. Now, you mixed the
metaphor. By your lights, you're not my manager so what criteria are
you applying to your exemption theory now?

Third, I'll tell you what 'the problem' is to me...in this company and in
this society. It's a lack of consistency. It's a gap between the real and the
ideal which _you_ "only go to show". 

I'm not perfect but I keep striving and I have always sought to do nothing but
my utmost honest best. My performance reviews reflect that. And since I've been
with DEC 11 years, I think I can claim some credit for the good times this
company has seen.

I suggest you reexamine your philosophy. 

    Would it be reasonable to assume that the Globe coverage is, uh,
    influenced by the tax issue debate?
    
    
    bk
    

    re .108
    
    It might - the upper management of the Globe would probably have their 
    taxes rise, as would a few of the more senior editors and syndicated
    columnists.
    
    Why do you ask, O excessively indirect one? ;-)
    
    /Butch

	I have gone through this note and my reactions are:-

	I like working for Digital
	I am responsible for my career, remuneration etc
	I expect management to treat me with respect and honesty
	I expect management to ask for my input on the areas that I am 		
	knowledgeable about
	I expect management to give me the tools to do my job
	I expect management to lead and set an example
	I expect to get my butt kick if it is required 
	I expect to get my back patted if it is required
	I expect management to act on good information and not to go off half 	
	cocked
	I dont expect the company to do the things I would like
	I dont expect the management in this company to solicit my approval of 	
	their decisions
		
	
	Bottom line is if I dont like the way things are going I can vote with
my feet and leave. The best analogy I can come up with is that of a  football
team (American or UK Soccer). If the manager does not deliver goods i.e.
trophies, success etc, then he will get the sack. The team is dependant on a
manager and management team that works together and realises that to be
successful they have to get the best out of the players. If a player does not
like what they see in the management team then they transfer to another team.
The management then builds up a team that they can work with and achieve success.

	I would like to see the people in the company working together to secure
the future. I would like to the people in this company treat each other with
respect. I would like to see the leaders of this company provide direction and
clarity in their decisions. I would like to see the leaders of this company
carrying out their duties with openess and honesty. I dont care how much people
get paid, what I care about is being able to do my job effectively. I am being
restricted in this by the lack of clarity on the direction the company is headed
and on the crazy kart wheels the organisations is churning through. Give me the
tools to do my job. 

	I feel better for that - good luck to the rest of you out there. Keep
fighting for what you believe in.

	Regards

	Paul 

	

    Again:  IT's not the money - ist's the mindset which is the problem.
    
    Also I take it for granted, that all the people which are noting here,
    and also the others, are working hard to make the (360 degree?) turnover 
    happen as soon as possible.
    
    And (as I have read it several times in this note:... if you are
         unhappy, why aren't you leaving out the door....)
         Why should I? I have invested to much energy, time, money, life
         etc. during the last 18 years. Why should I leave - still
         believing in this company!
    
    I also don't leave my homecountry, when I'm unhappy with some
    phenomenons (politicians?) - I even think one ought to stay and try to 
    better the situation! 
    It's just the same thing.
    
    Hubert

re Note 3413.111 by VNABRW::REISENAUER:

>     I also don't leave my homecountry, when I'm unhappy with some
>     phenomenons (politicians?) - I even think one ought to stay and try to 
>     better the situation! 
>     It's just the same thing.
  
        The theory (and the legal reality) is that you "own" (in some
        sense) your home country, but you don't own Digital (except
        if you own stock, and then only in proportion to your stock
        holdings).

        The bottom line is that it is legitimate for you as a citizen
        to have a disagreement with your political leaders about
        what's best for your country, but it is not (as) legitimate
        for you as an employee to persist in disagreement with the
        management team representing the owners of this company.

        Bob

    RE: .107
    
    Oops, here we go again.  Sorry, as you pointed out, I'm not your boss.
    But I never told you to sit quietly by...I never said anything about
    how power exempts some from adhering to basically fair standards (I
    don't consider management a position of power -- society does but I
    do not -- apparently you feel that way however).  I do not criticize
    the dissemination of information but instead, question the reaction to
    it.  The above are your reactions but for the record, were not what I
    felt was communicated.
    
    Yes, maybe I mixed a metaphor but from my point of view, someone looking 
    to understand another persons idea will read-between-the-lines and try
    to find the subject matter.  This is not as easy as it appears in my
    opinion.  On the other hand,someone looking to tear down an opposing
    idea will attack the method used to convey the idea and feel that they
    have won.  This is what you did with the pie example.  You didn't
    attack the premise or idea those words were trying to convey and that
    is what I meant by, "...making fun...".  You weren't supposed to take
    that line personally.  I was stating matter of factly a debate concept
    that I recently learned which was:  tearing down ideas or making fun of
    mistakes doesn't help support your idea.  It wasn't an attack but a
    statement.  It is a similar rule to the idea of, "...remember to add
    the words 'they believe' to the beginning of each sentence you read or
    hear in a debate.  Those two words are really there anyway For example, 
    the statement:
    
    "There is never such a thing as too much information." really said:
    
    "I believe that there is no such thing as too much information."  
    
    I've already stated my opinion on this issue and do not wish to
    continue to do so but I did want to address this reply and try to
    smooth what appears to be ruffled feathers.
    
    Have a nice day.
    
    dave

Just a few points:

I seem to vivdly remember Bob Palmer stating that he wanted to be 
measured on the price of Digital's stock.  Of course he said this
when he first took his new job (and when the price was much higher).

Haven't heard him mention that lately.  Would have liked to see all
the options they just gave themselves granted at the price of the 
stock when he started, not at what must be very close to a ten year 
low.

I also remember the last DVN when Bob said that the reason
that one would want to remain with Digital was to be part of one of
the best turn-arounds in history.  This apparently is not enough for 
the SLT members, our leaders, who would of course claim all the credit.

I guess I don't necessarily have a problem with our leadership receiving
pay increases for a job well done.  A good example of this would be
Enrico Pesatori.  He has done a fantastic job,  but a 159% pay raise?

70% or 159% or whatever seems obscene given the circumstances.

Appearances do matter.  It appears that our management feels that
they deserve to be treated radically differently than the rest of the
employee population.  They have that right, but I do wish they would
be honest about it.

And to those who feel that it would be better if people didn't know
about this situation:  Are you related to an ostrich?  Obviously an
informed person can make better decisions about their future.  It
would not be fair to ask people to make career decisions without all
the facts, and these facts truly are pertinent.

    re: -.1 (and others)
    
    I'm an ostrich then.... I don't need this kind of information to make
    any career decision.  I made it a long time ago.... Thats why I'm here. 
    Digital is my career; I'm here for the duration; I believe we'll pull
    it out and be even better.  I don't need these debates to bring me down
    when we can't impact it one way or another.  I believe that Digital
    says consistently "work smarter not harder".  I don't have the time to
    try to defend or attack this "article".  In order to work smarter and
    not harder I have to be positive, manage my time wisely, and do what it
    takes to get it done......
    
    Now, with my head in the ground, I'm gonna go book some revenue....
    
    Toodles.....JP
    

re:.113

I won't extract each of your notes to show you why I interpreted the way
I did, but I just wanted you to understand that what we discuss in here
is for constructive purposes. You use the terms "attack" and "winning"
a lot. Those aren't the basis for my objections. I did take exception
to the "part of the problem" statement but look...you speak of "reading
between the lines" yet you don't appear to be reading _the_ lines:
that must come first.

You speak of "trying to find the subject matter" yet, because of one
sentence in .64 you ignore the more substantive objections which most
certainly do address premises you made. I was only trying -- for a
second -- to lighten the discussion. 

Written communication can work if we don't abandon our attempts to
exercise its potential.

					regards,

					Brandon Guillermo
					a brother DECcie ;-)

Below is another caption from the Globe. It is information, what you do
    with it, is up to you. I only ask, at the current rate of profit
    from our PC line, how many extra systems must be sold to make up this
    figure?
    
    
 Digital - Waves golden goodbye.  Two top executives benefit.
	{The Boston Globe, 30-Sep-94, p. 81}
   As Digital Equipment lays off thousands of employees, it is offering a
 maximum of 12 weeks' salary as severance pay.  But the company was far more
 generous to two top executives who resigned after brief stints, spending
 $1 million on "golden handshake" settlements.
   Edward E. Lucente, widely considered the No. 2 executive, was given a
 $650,000 settlement when he left the company after one year on the job.
 Analysts had blamed Lucente in part for a stall in Digital's turnaround
 plan, and his departure came only days after the company announced a
 surprisingly large $183 million loss for the first three months of 1994.
   Digital granted a $350,000 settlement to Gresham T. Brebach Jr., head of the
 company's consulting business, who left in August after 16 months with the
 company.
   The payments are reported in a proxy the company released recently for
 fiscal year 1994, which ended in July.  Digital lost $2.16 billion during the
 fiscal year and is laying off 20,000 workers in an attempt to regain profits.
   The settlement agreements prevent Lucente and Brebach from competing against
 Digital at other companies.  "The company believed it was appropriate under
 the circumstances," Nikki Richardson, a Digital spokeswoman, said of the
 payments.
   Because of Digital's poor performance last year, directors on the
 compensation committee left chief executive Robert P. Palmer's salary
 unchanged for 1995 at $900,000.
   Palmer, however, had received a 20% raise at the start of fiscal year
 1994.  In all, salaries for the top six officers rose that year by 82%, in
 part because some officers took on significant new responsibilities.
   Four top officers were also granted stock options that have risen in value
 in recent months by $2.1 million, creating paper profits that in some cases
 exceed their salaries.  Stock options are a "major component" of executive
 pay packages, the compensation committee said, because "the compensation
 vehicle closely aligns the interests of management with those of
 shareholders."
   The committee granted options for 120,000 shares to Palmer at an
 exercise price of $19.56.
   A recent run-up in Digital shares has given Palmer a paper profit of
 $832,000.  Digital shares closed yesterday at 26 1/2, down 1/4 on the New York
 Stock Exchange.
   Vice president Enrico Pesatori was granted options last fiscal year for
 75,000 shares.  In addition, Pesatori's salary rose last year by 149% to
 $569,242.  The head of Digital's personal-computer unit, Pesatori in April
 was given the additional job of managing the company's computer systems
 business, which is responsible for half of Digital's sales.
   William D. Strecker, vice president and chief technical officer, was
 granted options for 50,000 shares.  His salary last year rose 20% to $427,891.
   Vice president Charles F. Christ was granted 60,000 shares.  His salary rose
 3% last year to $315,016.
    

No need to hold back - we've been discussing this information for a couple
of weeks now.  In fact, I suspect it is the discussion here, leaked to
the Globe, that prompted this news item.  See note 3398.

					Steve

    
    I meant that the Globe didn't hold back........
    
    I NEVER HOLD BACK! 
    
    Holding back is what CAUSED this dilemma.  You know, the ostrich
    syndrome!  
    
    Challenge unfairness wherever you find it.
    
    Challenge stupidity for what it is.
    
    and challenge Beaurocracy because it get's in the way of progress!
    
    WOW! What a set of challenges!  ;^)
    
    chet

    Most amazing - I have read this note stream a couple of times 
    and I always reach the same conclusion - the fundamental issue 
    being discussed is not really rewards or even fairness of the 
    rewards system, it is leadership vs. management.  Do as I do vs. 
    do as I say.  We want our leaders to act like they are a part of 
    the society and subject to a similar system of rules - what a novel 
    concept.  We require it of political and military leaders, of the
    leaders of our "institutions" (schools, churches, etc.), but not of our
    business leaders?  
    
    Some easily seperate the rules for "business" from the generally 
    accepted rules for the rest of human social activity.  This may make 
    make you personally successful, and make your company temporarily 
    successful, but the "us" and "them" attitude thus created usually
    results in failure, sometimes after protracted distress.  (How many
    times can Digital downsize?)
    
    The only real answer - ignore the "injustice" of leaders being rewarded
    while organizations fail.  Maintain personal integrity in the light 
    of adversity, go to work, and be personally successful - I guess if 
    it makes Mssrs. Palmer, Presatori, and others successful by inclusion,
    we'll just have to live with it!
    
    	Bill
    
    
    
    

    I know that some of the objectives of the company under Bob Palmer has
    been to improve moral (where possible) and focus on communication. The
    recent results of the employee survey indicated that effective
    communication was a real problem as viewed by the employees. Certainly
    this topic has proved that. My entry is to simply ask why no one from
    the executive body of this company including our CEO has responded to
    this note, a very effective communications medium. I strongly feel that
    any input/response/appology/defense/explanation from the executive body
    would be valuable, and definitly a statment confirming their belief
    that improved communication is desired.
    
    So how about it Bob.....  Any comments?

    re: .120
    
>    We want our leaders to act like they are a part of 
>    the society and subject to a similar system of rules - what a novel 
>    concept.  We require it of political and military leaders, of the
>    leaders of our "institutions" (schools, churches, etc.), but not of our
>    business leaders?  
    
    At the risk of spinning down a rathole ... Consider all those bills
    that Congress passes that prescribe how everyone must live, work,
    breathe -- but explicitly excuse Congress from the law.  Maybe we
    really only "require" this of those not powerful enough to thumb their
    noses at us.  From that point of view, perhaps the Big Guns of Digital
    (et al.) feel they have the power to do Their Own Thing, so they do it.
    
    Without seeking to defuse the criticism of such behavior in its own
    right, I just want to point out that it's not just "everybody's perfect 
    but Digital (or even American business in general)".
    
    -Mark

re 117:

>   with it, is up to you. I only ask, at the current rate of profit
>    from our PC line, how many extra systems must be sold to make up this
>    figure?
 
If we set the average price of a PC on 2000$ and a 10% margin then for the
lucente/brebach package (1.000.000 $) , we need to shift --> 5000 <-- PC's.
Anybody had such a nice integration project? How many did we sell anyway last
year?

Timo

    Maybe we _should_ have given them 5000 PC's at cost price. It
    would have given them something to do instead of enforced idlement
    and bumped our sales...
    
    Hell, we could have thrown in free transport to their garages.

    
    
    To refresh memories, the memo from the President of Digital Japan from
    last summer ('93) detailing executive level pay cuts:
    
    
headers deleted:

Date:	13-Aug-1993
Posted-date: 13-Aug-1993
Precedence: 1
Subject: VOLUNTARY RETIREMENT PROGRAM - JAPAN 






                      Enlistment of Voluntary Retirement

                                                            Aug. 6 '93
                                                            President
                                                            Yoji Hamawaki

I express my regret that "the settlement of accounts for fiscal '93 ( July '92
through June '93 ) " has fallen into the red, making the worst record of 
deficit since our company was founded.  There are some reasons: business 
depression and dull market as well as decreased competitive strength of the 
company and lack of the leadership.  The major reason is that the company is
overstaffed.  With the unstable political situation, the future business trend
is unclear.  I cannot help but judge from the existing state of things that the
prompt recovery of market conditions cannot be expected for some time.  If we 
remain an idle onlooker, the company will inevitably fall into management 
disruption, which will force our employees to make great sacrifices.  Such the
worst situation must be avoided.

To plow through rough seas and continue the safe navigation of a ship named 
Digital Equipment Corporation Japan, we must positively carry out urgent 
countermeasures as soon as possible.  This is my duty as the captain.  I feel
my heart breaking, but I have decided to enlist voluntary retirement.  In 
consideration of the corporate philosophy that the company puts great 
importance upon the human rights, it is a matter of regret to propose the 
voluntary retirement to the employees who have been sparing no pains for the 
company over a long term of years.  I truly respect the human rights of the 
employees and would like to follow the corporate philosophy.  I think that it 
is also my duty to provide the crew with an opportunity of taking another ship
before our ship goes on a rock.

I provide a career support program for those who will seek a new job outside 
the company and make a challenge.  This program is more careful and cordial
than other companies in the computer industry.  It is quite different from the
existing support programs of other companies.  Based on the corporate 
philosophy that the company pay deep regard to the human rights, the program is
widely opened and designed to provide an equal opportunity to every employee 
regardless of the age.  The choice completely rests with each employee.  In 
addition, a constructive system, which supports higher education and studying 
abroad and considers preferential re-employment in the future, is also provided. 
I believe that this system is suitable for the management style of a new age.
For detailed information, please refer to the attachment and the pamphlet of 
this support program which is available later.
                                  
Digital Equipment Corporation Japan is not the only way of career. Now it is 
the time of choice.  Everyone selects his/her own way of living by
himself/herself. The company is merely a means of career.  I will have
sincere talk with those who consider my proposal as the turning point for a 
new life, and support them as much as possible.

I would like to give some advice to those who will decide to remain in the 
company. You are asked not to remain in your post aimlessly. You should keep 
it in mind that the severe demand for indirect rationalization including 
indirect personnel cut will continue.  According to the hard and fast rule of 
"No work, no pay," you are requested to work much harder for the 
re-construction of the company.  If you make a choice of remaining in the 
company, You should be prepared for a so- called way of the Cross.  For 
increased productivity, I am planning to re-assign some people to the 
departments which are directly related to sales promotion.

Talking these tight conditions, I fully realize that the management is
responsible for unfavorable business results for fiscal '93.  I will take the 
lead in making effort to curtail the expenses.  To show my strong
determination to recover the business condition for this fiscal year to the 
inside and outside of the company, I have decided to carry out the following 
cut of remuneration/wages for the time being,.

  <Remuneration/Wages Cut>

  President and Vice President            10% cut of the monthly pay
  Managing Directors                      8% cut of the monthly pay
  Directors                               5% cut of the monthly pay 
  ex-IBG Managers and Branch Managers
                    5% cut of the monthly salary and bonuses
  Senior Managers (above level 12)
                    bonus cut equivalent to 0.3 monthly salary

  *  This rule applies to the current level as of Aug. 6, '93.

This "Enlistment of Voluntary Retirement" was unanimously approved by the 
Board of Directors which was held on Aug. 4.  The employees are kindly 
requested to understand all circumstances and support this program.

 
To Distribution List: CORE
DELETED

    
    	RP should have THAT (-1) memo glued to the dashboard of his car.
    
    		the Greyhawk

What? And ruin the finish with the adhesive? Surely you jest.