Conference 7.286::digital

Sounds like sound financial practices (i.e. something thought up by one
of DEC's auditors). They are probably checking on the payroll and financial
systems people. Make sure there aren't too many people on the payroll.

Years back I heard a rumor that an ex-Deccie had been on the payroll for
many years, with the check being taken by someone else. This type of thing
probably happens everywhere, and audits such as this help keep everyone
honest.

We had one of those here in HLO earlier this year.  I don't know if it was
MSB Finance that conducted it, but we were warned about it for a few weeks
beforehand, and complied with the inconvienence when it happened.  We had
an interesting situation in my group - our cost center wasn't on the list
of where and when to report for the checks.  It turned out to be a typo.

Rich

Yeah, my wife told me about the HL incident.  I didn't see the use for it
until reading this note.
				/AHM

'MSB Finance' is the financial group responsible for Bill Demmer's organization
(MSB => Mid--Range Systems Business).

	- Jerry

Hey, Co-deccies in the US, do you mean that you get real money or checks
with your "paycheck" ? Here in Europe general practise is that money is
transferred directly to your bank. The "pay-check" is merely a piece of paper
that tells you how much you got from your salary and how much the government
has taken away for social security........etc.
 Sounds a bit strange to us thinking of the US like a country where you
use "virtual" or "plastic" money more than everywhere else !

Fred

	In re .5:

	In the US we have a choice of a "live" check or "direct
	deposit" into a bank account.  I don't know what the
	percentages are, but I'd guess that direct deposit is used by
	the majority of employees.  It's much more convenient!

					-- Roger

re -1

So what happens in Europe to an employee who does not have a bank account?

The general practice in the US is for a company to issue a check to the 
employee. The practice of "direct deposit" is not widely available. I
think that even in DEC, it is only available to the DCU and a few other
banks....


					Tom_K

Re: .7

DEC does allow direct deposit to a fairly large number of banks.
When I signed up two years ago I remember the list of banks
being at least two typed pages.

DEC will set up direct deposit to a bank if a sufficient number
of Digits want to have their pay check deposited to the bank.
I think the number is around 10.  A co-worker once commented
on seeing a sign in his bank saying ``DEC employees that want
direct deposit should contact xxxx''.

I am glad that this topic came up--I am considering switching
banks and this may remind me to check and see if I can get direct
deposit before I switch.
						B.J.

  I have been with DEC almost ten years and my paychecks have always been
  deposited directly.

--Simon

Prior to joining DEC (in Hudson, Massachusetts) at the beginning of last year, I
lived in Syracuse, New York (a change of about 250 miles).  Being quite content
with my bank in Syracuse, I asked my PSA if I could have my paycheck deposited
there.  To find out, she pulled out a loose-leaf binder listing all of the banks
which DEC was willing to direct deposit to!

Here in Europe (at least in France, I am sure ) you NEED to have a bank account.
Money is always transfered directly. If you do exceptionally get a check
than you can only cash it if you have an account. 

Fred

                
       Most, maybe all, states have laws governing payroll in the
       US.  In Massachusetts, an employer has to pay either in cash
       or by check; if the employer pays by check, he must ensure
       that there is a local bank at which the check can be cashed.
       (Obviously, the employee can agree to waive this for direct
       deposit.)
       
       --Don

re: .10:

	One thing you might want to consider about your account in Syracuse
is that (I think) Taxachusetts taxes you on out-of-state interest at twice
the rate of interest earned in Mass. accounts.

						- Rich

  Did I miss something?

  Didn't the fellow who banks (banked?) in Syracuse also live 
  there?  If so, then good luck to Taxachusetts trying to 
  collect any of the interest earned on that account.

                                   Atlant

You'd be surprised at the amount of power states
have to tax people who don't vote in the state.
I neither live nor work in California, but I pay
them (non-resident) state income tax because of
certain income-producing investments which are
handled by a California bank.
    John Sauter

RE: .14

Maybe I misinterpreted, but here's what .10 said:

> Prior to joining DEC (in Hudson, Massachusetts) at the beginning of last year,
> I lived in Syracuse, New York (a change of about 250 miles).  Being quite 
> content with my bank in Syracuse, I asked my PSA if I could have my paycheck
> deposited there.  To find out, she pulled out a loose-leaf binder listing all 
> of the banks which DEC was willing to direct deposit to!

Here's my interpretation:

	He used to live in Syracuse - "Prior to joining DEC (in Hudson, Massa-
chusetts)".  He is happy with his Syracuse bank, so he asked his PSA if DEC
would direct-deposit there.  So, we know that he now works in Mass. (I assume
he lives here, too, but I'm not sure if that's relevant).  I inferred that he
still had his Syracuse account and that if DEC would cooperate, he would have 
his checks deposited there, so I mentioned that there was one other factor that
he might want to consider if he hadn't already - the higher tax rate on
out-of-state interest.  Then again, if he's REALLY happy with the bank or if 
they pay a high enough rate of interest, it may be worth the extra taxes.

Did I miss the boat?

						- Rich

P.S.  Another assumption of mine is the gender of .10...my apologies if I'm
wrong.

  No -- you didn't miss the boat -- I misread.

  But I think the case would still turn on whether the fellow
  lives in MA.  Yes, John Sauter, if he lives in MA, he's
  a dead duck, tax-wise.  All of his income is fair game to
  the MassCollectors.  But if he happens to live in RI, NH, 
  etc. then MA has no legitimate interest in any income
  earned outside of MA.  Unless they've managed to make some 
  corporate Unitary Tax Law apply to people, too.  If so,
  then we need to get Reagan to kick their butts, as he is 
  kicking the butts of all of the states with Unitary Tax Laws.

                                   Atlant
                    Who_lives_and_banks_outside_of_Mass,
                     and_wishes_he_worked_outside,_too!

A point of intrest !
Aprox a year ago I moved within mass and had to change banks; no branches
of my ex-bank within 50mi; the bank I wanted to use was not on the list of
banks for direct deposit but is part of the Bank of NE group which may or
maynot be of any import. 
I contacted corporate payroll at PKO they gave me a form to be filled out
by the bank, within two weeks I could use it for direct deposit.  
To the best of my knowledge I am the only one using that Bank. 
		(Its Bank of NE, Worc County).  
It was a very easy painless process.
As I remember the only requirment is that the bank has to be a member of an
automated clearing house.

    	In Britain you have a legal right to be paid in cash, but hardly
    anyone takes that right. British banks operate nationally (and that
    means that they cover a population of about 1/4 of the U.S. just
    there), and many of them operate internationally. There is a branch
    of my U.K. bank within 10 miles of here in the South of France.
    Direct bank transfers are easier for almost everyone. Pay cheques
    are a symptom of the primitive U.S. banking system.

    
    
    Primitive US banking system? Come on.

    I haven't seen a pay check (cheque?) in over 9 years.
    
    -phil

    A bank is a building to house an ATM, right?

                                                ...diane

    I don't think our banking *technology* is primitive, but there are
    some rather strange rules which have a valid "historical" basis.
    US banks were limited to operating in one state (plus Puerto Rico
    as a freebie) until recently; now states can have interstate banking
    treaties with one another.  In Mass., banks are further limited
    to which part of the state they can serve.  This has been liberalized
    (it used to be, I think, one county or a 10 mile radius) but it
    did seem to protect small-town banks from competition from city
    slicker banks.  (Banks have seen a lot of deregulation lately.)
    
    Recently, a big Mass. retail bank holding company, Bay Banks, announced
    that all of their subsidiaries would accept deposits for each other.
    They used to have a common ATM system, but with local deposits.
    Like many large US bank chains, they were founded by merging smaller 
    banks, each with its own computer system.  Getting them to accept 
    deposits at each others' windows was a massive MIS job!  Not to
    mention the culture shock that followed each merger.
    
    I'm sure there's a lesson in there somewhere.

    Massachusetts requires by law that everyone have the choice of being
    paid in cash, or the company can opt to pay via check (or EFT) as
    long as the check or deposited funds can be converted to cash by
    the employee within 1 mile of his workplace.
    
    When DEC first introduced direct deposit, about a dozen years ago,
    it tried to make it mandatory. And the only back back then was Shawmut
    and part of the deal was the Shawmut built a branch on Main Street
    in Maynard. But PKO was over a mile away from any back. So Shawmut
    installed an ATM (one of the first they had) inside PKO.

    re: .24--I came to work for DEC just as the third building, MRO,
    was opening.  There was a Shawmut bank about a mile away, on Route
    20, and I opened an account there.
        John Sauter

    	.23 is what I was referring to.  20 years ago I could cash a
    cheque of *any* British bank at any other British bank, and also
    at many bank branches in other countries. Britain has over 1/5 the
    population of the U.S. (though a much smaller area), but I do not
    think I could expect to cash a U.S. cheque at 1/5 of U.S. banks.
    I also had major difficulties transferring money between a branch
    of the Shawmut bank and my bank in Britain. I have had no problems
    doing the same sort of thing with a bank in France, so I have to
    assume the problem has to be in the U.S.?
    
    
    (This is probably getting off the subject of the note, and as you
    can probably tell is only here because it is a sore point. I had
    to live for 2 months in the U.S. on "per-diem" with a wife and 2
    kids because the U.S. bank seemed incapable of giving me money that
    my bank in the U.K. wanted to transfer to me).
    
    		Dave (with apologies)

    Re .26:  It ain't just the banking industry.  It's geography and culture.
    	     Now for some gross generalizations. :-)
    
    In England, Europe is at your doorstep.  France, Sweden, and Denmark
    aren't that far away.  European countries have real politics, with real
    differences of opinion about what the goals are, not just on how to
    achieve them.  Your news is full of the economics, politics, and
    culture of the rest of Europe, because it is too close to you to ignore
    it. 
    
    In most of America, it takes at least a couple of days to encounter
    another country.  Most of us never see most of America. I'm probably as
    good an example as any.  I've never been west of the Missisippi.  I've
    been to Montreal once, and to Florida once.  I've been to Washington,
    the national capital, only twice. I've never lived more than 4 months
    outside of New England.  And I've lived 1/4 of my life already, even by
    optimistic estimates. 

    America is populated largely by European immigrants, who turned their
    figurative back on Europe to come here by boat.  The attitude lingers.
    "Europe is far away and very hard to get to.  You can only go there if
    you're rich."  Most of us haven't the foggiest idea how passports and
    visas work, but they sound very complicated, and frightfully expensive.
    Besides, they involve getting shots for all kinds of obscure diseases.
    Yecch! 
    
    Most small to medium US businesses don't invest abroad.  A small
    business in Massachusetts probably doesn't see Texas as a potential
    market, much less London or Paris.  The big commercial banks, like
    Chase-Manhattan, are able to manage routine international transfers,
    but the banks that live by handling individual savings accounts and car
    loans are run as small businesses -- and think like small businesses. 

    So, in general, with all our technology in America, we rarely expend
    much effort in applying it to international commerce.  Digital is
    the rare exception, and Europe probably accounts for a lot of our
    phenomenal growth.  (There!  I knew I could bring it back to the
    topic of the conference, if not the topic of the topic. :-) )
    
    						Ralph 

    To continue the digression a little longer : the US ban on most
    interstate banking does not apply to foreign based banks.
    
    This was recently picked up on by a major Eu2opean bank, which
    announced that it would open a complete chain of banks across the
    US to take up what it perceived as a po4ential market.
    
    The reaction was that the American banks immediately joined together
    to petition for repeal of the current controls, to allow them to
    compete!
    
    The ban on interstate banking chains, as far as I can tell, is a direct
    result of the failure of the "First National Bank" (or whatever...)
    over a hundred years ago. The law was introduced to kill the financial
    panic and prevent it occurring again.
    
    /. Ian .\ 

    As I recall, the laws against interstate banking were after the
    failures of banks during the Great Depression (in the 1930s). But
    I suppose it could have been earlier. In any case, Florida has one
    of the most repressive measures--probably because they were so badly
    burned in the '30s. Florida does not even allow branch banks. Even
    to the extent that they can not put a drive-up teller in the parking
    lot of a bank unless the teller is in the main building--I know
    at least one bank whose only drive-up location would have been in
    their parking lot across the street and it would have been illegal!

    Amazing how many of the "reforms" that were put in place in reaction
    to the Depression are being removed.  For a long time banks could
    not pay interest on checking accounts.  Balloon payments on mortgages
    were illegal.  Cash your paycheck quick, guys, we may be heading
    for a repeat of October, 1929.  Dow-Jones hit a new record again
    yesterday.
        John Sauter

    re .29:
    
    I think Florida has lightened up a bit on this.  I believe they
    do have branch banks (including teller machines).  Also, speaking
    of interstate banks, I'm not sure of the exact details, but recently
    (a few years ago) the Exchange National Bank of Tampa became part of
    NCNB (North Carolina National Bank) under some kind of grandfather
    clause.
    
    			      		- Rich, born and raised in Tampa

    My information on Florida is about five years old, so they may have
    changed. What was happening for many years is the creation of bank
    holding companies. They had ownership and some shared administration.
    But absolutely no cross-banking or sharing of accounts.

    
    I came to the US a year ago and at that time I formed the opinion
    that the US did indeed have a primitive banking system! After
    running around Washington for an hour or two (because I didn't know
    that 8th st NW is a different place to 8th st NE) my opinion of
    it has fallen still further!
    
    In the UK there are four major banks that are usually found in
    close proximity in all towns. Even in places that have only one
    of the banks you can still cash a cheque because they all
    participate in a clearing house system. In this system cheques
    not from the bank cashing the cheque (including those drawn on
    other branches of the same bank) are sent to the clearing house
    for presentation to the paying bank. Using something called a
    "cheque card" payment of the cheque is guaranteed even if the
    person presenting the cheque has no funds to meet it, so you
    can always get cash as long as the signatures match.
    
    The cheque card system also lets you buy goods at any store. Only
    a relatively small amount is guaranteed, i.e. 50 pounds, but 
    shops will accept the card for larger amounts because they know
    your bank will recall the card if you do not have sufficient
    funds (or overdraft facility).
    
    So in the UK I can go to any bank or any store and write a cheque
    (stores usually only provide goods, not cash), I would not expect
    to be able to do this anywhere in the US! Another useful feature
    is that my UK bank will accept a dollar personal cheque!
    
    There is also something called the Eurocheque system. With this
    I can either buy "Eurocheques" or obtain an ID card from my 
    bank. So armed I can go to almost any bank in Europe and 
    present my personal cheque (in Sterling) and expect to be
    paid, on the spot, in the local currency.
    
    The main bright spot in the US banking system is the national ATM
    networks. I don't know exactly how these work but I assume they
    are operated by independant organisations that transfer funds 
    between two financial institutions. These are located at banks,
    stores and a few other places. The problem is that there
    are several networks so even if you find a machine it will
    probably not take your card! So even in the nation's capital there
    were only 20 odd ATMs that I could use.
    [out of interest, in an ATM at a store, who's money is it? Is it
    the store's, a local bank's or the network's?]
    
    In Europe you can only use an ATM at a branch of your own bank,
    although I'm not sure that this is true any longer because
    I heard rumours of banks accepting other banks ATM cards and
    some international networks being formed prior to leaving.
    
    
    So I think my statement that the US banking system is "primitive" is
    well founded.
                 
    -- slight change of subject --
    
    I had a lot of problems here, with financial matters, in the first
    few weeks were because I didn't understand a rather strange aspect of
    the American way of thinking. That is if an American is faced with
    a situation in which they were not specifically trained or where
    there is some doubt their instinctive reaction is to "play safe".
    An example that happened to someone I know is that a bank teller
    refused to cash a dollar travelers cheque because it was not drawn
    on a US bank (or AMEX etc.) in spite of the fact that it was as
    safe as an AMEX one. So if you do go into a US bank and you
    are told that they can't help you remember that NO also means
    "I don't know"! So being persistant (even belligerent) often
    helps. I had always assumed that Americans were particularly
    creative when it comes to money matters but it has been my
    experience that people would turn away thousands of dollars
    in business for their employer rather than ask someone more
    experienced for advice.
    
    Mark
    

                                               

 I agree that street naming schemes in many cities are confusing, but
 the banks are not to blame.
 
 You can buy with a check at most stores. There are credit agencies
 which have 24-hour phone lines for check-clearing information.   
    
    I would not expect to walk into a European bank and cash a personal
 check drawn on an American bank. The check would eventually clear,
 maybe after a phone call (if the bank felt exceptionally helpful) or
 after a couple of days, but it is unreasonable to expect immediate
 cash.
                                                             
 Traveler's Checks should be honored at any bank. In my limited travel
 experience, I have not had a problem anywhere.      
 
    The Check Card system you refer to sounds alot like a credit card.
 Credit cards are easy to get.
 
 
    

    I'll certainly agree that the refusal of a bank to cash a check
    drawn on another bank is primitive.  In these days of electronics,
    you would think they could verify sufficient funds in real time.
    
    Right now, American Express Travelers Checks are they only thing
    besides cash that come with a guarentee of payment as long as the
    signatures match.
    

    A "cheque guarantee card" is not actually like a credit card - it
    only guarantees the bank will honor the check, up to the stated
    limit. A credit card produces a payment in all respects similar
    to a check, including the fact that it can be stopped if you write
    to the credit card company declaring a dispute with the dealer.
    
    Also many american shops only accept checks if you have an id card
    they have issued to you. Others will only accept the check provided
    you wait for clearance before taking the goods (especially for
    "non-local" checks).
    
    Finally I have also had problems with European issued traveller's
    checks in small American banks - especially in one spectacular case
    where I had sterling traveller's checks when on a course over here
    at Bedford in Mass, and was sent into Boston to find a bank that
    would accept them. A real pain, any (repeat - any) Britsh bank
    will accept traveller's checks in any currency and give you local
    currency (this is true of most European countries, though a few
    have currency limitations, especially behind the iron curtain).
    The worst delay you could expect would be 30 seconds whilst the
    teller checks with the central bank clearing scheme that the issuing
    agency is known.                
    
    /. Ian .\
    
    PS I used to work for a company who had dealings in America - they
    were so upset by the difficulty of funds transfer between the US
    and Europe that they did their trading through a Mexican office!
                                                             

    I have to disagree with the statement that most European banks accept
    any Traveller's checks.  When I was travelling the continent 4 years ago,
    I carried American Express checks and had no problem.  Every bank
    I went into had a sign showing which Travellers checks they accepted.
    Many types of travellers checks were not represented.  I was travelling
    with a friend who had Norwegian travellers checks and several times
    she was unable to cash them.  I didn't use travellers checks when
    I was in England so I don't know the situation there.
    
    Rich

    DIRECT DEPOSIT CAMPAIGN AIMS TO INCREASE U.S. PARTICIPATION
      {excerpted from "Mgmt Memo";  Vol. 5, No. 2; March 1986}
    
    In early April, Payroll will launch a campaign to increase the number
    of U.S. Digital employees in the Payroll Direct Deposit Program
    by at least 20%.  Today, 65% of all U.S. employees use direct deposit.
    
    For the company, direct deposit, or electronically transferring
    funds,
    
    o	Is a more reliable way to distribute pay than issuing paychecks
    	directly to employees.  Direct deposit through the federal
    	banking network to individual checking accounts is not vulnerable
    	to weather, air or courier strikes or other physical interference.
    
    o	Reduces banking and associated company processing costs.
    
    o	Keeps funds safe while they are in transit.  There is no live
    	check to be lost or stolen.
    
    For the employee, direct deposit, besides being safer,
    
    o	Makes an employee's pay available without a trip to the office
    	or bank.
    
    o	Offers employees a choice of over 28,000 U.S. banks for their
    	check accounts.  Nearly every bank, savings and loan, and large
    	credit union (including DCU) participates in direct deposit.
    
    o	Allows employees to move funds from checking to savings or other
    	accounts through any bank offering automatic transfer services.
    
    In April, non-participating employees will receive a brochure at
    home highlighting the advantages of direct deposit,  outlining how
    direct deposit works and answering common questions.  Local Digital
    newsletter articles and posters will also appear.
    
    With your support, the company can reach its goal of having 85%
    of the U.S. employee population in the Direct Deposit Program. 
    This success will reduce costs and improve payroll distribution.

    Since it will reduce the company's costs, how about passing part
    of that savings on to those employees who elect to use it?  That
    would improve participation, I betcha.
        John Sauter

    
    When I started with DEC in 1976 direct-deposit was not an option,
    it was the ONLY way to get paid. You couldn't get a live check if
    you wanted one. I didn't really care for this arrangement but had
    no choice. Now, I don't think I would have it any other way. It
    makes life much easier if you are out for an extended period (sick
    or on vacation).
    
    bw

    Hi Bob,
    I also started in 1976 and the option of a live check was not
    available.  As a matter of fact on my first day an account was openned
    for me at the local Shawmut bank.  It was the only bank available.
     I never did get checks from the bank; Shawmut is an awful place.
     I spent every Thursday or friday lunch time standing in a long
    line at the complaint desk.  To put it bluntly "It was AWFUL!!!".
    About 6 to 9 months later DEC signed on with many other banks one
    of them being the bank where I was doing business then and I still
    am today.  I was one of the first employees to switch from Shawmut
    to another bank.
    
    Since I switch from Shawmut to my bank I have LOVED it.  There has
    never been a problem and it is very convenient.  I would recommend
    direct deposit unless your only choice is a place like Shawmut.
    

    re Travellers checks in the US.
    
    On my first trip to the US the DCU refused to cash a dollar travellers
    check for me. I had to pay it into the account of a friend who then
    got the cash. 
    
    Tim

    Was it because you didn't have an account with the DCU?
    
    I bought some AMEX travellers' checks from the DCU for my CXO trip.
    I'd be really unhappy with them if they didn't accept them back
    afterwards.
    
    B.
    

    They probably didn't cash it because you didn't have an account.
    Credit union rules require you to have an account before you can
    transact business.   This includes cashing traveler's checks.

    Yes, I did not have an account at the DCU (since I was visiting from
    the UK). I confess to (still) not knowing the differences between a
    credit union and a bank (I now do have an account with the DCU - and am
    very satisfied with it - this note is not intended to get at the DCU).
    However it seemed strange that a check that could be cashed in any
    other bank, and would be accepted as tender in any store could not be
    cashed by an employee at what looks like a bank. The policy did not
    seem to be consistent since I did on other occassions cash checks at
    other branches of the DCU. I have also since seen other visitors
    without DCU accounts cash a travellers check with no problem. Perhaps
    it was just an unclear policy and an employee being cautious.
    
    Tim