Conference 7.286::digital

    It might be rumor-mill stuff. DEC here in Washington continues to
    advertise in The Post.
    
    It might be restricted to various geographic locations or business
    segments.
    
    Jim
    

        Hiring freezes and expense freezes and so are usually rumors
        and usually short term. I have never let one worry me.
        
        
        q

    seems to have become somewhat of an annual occurrance around the
    beginning of the fourth quarter as the bean counters begin to shore
    up against the end of the fiscal year .... something about not
    overruning the current budget seems to come to mind ...
    
    jack

    In my experience, hiring freezes are often imposed but never explicitly
    lifted. So - since I joined the company there are now 6 hiring freezes
    simultaneously in effect. Also, 2 bans on international travel,
    3 on off-site meetings, etc.
    
    Richard. 

  I just got a glossy brochure from Personel begging me to turn in all
my non-Digital friends for interviews, with a free dinner for two for
each one that they hire. 

  If there's a hiring freeze, does that mean I get a frozen dinner ?

  :-}
  - Larry.

    Not only is it a frozen dinner, it's COLD TURKEY!

    There was a freeze, but it's unfrozen now... I was in the middle
    of a transfer, got caught, and had to wait a week for the paperwork
    to start moving again.  The goal was to hold things for a week,
    while a headcount went on... sort of a 'closed for inventory'.

    bill

    Anybody wish to comment on the freeze, said to be going into effect
    today?  Has the stock market forced DEC to bolt the door?
    
    
    

    From today's VNS:
    
 
 Olsen: Digital ready for recession if one comes
   Kenneth H. Olsen, DEC president, said Thursday the company would take
 precautions to protect itself from recession but has not seen signs of one.
   Addressing the shareholders' annual meeting, Olsen said last month's market
 collapse will have "no immediate, direct effect on the company." But he said
 DEC would cut some spending.
   "We'll slow down capital spending and slow down hiring, so that if we have a
 recession we'll be ready for it." he said. But Olsen added that "like other
 companies, we have not seen any effect so far in our order rates." DEC's
 spectacular growth could slow if customers curtail or postpone capital
 spending as a result of the market collapse. "Computers are capital equipment,
 and spending on capital equipment slows down in a recession," Olsen said.
 Olsen also said the changing value of the dollar would have an effect on the
 company's business. He said the dollar had been "artificially high," making
 Digital products more than twice as expensive as comparable products
 overseas.

        I talked to someone in Ed Services personnel this morning.
        He said it's not really a "freeze", but a "redefinition
        of hiring guidelines".  Basically, he said we can hire
        to replace - and can't go over the headcount as of 30
        October.
        
        He said that some things hadn't been worked out yet, like
        where the headcount "cap" is (e.g., per cost center, larger
        group, all of Ed Services), and how contract workers were
        affected (e.g., are they part of the 30 October count).

        

I n t e r o f f i c e    M e m o r a n d u m

To: JFS STAFF:                          Memo: 5363848557COR70
                                        Date: Fri  6 Nov 1987 11:31 AM 
                                        From: JACK SMITH
                                        Dept: ENG/MFG/PROD MKT ADMIN
                                        Tel:  223-2231
                                        Adr:  MLO10-2/A54*

Subject: COST STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS & INCREASED PRODUCTIVITY

With the uncertainties in the U.S. and worldwide economic environments 
heightened recently by the disruptions in the financial markets, the 
impact of these uncertainties on our near term operating plans is not 
clear.  However, it is clear that a more cautious approach to our 
expansion plans is required until the economic outlook becomes more 
predictable.

Although there are uncertainties in the market, Digital remains 
committed to our strategy of increasing market share and plans to 
remain aggressive in the marketplace.

We are, however, asking your organizations to do even more at this 
time in terms of cost effectiveness.  Each organization will adhere to 

the following guidelines:

   1.   Management of Headcount:
           With the exception of specific Sales and Service revenue 
           generating positions, there will be a cap on each 
           organization's population equal to the October 30, 1987 
           headcount.  This cap will continue until further notice.  
           Hiring commitments made to date should be honored with 
           organizations then managing to the headcount cap 
           limitations.

   2.   Travel:
           Travel is to be limited to trips essential to produce 
           revenue or to address critical business problems.  Careful 
           analysis of the number of people required is emphasized.  
           Travel outside the U.S. must be at the request of a senior 
           manager in the Subsidiary and must receive my approval as 
           well.

   3.   Training:
           External Executive Development Programs will be postponed
           Internal Management Development Training and Technical 
           Training will continue where we are utilizing internal 
           resources.  

   4.   Agency/Contract/External Temporary Employees:
           Use of all agency/contract/external temporary employees are 
           frozen at current levels.  I want to review all present 
           usage within thirty days.

   5.   Outside Consultants:
           Each organization, in the spirit of cost management, should 
           closely examine the use of outside consultants and 
           eliminate these costs wherever possible.

   6.   Company Sponsored Employee Activities:
           Eliminate all Department sponsored employee activities 
           except service award lunches/dinners and normally scheduled 
           formal recognition programs.

   7.   Relocation:
           Managers must consider all available local staffing 
           alternatives before utilizing relocation.
           Relocate only for essential positions.

   8.   Off-Site Meetings:
           Eliminate holding off-site meetings for internal 
           activities.
           All business should be conducted at Digital locations.

   9.   Company Paid Food:
           Company paid food and refreshments should be eliminated at 
           internally conducted meetings.

   10.  Overtime:
           Minimize overtime.  Overtime should only be authorized when 
           it is necessary to a) meet critical production schedules 
           and b) address critical business problems.

We remain confident in our future, and it is important that employees 
see that these efforts are proactive and do not signal any weakness in 
Digital's current business.  The goal is to further strengthen 
Digital's position in the industry.



Distribution List:

IT STAFF:: ANDERSON @COGITO@VAXMAIL,
	FRANK CASSIDY @MLO,
	BILL FOLEY @MLO,
	DICK HASLETT @MLO,
	NAME: INFANTE
	INITLS: DAN <18797@DECMAIL@CORMTS@CORE @*>,
	KILZER @CIMNET@VMSMAIL,
	PEG MACMILLAN @MLO,
	SUE MILNE @MLO,
	RALPH PERRY @MLO,
	STONE @TOPDOC@VMSMAIL,
	BOB YOUNG @MLO
MEM IS MGRS:: AMANN @OWL@VMSMAIL,
	APFELBAUM @HENRY@VAXMAIL,
	ASHTON @BRAT@VMSMAIL,
	BASSAGE @VAXIT@VAXMAIL,
	RAY BEDARD @MOO,
	FRANK BINDER @MLO,
	NICK CAPPELLO @MRO,
	FRANK CASSIDY @MLO,
	DRUM CHAPMAN @MRO,
	RICH CHARLAP @LJO,
	CONLON @MSBIS1@VAXMAIL,
	DONOHUE @CURIE@MRGATE,
	DAVE DUANE @NRO,
	BILL FOLEY @MLO,
	DICK HASLETT @MLO,
	MIKE HOULIHAN @REO,
	DAN INFANTE @MLO,
	LAMB @SACMAN@VAXMAIL,
	SUE MILNE @MLO,
	BOB NAISMITH @WJO,
	RALPH PERRY @MLO,
	CONNIE PITT @MLO,
	BOB PREZKOP @MLO,
	ANIL SITOLE @ICO,
	STEVE STOLLE @MLO,
	TIM WOISIN @HLO,
	BOB YOUNG @MLO

    re .10:
>> company's business. He said the dollar had been "artificially high," making
>> Digital products more than twice as expensive as comparable products
>> overseas.
    
    Therefore, since dollar is at a fairly 'low' value now compared to
    overseas currency markets, digital should see overseas sales pick up
    since now US equipment is considerably cheaper than it was a few months
    ago, right?! [grins]  (...but then again the whole world's financial
    market is rather a large pile of do-do now anyway [thanks in large
    part to our artificially high standard of living and trillion dollar
    deficit], but lets not talk about that here, send nasty grams directly
    to me via mail instead, gawd but I'm feisty this morning!). 
    

    There are a whole bunch of products that a month ago were strategic
    to this company, in that they were designed to maintain DEC as the
    leader in networking.  Now with this freeze, there are specific
    cases where products will be late, and possibly canceled.  In the
    marketing area, there are 'events' that won't be funded, that a
    month ago, we couldn't afford to miss.  The memo from JS says that
    DEC intends to maintain it's leadership role in the industry, but
    only talks about cutbacks.  How is the work going to get done?
    
    bill
    

    What will happen is the same as always - priorities will come into
    play, and those products on the bottom of the list will not be
    developed, so that the ones at the top of the list can be.  Of course,
    this assumes that each department has more than one product to
    prioritize. 
    
    Bruce (in the process of doing exactly what I describe above)

    Just saw 304.12, very interesting!  see the following; only the  
    author is different(?)  --cer
    -----------------------------------------------------------------
   
I n t e r o f f i c e    M e m o r a n d u m


To: SSMI:                               Memo: 5363850815NAT83
                                        Date: Fri  6 Nov 1987  4:21 PM EST
                                        From: JACK SHIELDS
                                        Dept: SSMI ADMINISTRATION
                                        Tel:  276-9890
                                        Adr:  OGO1-2/R12*

Subject: COST STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS & INCREASED PRODUCTIVITY



There are growing uncertainties in the U.S. and worldwide economic 
environments which have been heightened recently by major disruptions 
in financial markets.  The impact of all of this on our near-term 
operating plans is not clear, but it is clear that a more cautious 
approach to our expansion plans is required until the economic outlook 
becomes more predictable.

Although there are uncertainties in the market, Digital remains 
committed to our strategy of increasing market share and plans to 
remain aggressive in the marketplace.

We are, however, asking your organizations to do even more at this 
time in terms of cost effectiveness.  Each organization will adhere to 
the following guidelines:

   1.  Management of Headcount:

         With the exception of specific revenue-generating positions 
         in Sales and Services, there will be a cap on each 
         organization's population equal to the October 30, 1987, 
         headcount.  That is, until further notice, headcount should 
         be no greater than the level of October 30, 1987.  Hiring 
         commitments made to date should be honored, with 
         organizations then managing to the headcount cap limitations. 
         I ask that each of my Sales and Services direct reports 
         submit a revised workforce plan proposing the minimum 
         headcount growth necessary to maintain revenue growth.

   2.  Travel:

         Travel is to be limited to trips essential to produce revenue 
         or to address critical business problems.  Careful analysis 
         of the number of people required is emphasized.  Travel 
         outside the U.S. must be at the request of a senior manager 
         in the Subsidiary and must receive approval from one of my 
         direct reports.

   3.  Training:

         External training programs will be postponed.

         Internal Management Development Training and Technical 
         Training will continue where we are utilizing internal 
         resources.  (More information will follow relative to 
         training).

   4.  Agency/Contract/External Temporary Employees:

         Use of all agency/contract/external temporary employees that 
         are used to augment the regular full-time Digital workforce 
         are also to be managed at current levels.  I want to review 
         all present usage within thirty days.

   5.  Outside Consultants:

         Use of outside consultants for special projects is to be 
         eliminated wherever possible.  All consultant work deemed to 
         be essential needs to be reviewed with me within thirty days.

   6.  Company Sponsored Employee Activities:

         Eliminate all sponsored employee activities except service 
         award lunches/dinners and normally scheduled formal 
         recognition programs.

   7.  Relocation:

         Relocate only for essential positions.  All relocations must 
         receive advance approval from one of my direct reports.

         Managers must consider all available internal staffing 
         alternatives before utilizing relocation.

   8.  Off-Site Meetings:

         Eliminate holding off-site meetings for internal activities.

         All business should be conducted at Digital locations except 
         where customer needs dictate alternative meeting locations.

   9.  Company Paid Food:

         Company paid food and refreshments should be eliminated at 
         internally conducted meetings.  Exceptions can be made for 
         customers as necessary.

   10. Overtime:

         Minimize overtime.  Overtime should only be authorized when 
         it is necessary to a) meet critical production schedules and 
         b) address critical business problems.


We remain confident in our future, and it is important that employees 
see that these efforts are proactive and do not signal any weakness in 

Digital's current business.  The goal is to further strengthen 
Digital's position in the industry.

I ask that you immediately disseminate this message throughout your 
organizations.  Our managers should not only implement the above, but 
also take steps to further reduce expenses wherever possible.
   

We can expect a copy from Senator Joe Biden any day now.  :-)

I notice the version in .12 has a time stamp earlier than the one in .16.

    re .16
    
    I especially like the part about making employees see this as a
    proactive measure.  The old line about "temporary emergencies"
    comes to mind for some reason ...
    
    Geoff

    re: .12,.16
    
    Just goes to show you that great minds really do think alike! :-)
    
    						Trace

    What about salary planning?  Remember the great freeze of '82-'83?
    I found out about that one on CNN.  I hope management has figured
    out in five years how to "manage change".
    
    tim
    

    re: .20, et al:
    
    (Hi Tim)
    
    SET CYNICISM/MEGAHIGH
    
    Anyway, I really doubt that there has been *anything* learned from
    the way the last hiring freeze/salary "adjustment" was handled.
    
    They will do an "across the board" type of thing again, because
    it is the easiest thing for the poorly equipped personnel organization
    to implement.
    
    Never mind that the people that will leave will be the good ones
    who can get more money, sooner, elsewhere. Nevermind that the ones
    more likely to stay are *more likely* to be lower performers (remember,
    please, that everything is relative)
    
    Never mind that a hiring freeze is stupid, because it is during
    times of downturn that we can obtain talent in the marketplace at
    a cheaper rate (and the bonus will be not to have to be hiring in
    talent at more than those of us who have been here many years are
    making).
    
    My experience based on the last one that Tim mentioned, is that
    it is going to be the same thing all over again. The letters from
    the two Jack S's only confirm it.
    
    SET CYNICISM/OFF
    
    Seriously though, I think that this could be much better handled
    on an individual basis. Say for salary, give those people performing
    at the bottom of there range (relative to peers) proportionally
    less of a raise, and those at the top, proportionally more. This
    would be incentive to be *more* productive, as opposed to a freeze/
    delay being incentive to *leave*.
    
    We will see, I am trying to remain positive.
    
    David_who_has_been_here_before!
    

    I am currently job hunting, and it has not worried me in the slightest.
    Like every other corporate freeze, it can be a) worked around. b)
    will finish sooner or later and c) is really just a change of
    policies...
    
    q
    

    That did come out pretty cynical, didn't it?  It isn't so much the
    freeze that bothered me.  It was learning about it for the first
    time on CNN.  Bad form.  It gives the impression of a rather callous
    attitude toward employee relations.  People in Corporate got fair
    warning, I heard, but it took too long to get the message to the
    field.
    
    Then again, it may not happen again at all.
    
    tim
    

	I'm on the hunt for a job for almost 6 month now. I've got several
	'almost' offers, stating that they would like to hire me but can't
	because of the current hiring freeze.

	Having read notes 258.* and this one, I don't understand the answers
	of the managers I got. To my understanding the hiring freeze should
	not or even doesn't affect internal hiring. Correct me, if I'm wrong
	please!

	Or is my problem to get a job ONLY related to my desire to move from
	Europe to the US? Though I understand that such a move is more expensive
	for the company than to hire down the road, it seems to me that because
	of all this freezing and expense cutting, I'm not given the chance to
	proof what I'm worth. All I want is a fair chance in a reasonable time
	frame! Am I asking for too much? 

	I am very grateful for comments and/or hints!

	Wilfried

    The freeze is not really on hiring it is on headcount.  Groups are
    being held to the headcount they had on hand as of 30 Oct 87.  Even
    if they had approved reqs before that they cannot hire unless some
    one leaves and they can use their headcount.  I assume that there
    are exceptions to this but this is the rule.  

    Pierce

    re.: .24
    It never has been easy to relocate from Europe to the USA.
    Hiring freeze or not, it is expensive for the hiring manager.
    If he/she is convinced that you are the only right guy for
    the right place than you'll get the job. If there is a "cheaper"
    solution than he/she will go for the other.
    The hiring freeze or headcount freeze or whatsoever just makes
    it a little more "expensive" (in terms of persuasive power to
    be used towards the hiring manager's manager).
    Did you ever envisage Valbonne as a "routing node" to the US ?
    It might help.
    Good luck,
    Fred_stuck_in_the_routing_node.
    

    I understand the reluctancy about relocating from Europe to the
    USA but what is the feeling about relocating within the continental
    USA? Like from Burlington, VT to Phoenix?
    
    Rich - Trapped in the Tundra
    

    Basically the same issues: the bucks it will cost.  Even though
    domestic transfers *generally* are cheaper than international, there's
    still a fair amount of dollars that go into the pockets of the moving
    folks, the airlines, the hotels, work time lost because of house
    hunting, etc.
    
    More than anything else (at least from my perspective), it's the
    needs of the hiring manager, how critical that need is, and how
    closely you match those needs.
    
    BTW, I hear that the hiring freeze is being tightened effective
    Jan 1?
    
    Jon

    re .28
    
    Gee, thanks, Jon. Looks like I'll need to start taking more Vitamin
    D pills to counteract the lack of sun we get here.  Ugh!
    
    Rich
    

    Re. .29:
    
    The decision to relocate an employee is more of a business decision
    these days, as opposed to its your turn now. On average it costs
    ~35K$ to move an employee, the range is, roughly, 23K$ - 56K$,
    international relocation starts at ~85K$ and goes up. These are
    the "raw" costs and don't include things like "down-time" or
    opportunity costs. (time off, disruption of work scheduels due to
    getting settled in, etc). The real costs are stagering.
    
    During the "great redeployments" of 1985-1986 when DEC was closing
    the Phoenix plant, people were relocated to MA, at great expense,
    and most relocatees decided they didn't like MA and were relocated
    back to Arizona, just imagine the costs and time lost in such moves.
    
    As a recruiter I have relocated countless numbers of folks. In the
    past the battle cry was "get me an internal candidate at any cost".
    Contemporary marching orders are more like, "Internal candidates
    are great, but local externals are much less expensive..... SO WATCH
    THE COST". Not only are local external candidates less expensive
    to hire, but they usually get here in two weeks or less, not the
    four to six it takes to free up an internal. The other part of this
    is that DEC doesn't have a monopoly on technology anymore, which
    means that external candidates might add more "value" to your group,
    as in bring something to the "party" that you haven't seen before,
    as in new approaches. DEC is competitive, clearly, but we don't
    make 6-9X markups on the loading dock anymore.
    
    I'm not trying to rain on anybodys parade, but the key question
    to relocation is: Does it make good business sense??, roughly the
    same situation as MAKE/BUY??
    
    Does this preclude relocation??? Absolutly Not! What it means is
    that job seekers need to start thinking in "business proposal" fashion
    when considering using their skills elswhere. The person who wants
    to make a career change and relocate to boot is having a "pipe"
    dream. Sucessful relocatees are those folks that can "hit the ground
    running" when they get to the new location, really add value to
    the new group. But yourself in that mold and you're almost there.
    
    
    Bill.

    Re last few:
    
    One thing that seems to be "catching on" to some degree, presumably
    to help combat the large cost of physical relocation, is the idea
    of "remote employees".  I know of several managers who have few
    (if any) employees that report to them physically located in the
    same building, or even the same *state*.
    
    2 cents worth
    Jon

    
    I have another question.   What is/are the benefits of hiring someone
    
    out of college over someone who is more qualified internally ??
    
    This question comes about because of the "hiring freeze ".  I 
    
    understand that even though there is a freeze, the college hire
    
    is still intact.
    
    Thanx
    
    Jim
    

    re: .30
    
    Concerning the question "Does it make good business sense", I feel
    it is a matter of attitude.  Allow me to further illustrate.
    
    This is occuring today, not 6 months ago, this is now, with a
    freeze on.
    
    There are two DEC plants in California separated by a scant 20 miles.
    One plant is willing to fly potential internal recruits out for
    interviews, simultaneously providing a rental car, overnight hotel
    stay, and meals.  All this for a "potential" in these trying times.
    I know, I was a lucky potential.  NO gaurantee for these folks
    that they had their man.  They even went so far as to say that
    if they had their man, they would go for full relocation, and if
    it got turned down, they "knew" they could at least move the 
    household goods out.  All this for a wage class two in these trying
    times.
    
    By contrast, 20 miles away, is a plant who will not consider one
    iota of the amenities the above plant indulges in.  In order for
    me to get an interview on a posted job slot, I am told I will have
    to fly myself out there and they will definitely give me an interview.
    Since I very much want to get out there, I'll even concede to this,
    and I will be.  But it makes me wonder if we're all working for
    the same company.
    
    Can anyone reasonably explain how one plant can just about continue
    with the "benny" deals, while another down the road has decided
    to play word for word under the "freeze" dictates?   How can
    one personnel rep/hiring manager work in harmony with the expenses,
    while another pair work in harmony to shoot down any notion of
    this and that.
    
    
    I realize there may be a hundred reasons why it is so with one
    plant and why it is so with another.  But in this case, "business"
    may be on the minds of one plant, while "pipe dream" is definitley
    transpiring at the other.  Is this right?
    
    Sherman

    Note #304.34 got jerked away from me by the net. The text, best
    as I can remember was something like:
    
    
    Re. .33:
    
    No one can say the "system" isn't abused, from time to time. I should
    have qualified .30 by saying "in my experience", sorry 'bout that.
    That there are MAJOR differences in hiring is reality. Some groups
    invite the trailing-spouse along for the interview trip, and some,
    as you pointed out, require the candidate to foot the bills (policy
    issue here, I believe). I do see a "trend" (using the term lightly)
    tword using the most cost-effective solution (business sense?).
    When operating under a "Do The Right Thing" philosophy, much is
    possible, maybe too much?
    
    Bill.

    Bill, a question:
    
    How does the company feel about working with an employee whose spouse
    is extremely unhappy with the place an employee was relocated to?
    In my case, it is Burlington, Vermont and my wife's health is
    suffering, her professional job opportunities are severely limited
    and she is miserable. This relocation was the result of Marlboro
    Manufacturing being discontinued and the prevailing sentiment to
    get personnel placed as quickly as possible.
    
    It turns out the job I took was great and the people I work with
    are fantastic but the environment my family and I live in is causing
    a tremendous amount of strain on my personal life. I have no qualms
    about relocating to a warmer climate and have been trying actively
    to work with folks in Tempe and Phoenix for the past month and a
    half but, as everyone knows, now is a poor time.
    
    Back to the question; given the strain on my personal life and the
    possible impact it may have on my job performance, is it DEC policy
    to work with an employee to help this situation?
    
    Rich
    

    Rich,
    DEC has no specific policy that would cover your situation, that
    I know of. Your problem is, however, not unique. Families get caught
    up in the excitment of a major move and often subordinate their
    true feelings, figuring that it will all "wash" in time. I spend
    a fair amount of time with relocating families being the "devil's
    advocate", trying to set their expectations to the point where,
    hopefully, they will have nothing but pleasant "suprises" at the
    new location ( I wish I could say that I'm 100% effective....).
    
    In your case, specifically, I would suggest two ways to get started:
    First, speak with your manager, if you haven't already done so,
    make sure he/she understands your situation, and will "back" you
    for an internal move. Next, speak with your personnel rep, make
    sure he/she knows what you and your manager are discussing. Your
    rep may even be able to point you and your spouse in the direction
    of some programs, to ease the "pain" untill you make your move.
    
    In any case you'll still have to be a "match" for whatever new job
    you apply to, and you're right now is not a good time, I do, however,
    see this improving late Q3 early Q4 (my best opinion). Make sure
    your resume is as to the point as possible, use your "network",
    use the on-line Jobs Book. Above all!!! make absolutly sure that
    the next location "fills-the-bill" in accomodating all your concerns.
    
    Wish you the best, I know this isn't an easy time for you, if you
    disire more personal help, call me, I make no promises, but I'll
    try.
    
    Bill.

    Here we go again.  
    
    I am job hunting in DEC and today I have had a number of calls stating
    all internal transfers are frozen.. What is true story?  Is this
    an extension of the head count freeze or what.  What useful purpose
    can it serve? Internal hiring in many cases is simply employee a
    moving to site b. If its not filling a new rec what is the reason
    for limiting this.  Seem movement to different jobs is valuable
    to the company and costs very little.
      
    
    

    Same question as .38.  I understand that effective Dec 31st, the
    hiring freeze that was on is now tightened.  Not only can headcount
    not be increased (as was the case with the Oct 31st freeze), but
    now internal transfers are being blocked without approval from either
    Shields or Smith.
    
    What possible good is that?  I don't understand.
    Jon

    Re. last couple:
    
    I'm in Employment and can't answer your questions.
    
    There seems to be no set "process", I have a group that has no
    constraints whatsoever, I have another group which is being very
    tight, and, yet, the economic forcasts are favorable for growth.
    
    Years ago I complained, loudly, and was told that confusion was
    the key, great mode of communication, no?
    
    
    Bill.

    Re. 37
    
    Thank you very much for your reply, Bill. I have spoken to my manager
    who is very supportive and will now set up with our Personnel dept.
    
    re last two
    
    I received some word today on a job I had interviewed for in November
    which happened to be out of state. The word I got was that CSM has
    instituted a policy where everything is on hold until 1/31. From
    that time on, req's will be reviewed on a monthly basis. 
    
    Rich
    

    We have been told that everything is shut off as of 3:00 pm (Maynard
    Standard Time I presume) yesterday 1/7. If the offer wasn't out
    by then we can't make it.
    
    I think we can still buy an answering machine to replace our secretary
    (who left after Oct 30).

<moved here - noter notified. /mod>
================================================================================
Note XXX.0                     Relo funds on hold                     No replies
PARVAX::WARDLE "Joe Must Go!"                        10 lines  11-JAN-1988 14:48
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    I'm sure this is being discussed somewhere in here so please re-direct
    me to the appropriate note if it is...
    
    I understand that there is a relocation funds freeze. I'm looking
    to transfer to Colorado from NJ and couldn't even consider it without
    Relo. 
    
    Anyone know anything about this...?
    
    Jim

    Thanks for directing me here Bruce...
    
    I didn't see this note before writing .43, but it's obvious that
    there really is a hiring freeze. I have been in touch with several
    people in CXO and in Denver (DVO). I get a consistent message from
    everyone. They can't offer relocation but can hire locally to fill
    req's. That is slightly inconsistent with the previous replies.
    
    This really depresses me. I've been in the NJ District for 7 years
    now and would really like to get out to Colorado. I don't believe
    they can find someone off the street with experience equal to mine
    for less money than it would take to relocate me. So I don't buy
    the previous argument that it's more cost effective to hire and
    train, and neither do some of the mgr's in CXO that I've spoken
    to. After looking at the Job Req's, they could relocate me and put
    me to work immediately. 
    

    I hope Rich was correct with the 1/31 date for the end of the freeze
    and the start of monthly reviews for hiring.
    
    Jim

    Jim brings up an interesting point in .44. The cost to the company
    of hiring a new person versus the cost of relocating an employee.
    
    Considering the many fringe benefits we in DEC receive, I think
    it is fair to assume that the cost to the company would be 
    a new-hire's salary doubled. Considering a nominal wage of $25K,
    the cost to the company is an addition of $50K per year which increases
    by 3-5% every 15 months.
    
    Conversely, an existing employee carries his or her salary and fringes
    with him or her. The one time cost of relocation varies depending
    on the case but in Jim's case and in mine (Vermont to Arizona) the
    cost is probably around $45K. This figure is one time and considers
    house-hunting trips, familiarization visits, all the relo costs
    per Personnel Policies, etc.
    
    There is another fractor to consider, also. People like Jim and
    myself have existing support networks within the company accrued
    over years of being a part of DEC. In addition, we are familiar
    with Corporate goals and headsets and, in most cases, can hit the
    ground running within a week or two of starting a new job.
    
    For an employee new to DEC, indoctrinations, familiarizations, etc
    take time and, for some, could last for a couple of months.
    
    I understand totally the fact that DEC is scrutinizing each and
    every job req closely and looking to fulfill these requirements from
    within a facility close or at the site of the need. However, to
    add to the Company headcount in lieu of utilizing current people
    assets doesn't make sense to me. The one-time cost is more than
    off-set over a 2-3 year period plus the benefit of having an already
    Digitalized employee makes it clear to me that cost is not always
    the deciding factor in hiring.
    
    Rich\
    

    Re. .45
        Although internal employees have a "support network" established
    and are familiar with DEC culture an external hire will bring with
    them ideas and methods which can be useful.  Digital isn't perfect
    and a person who worked someplace else might see more clearly how
    to improve something.  An attitude of hire only new graduates and
    teach them the DEC way and from then on fill all other positions
    from this pool is not wise and can produce narrow minded employees.
    
    Martin H.

    Diversity (.46) is important; and so is "confusion". Let's see how
    that might be. It is a given that no policy fits all situations
    optimally.  Yet when one is confronted by "the corporate policy"
    one tends to acquiesce to it.  On the other hand, in a "confused"
    policy situation, if something is important, most will continue
    to try get it to happen.  That is the only way for decision makers
    to get the information that leads to an exception to the policy.
    
    Yes, this can be hard on individuals caught in the middle and not
    sure which doors are open. But aren't they more apt to test to see
    if doors are unlocked when they hear that some doors "may" be unlocked?

    Confusion is also the best policy externally too. Think of the
    multiplier effect when a company the size of DIGITAL is seen as
    saying no-jobs.  With Confusion, other companies small or large
    must make up their own minds.  With Confusion, prospective employees
    will still submit their applications - otherwise they might not
    apply and DIGITAL could loose a good prospect.

    	rmm
    

RE: .44

  > I get a consistent message from everyone. They can't offer relocation
  > but can hire locally to fill req's. 
    
    The term you used, "freeze on relocation funds", sounds like you're
    talking about a corporate freeze of some sort.  Relocation funds come
    out of an individual cost center manager's budget, and in all
    situations I've ever seen, local management (read that Area or below)
    can decide whether to spend money on relocation.  There is no pot of
    money for relocation, per se, but an annual cost center expense budget
    that must pay for ALL expenses including salaries, relocation, office
    supplies, travel, and (almost) everything else. 
    
RE: .45
    
  > Conversely, an existing employee carries his or her salary and fringes
  > with him or her. 
    
    An existing employee carries salary and fringes with him/her, yes,
    but the hiring cost center manager must start paying for those out
    of his expense budget.  Therefore he must be able to "afford" hiring
    the new person, whether they are hired from outside or from within.
    The only additional funds he gets on an internal transfer are for
    that year's salary plan; that is, the person's raise that is already
    planned for that year.  The additional expense, however, can be
    considerable if there's an internal relocation involved.
    
    The system isn't perfect.  One of its imperfections is that it's
    often cheaper (and therefore sometimes more attractive) to hire
    from the outside than internally.  Maybe there's a better way we
    could structure the system to encourage employee mobility.  However,
    the stated trend for the last two years or so has been to DISCOURAGE
    employee mobility.  Hence the increase from one to two years in
    the required time in a specific job before moving on, the slowdown
    of promotions, etc.  But that's another note I guess.
    
    							Pat Resende

    Re .48:
>       in all
>       situations I've ever seen, local management (read that Area or below)
>       can decide whether to spend money on relocation.  

    The memo in reply .12 contained the guideline:

   "7.   Relocation:
           Managers must consider all available local staffing 
           alternatives before utilizing relocation.
           Relocate only for essential positions."
    
    Is this unusual?  Does this limit the options local management has?
    
    Bob

    I guess it's just a little frustrating when I scan the Jobs database,
    find numerous jobs that I'm qualified for in a location that I'd
    like to move to, and the funds are said to be unavailable. 
    

    Well, I'll just keep trying. 
    
    JoJ

Let's get back to the freeze issue.

<flame on>

I am in the field in a DIS position. The staff level here in our group is
about one-half to one-third what it is at other sites doing the same thing. I
have heard for YEARS about $ freezes, headcount freezes and hiring freezes
either from corporate, Field Service (my old bosses) or within F&A (my current
organization).

I have nearly weekly discussions with my manager about it and they frequently
talk to their boss about staffing levels. My immeditate manager is nearly as
burned out as I am... they can get no action from anyone- they aren't even
allowed to fill the slot that they created when they moved out of the group to
become a manager of it!!! 

All the while greater quantity and quality of effort is expected from the
group here ("Work smarter... do more.. give that extra %).  I have been
dishing out extra % for along time now and am unable to do it any longer.

Everyone just shrugs their shoulders and points towards Maynard. Personnel
seems unsympathetic (based on a past experience).

My first glimpse of the draft of my job plan (long overdue, BTW) looks like a
script written for Superman to keep Metropolis and the USA free of ALL crime
and problems. There is not enough staff to do an adequate job but they just
pile it on and expect the existing folk to work like mad. I can hardly see how
I could manage a '3' performance with the job plan as it is, let alone a '2'.
Maybe if I work 16 hrs a day, 6 days a week....

I've been reading the job postings and have been working a few leads so as to
find an 'escape' to a better/less hassle job. Now it looks like (temporarily,
I hope) even that avenue is blocked.

Granted, I am probably an exception, but sombody somewhere better get things
straightened out... I'm the victim of one too many squeezes!

<flame off>

Lee

11+ years at DEC. Gasp.

    Re: .46
    
    In the field it is the complete opposite: they usually only hire
    experienced (generally >1 year in industry) people.  Those fresh
    out of college don't look as attractive.  SWE seems to have the
    opposite approach.

    As far as cost goes, I think some folks are missing my point.
    
    Let's get away from this Joe and Mary from MLO or CXO syndrome.
    Let's look at it from a DEC standpoint.
    
    I'm Ken and I've got 10 employees. 5 work on the East coast and
    5 work on the West coast. The East coast is underworked and
    overstaffed. The West is hurting for people. Since each employee
    makes $25K/yr, my payroll, including fringes, is $500K/yr. 
    
    Now, in order to ease the pain on the West coast, I've decided to
    approve their req. I can spend $50K once to move a person from the
    East to up my cost for employees for one year to $550K or I can
    hire a person off the streets of LA and up my expenses for that
    year to $550K. No difference, right?
    
    Wrong. Assuming that there is a wage freeze the next year, in the
    relocation option, I'm back to a yearly expenditure for wages to
    $500K. In the hire from LA option, my payroll budget is $550K.
    
    My point is that, from a Corporate standpoint, it is less expensive
    to relocate a good candidate than to add to the headcount of the
    COMPANY.                                                
    
    I don't dispute the value of new ideas from people who have worked
    elsewhere or who have just gotten out of college. However, I think
    the value of our internal resources gets overlooked, sometimes,
    due to supposed "cost cutting" measures.
    
    Rich
    

                Re .53 and others
                
                One thing that gets forgotten frequently by those
        attempting to analyze the costs of some action is that you have
        different people looking at and figuring out those costs. Rarely
        (at least from my observations) do those costs get looked at in
        a "bottom line to the corporation" manner. The most frequent
        point of view seems to be " What will this cost MY bottom line?"
        This differing point of view will obviously bias the situation
        differently in each case.
                
                Generalities are great at times (things like "Do the
        right thing for the Corporation"), but often are hard to get
        considered when it's YOUR budget that's going to see the hit
        first.
                
                /s/     Bob

    As one who is currently working on Cost Center Budgets at the line
    item detail level, let me put my 2 cents in.
    
    As you go through your budget there are are number of items that
    are driven off of headcount, ie: fringes, occupancy, training etc.
    These numbers are either percentages of DI/IL costs or agreed amounts
    per person. These amounts, either the % or per person, are agreed
    to by the Cost Center Manager and usually 2-3-4 folks upward in
    the chain of command.
    
    There are items that can also be listed such as relocation that
    do not have a direct relationship to the items above.
    
    If I put in a figure for relocation, I will have to justify why
    I feel that I can not find a local person to fill the slot. Even
    if the reason is valid but the Cost Center budget needs to be cut,
    relocation may be the first area that is cut.
    
    There are also groups that want to promote the company in the local
    area. The idea is to hire as many of the local talent as possible.
    There are a number of reasons for hiring locally. The people are
    already there. They know what the area looks and feels like. The
    community has a feeling that the company wants to foster good
    relationships with the community. Nothing works against a company
    more than opening a plant/office and then bringing in an entire
    staff from out of town.
    
    If I was to make an investment in the relocation of an individual,
    I would hope that they would stay at least until their agreed time
    was up, if not longer. I understand that there are individual
    circumstances that may cause people to want to leave sooner, but
    those should be worked 1 - 1 and not as a group of plant issue.

    But what about situations where the points discussed in the last
    umpteen replies are not applicable??  I understand that the current
    hiring freeze applies to TRANSFERS as well as NEW-HIRES, WHETHER
    OR NOT RELOCATION IS INVOLVED.  I'm currently looking at moving
    to another group.  No relocation is necessary (as I would be working
    in the same building!), it's merely a subtraction from one group's
    headcount, and an addition to another.  For the new group, the slot
    has been approved, accounted for, and open since before the freeze
    went into effect.
    
    So what logic is behind blocking internal transfers where no relocation
    is involved?
    
    Jon

    Is it possible for someone to post the official memos stating the
    freeze(s) and the reasoning behind them?
    
    Thanks,
        Tim

    see 304.12 and 304.16

    Recently...as of yesterday...I heard that exceptions to the freeze
    can be had if necessary. I was speaking to someone in a group I'm
    very interested in going to and he was saying that because they
    are so understaffed they cannot meet their business goals. He said
    that an exception could be justified on this basis. 
    
    Also, personnel in my district mentioned that they are relaxing
    the freeze a little, but couldn't give me details. So, I'm not
    convinced yet..
    
    JoJ

  Somewhere in this note I read a memo stating that the headcount/transfer
freeze would be reviewed at the end of Jan.  Jan. ended two weeks ago; is the
freeze still in effect?

  As has been noted elsewhere in either this topic or another related
topic, the beginning of a hiring, transfer, relocation or other freeze
is always announced, while the end of it is rarely, if ever, announced.
One long-time employee mentioned that, by their count, there were at
least 9 hiring (etc.) freezes already in effect before the current one
was announced. 

  I guess the analogy "freeze" is a good one - the ice doesn't vanish 
one day, it just slowly melts away ...

  Larry.

    My guess is that you will continue to see/hear freeze/chill through
    Q3. This activity has cut our population growth rate rather
    dramatically, don't have actual numbers, but can speak from my own
    hiring activity. This, in turn, should make DEC's cost of sales
    look much better and give the "industry" analysts something positive
    to write up, for a change.
    
    The "up-side", in my opinion, is that it looks like DEC is planning
    for the long haul, fine tuning, getting in step with the industry.
    The "down-side" is that it is killing some real creative groups,
    giving new meaning to the word stress..... isn't stress something
    that "other computer companies" sell?
    
    Suggest that managers who need hires, plan on not getting them and
    adjust projects accordingly, sets up the "pleasant" suprise. FWIW.
    
    Bill.

    I don't care if they freeze external hiring, but would someone
    "up there" please explain how freezing internal transfers improves
    cost of sales and that sort of thing that outsiders care about.
    
    As far as I can see, the only effect of freezing internal
    transfers is to keep heretofore-motivated employees from
    moving into positions where they can be more effective and
    productive for the company.  In other cases it keeps people
    "trapped like rats" in bad groups (yes, there are some) where
    they aren't allowed to do the kind of work that they're capable
    of doing, or where there are personality conflicts and that
    sort of thing.  People trapped like this are not too likely
    to be motivated to perform at their highest level.
    
    Internal transfers don't cost anything; the people are already
    here.  They don't increase the population of the company, and
    they don't increase the cost of sale or anything else.  On the
    other hand, freezing internal transfers does tend to prevent the
    "abandon ship" syndrome in a group where the management does not
    treat their people properly; heaven forbid we should be encouraging
    managers to respect their employees so that they'll *want* to stay
    instead of being *forced* to stay.  Is this the only way some
    groups can keep their people now?
    
    Forcibly preventing people from doing their best for the company
    just isn't the "right thing to do", and is extremely unlike the
    DEC that I know (knew?) and love.  All of this seems quite obvious
    to me and many others; why isn't it apparent to the people who are
    making these decisions?  What could they possibly hope to accomplish?
    The image that they show to Wall St. can't possibly be more important
    than the substance and reality that this sort of nonsense is going to
    cost the company a couple of years down the road.
    
    Chris

>    I don't care if they freeze external hiring, but would someone
>    "up there" please explain how freezing internal transfers improves
>    cost of sales and that sort of thing that outsiders care about.

    I'm not one of those "up there", but there are several ways that
    internal transfers cost the company money in the short term.  In
    the long term, I agree with you completely, as the company is paying
    for a resource that's not being fully utilized.
    
    Internal transfers cost "hard" dollars if your changing location,
    and the company has to pay for it.  Having been relocated by DEC
    four times, I can attest to how much money that can add up to.
    
    They also cost "soft" dollars in administrative overhead, in lost
    work time, in retraining costs (there all *always* retraining costs).
    
    Finally, internal transfers to *new* positions, unless they're going
    to eliminate the old positions, mean that the company has to hire
    someone and train them for the old positions, thereby violating
    the original intent of the hiring freeze.
    
    Geoff

re: freezing internal transfers

By this, I assume you mean transfers *out*.

People do many things that are successful until tested.  If you have an 
offer from another group, and the support of the incoming manager, I would 
encourage you to elevate the issue as high as necessary to get it resolved. 

You may wish to note that their are applicable Personnel Policies and 
Procedures governing internal transfer, and that there is *no* provision 
for blocking a transfer *out* via a "freeze".

In my opinion, an attempt to block a transfer *out* with no justification 
other than the existence of a freeze is contrary to company policy.  My 
opinion is shared by others in a position to do something about it, but 
only if the issue is elevated.

re: internal transfers cost money

Internal transfers in general cost the company less than an outside hire.  
Also, if someone who would have transferred terminates instead, then the 
company loses twice.  If you think about it, it's a short-sighted attitude 
that's an affront to anyone with business sense. 

Ray

    
    > Somewhere in this note I read a memo stating that the headcount/transfer
    > freeze would be reviewed at the end of Jan.  Jan. ended two weeks
    > ago; is the freeze still in effect?
    
    Well, yes and no.  It was reviewed and certain organizations were
    allowed to begin limited hiring.  Fortunately, we in Ed Services
    were among those groups allowed to start hiring again.  (My
    understanding is that it was because we "made our numbers" in Q2.)
    Other organizations are still frozen.
    
    Frank

    
    I was just wondering...
    
    Any signs of a Spring thaw?
    
    I notice there's still activity in the JOBS conference.
    
    Is there an official end date, or will the laws of attrition rule?
    

    What I'm hearing is that there is not yet an official thaw, but
    it seems that things are starting to loosen up a bit, based on the
    needs of the hiring group.  I know that I just recently (last week)
    did an internal transfer to another group; no relocation involved.
    
    fwiw
    Jon

        As has been mentioned previously, no Dec Hiring freeze has
        officially been cancelled, so this one exists along with a
        dozen others. I think the natural attrition will occur soon
        (We all known what low attention span Managers have... :-))
        
        If our end of Fical Year Figures are good, I would say it should
        really ease up then. (Just about the right time for me.)
        
        q
        

    Two weeks ago we were informed that our organization (Distribution)
    had too many people, and that the number would be reduced. Yesterday
    we were informed that the process was on "hold". Stay tuned. 
    
    (Maybe they found out how many of our temps have been here for
    *ages*)

    I was recently told that since the hiring-freeze began we have taken
    on 3000 new employees (world-wide). (I consider the source of this
    info fairly reliable.)
    
    I don't know what this means, but I think about it a lot... ;*)

I would certainly recommend that you don't consider the hiring freeze
at all when making the decision to change jobs, it seems to be so dynamic 
that the only way to find out whether it is still in force is to test it.

My view of this is that the freeze was lifted some time in February but
budgetary controls were going to be strictly enforced. So groups that
were within budget could hire, both internally and externally.

Now the situation is changing again, the chill is coming on but the
freeze hasn't quite arrived yet. I expect that within the week or
two it will be a freeze.

So there was/is a window in Feb/Mar.

    
    	So, this freeze thing...
    
    	Given that it may never be officially lifted, any signs of an
    unofficial loosening, maybe beginning in Q1?  I have noticed ads
    in some national magazines that Digital is looking for outside people
    to hire for DecWest, and Colol Spgs.  How does this affect internal
    transfers?
    

    Here in Colorado Springs, all jobs have to be posted internally
    first, and all internal applicants must be considered first.
    
    So it *shouldn't* affect internal transfers.
    
    -  David

        As I am sure I have stated previously, There has never been
        a formal end to any corporate hiring freeze. (So in theory,
        there are 20+ separate freezes still in effect). I think the
        way that things usually work is that when people start putting
        in Job Reqs and that start getting filled, then that Freeze
        has thawed...
        
        q
        

(Moderators please move if there is an appropriate note.)

Given the state of the company today, rumors of layoffs, rumors of a potential
loss in the 3rd quarter I was wondering if anyone has seen any external hiring
going on in the past several months? 

I was speaking to in friend in HR's the other day and they let slip that
during the last "hiring freeze" 7000 new hires were added to Digital. I didn't
pursue this person's definition of hiring freeze or whether they meant the last
company wide hiring freeze, but I felt rather chilled by the thought that
Digital could actually add 7000 people during a hiring freeze. I recognize
there are always exceptions when the skills aren't available from within
locally but I'd guess that in at least some cases its just a whole lot easier
to place an ad in the local help wanted than to search the company and sell
an internal candidate with the right skill mix to relocate. (At least someone
is trying with the COD program.)

How about it fellow DECies, anyone seen any NEW faces lately?

-Terry (just curious) 

	DIR/KEYWORD=FREEZE also turned up topics 258 and 886. This one
	seemed the best fir for 304.76 though. DIR/KEYWORD=HIRING_FREEZE
	would also turn up this topic BTW.

				Alfred

>              -< FYI   -   KEYWORDS are there for people to use >-
    
    Funny you should mention that.  I just did DIR/KEYWORD=HIRING and
    waited 20 minutes with no response before ^Cing.  (At 0630 EST)
    
    Do you really expect people to use keywords with that kind of response?
    
      John

	DO I expect people to you keywords? Even if response was great I'd
	be surprised if they did. I'm just hoping that between DIR/TITLE
	and DIR/KEYWORD a few people will try to find existing topics.

			Alfred

re: .78,
    
>    Funny you should mention that.  I just did DIR/KEYWORD=HIRING and
>    waited 20 minutes with no response before ^Cing.  (At 0630 EST)
    
>    Do you really expect people to use keywords with that kind of response?

	Ha!  You're lucky to be able to get into this conference at all,
    much less use keywords!  This conference is among the worst on the
    entire network in terms of accessability and response time.

	I sent the moderator (Peter Conklin) a memo pointing out this
    problem over a week ago, but have yet to get any response.  You'd
    think that with the increased reliance upon notesfiles across the
    corporation, that of all notesfiles, the Digital notesfile would at
    least be accessable.

    re: .76
    
    My understanding, from where I sit (in the field, under the banner of
    EIS/SWS):
    
    Up until a few months ago, SWS/EIS could do external hiring only if the
    position had been posted internally for x days, COD possibilities had
    come up dry, an appropriate VP signature had been obtained, etc.  Then,
    we went through a spell of "no external hires -- period!".  Now, we're
    back to the jump-thru-enough-hoops-and-mortgage-your-grandmother-and-
    then-you-can-hire mode.
    
    The problem in the field (as I understand it) is that we have many business
    opportunities to sell residencies, etc. which need to be filled ASAP. 
    The COD candidates (reportedly) rarely come with the skill set to
    "begin delivery within 4 weeks", or whatever the customer need is.  Even
    under the current exception plan, by the time the open req has been
    sitting around long enough to qualify as a possible external hire, the
    customer is already less than happy about the very long delay.  As a
    result, we may not actually do much external hiring because the
    business goes away before we can find a suitable candidate.  8^(
    
    Looking at our District delivery units, there are three people who
    might have been external hires within the last year (I don't know where
    they came from).  This represents less than 10% of our delivery folks.
    If the 7000 number is to be believed (over what time period?), then
    some other groups must have an easier time hiring outside than we do.
    
    -- Russ

    ... back to the subject:
    
    External hiring did happen.  The program I am working for added several
    people, both as direct hires and as contractors.  Some of it was for
    unique skill sets, some of it was for timeliness.  Of the people who
    were internal transfers to the program from elsewhere in Digital, my
    impression is that some of them were able to transfer easily, but for
    some it has been a nightmare of red-tape and non-cooperation.  I have
    no idea how many people might have been interviewed internally who
    might have come to the program except for restrictive policies or
    pay inequity problems.
    
    As long as the compensation policies are geared to paying an employee
    based on outdated salary planning information and not on what a job
    is really worth to the corporation, then employees will be discouraged
    from internal transfers.  Since this problem has existed ever since I
    came to work for DEC eight years ago, I can only assume that management
    wants it that way for a purpose.
    
    Geoff
    

    Yes, I had a friend who was just hired at the CSC.  I understand it
    took an 'act of Congress' to open the rec and a few others which open
    for a short time.  She starts in 3 weeks.

    
    This is a Sorry state of affairs. It is Managements job to get the
    nessesary skill sets AVAILABLE. If there is an external freeze there
    SHOULD BE NO EXTERNAL HIRING. Once again if you cry and jump enough
    the responsibility is lifted from your shoulders. Doesn't anyone
    do any planning with regards to long term business? Even short term?
    Surley the right people are around! Lets find and use them.
    
     If I saw an external hire I'd surley inquire to management as to how
    this could happen. With all the gloom and doom going around this just
    doesn't seem like the right thing.
    
    -FUSTRATED
    Mike Z.

    Re .85
    
    	I think you may have jumped in too fast with your "FRUSTRATED".
    It is possible that the Hiring cost center has attempted to find a
    candidate for the position, but due to poor response, or no one who
    fits the bill, has applied, they have had to go outside the
    Corporation.
    	I know that we,(CSC Colorado Springs) many times have difficulty
    finding a qualified person for open Reqs., and have to wait a
    considerable time to fill a slot, with the result that the existing
    people are hard pressed to fulfill their commitment to the Corporation.
    
    	Perhaps you should check what has been done, and what the result
    were before jumping up and down.
    
    George

    re: .85
    
    I agree with you that it is a management problem, but not for the
    reasons you describe.  This is a long-term problem, and short-term
    freezes will only ever have a marginal effect.  It's terribly hard
    to find qualified applicants internally because ...
    
    1)  Empire protection - no one is willing to distribute information
    within a group about transfer possibilities to their qualified people. 
    Often the only people who get information are the ones the manager
    would like to get rid of for performance or personal reasons.
    
    2)  Training - Most specialists I know in the field get very little
    training as a general rule, and usually is more geared to customer
    requirements than it is to career progress.
    
    3)  Even if you do find a qualified applicant internally, as a manager,
    you often find yourself prevented from getting that applicant because
    of restrictive pay and promotion practices.  If you find a person who
    is qualified, but not currently rated at the level of the job you have
    open, then you may not be able to promote them, or pay them in line
    with what the job is worth until several years have passed.  If you
    find a person who *is* working at the correct level, then all you have
    to offer is a lateral transfer, which often causes hardship on the
    transferee with no gain to show for the effort.
    
    4)  Finally, even if you do find the right person, at the right level,
    and they accept ... relocation problems, family problems, red tape,
    and all of the other familiar roadblocks to a successful transfer
    still have to be dealt with. Since DEC is becoming more geographically
    dispersed, these problems show up with more and more frequency, but
    I haven't noticed that DEC has become more proficient at solving them!
    
    Geoff
    

    You're right,this notesfile is the absolute WORST for accessibility,but
    other files have their problems too.Some days every conference I try to
    open gives me some meaningless error message.
    
    Ken

    I apologize for entering this here, but you'll understand in a moment
    why I don't want to look for a better place!  Yesterday, I submitted a
    batch job to start at midnight and extract the new unseen notes from
    this conference.  Today around 3:30 p.m., the job terminated without
    completing with about a dozen notes extracted.  (Other jobs on our
    cluster finish in normal times.)
    
    
    				-- edp

    re: .89
    
    One manager here has had the same problem 2-3 days per week: the notes
    extract job just seems to sit around forever with the network link
    to HUMAN present, but with nothing going on.  He finally got so
    frustrated that he no longer extracts notes from this conference (other
    conferences work fine).
    
    -- Russ

    I wonder if the performance of the network and getting
    into conferences on HUMAN:: has anything to do with the
    fact that they moved from mainstream DEC land (Parker St
    Maynard, MA, USA, PKO) where network bandwidths are very 
    high to boonies (Westford, MA, USA, DSG)?  If so maybe
    this conference should be moved to a location which has
    a higher network bandwidth.

re: .89, .90, .91, etc.,

	Like I said, I complained about this problem over a week ago to
    the moderator (Peter Conklin), but since I have yet to get a response,
    I can only assume that either Peter can't read his mail due to an
    overloaded system, or, perhaps more likely, this notesfile, along with
    perhaps 99% of all notesfiles on the network, are established and run
    by people with practically zero clout when it comes to prioritizing
    computing resources and improving notesfile performance.  Take a look
    at other notes on this subject (if you possibly can) and you will see
    that this is not a new problem by any means.

	It is truely a sad situation in that the very success of this
    corporation desperately depends on the level of accessability to the
    various notesfiles which act as arteries of information flow within
    the corporation, yet there is not one single thing which is adequately
    being managed in any of the network notesfiles.  If this situation
    cannot be improved immediately, then this corporation risks suffering
    a cardiac arrest in terms of information flow.

	If I had any clout, I would dedicate a high-performance system here
    in PK03 to serve as a host for this DIGITAL notesfile (which I consider
    to be *THE* major artery of information flow within this corporation).
    Unfortunately, I just joined a new group, and being the new kid on the
    block, I have next to zero clout around here when it comes to computing
    resources in general (much less for such virtual group things as network
    notesfiles).
				    -davo

    Given that Peter Conklin is a very highly-placed manager (reporting
    directly to the head of Video, Imaging and Printing Systems, Larry
    Cabrinety), I doubt that clout is the issue.  HUMAN is a relatively
    small system, which is used for little else than this notesfile.  VIPS
    is being pretty generous in dedicating ANY resources to a function
    which should be paid for on a corporate-wide level.  And, as was
    pointed out, the machine is in a network backwater.  Send him another
    letter -- he's a busy man.
    
    Ed

    I wonder whether all these notes about performance should be in another
    topic?  :-)

							-- Nina

re: .94, etc.,

>    I wonder whether all these notes about performance should be in another
>    topic?  :-)

	Well, now that I finally got back into the conference (heck, that
    only took nine hours or so), I'll try and point this (as well as other)
    DIGITAL notesfile performance rathole(s) to note 1047.

				   -davo

    Well so much for a hireing freeze. DEC and IBM recently each hired a
    couple of complete buildings full of people from KODAK in Penn. We got
    workers to managers, secretaries, everything. Were talking 200-400+
    people each. Only their top level managers report to DEC now instead of
    KODAK. Everything else is the same except they now get DEC pay checks
    instead of KODAK pay checks. It seems hard to believe that hiring from
    KODAK was more important then using our own surplus people.
    
    Regards
    AL ROOT
    

re: .96

You seem to have a limited perspective here.  (I assume you're talking 
about the TELSTAR project.)

1.	Hiring these people was an integral part of a multi-million dollar
	deal.  It is hoped that success at KODAK will lead to other similar
	business.

2.	Digital is trying very hard to fill some openings associated with 
	this project with some folks from New England.  I even saw an 
	electronic memo circulated by some VP's trying to staff a 
	particular position on this project.

Do you know anyone willing to relocate?  Do you know anyone who knows
anything about networking?  People like this would most likely be offered a 
transfer immediately.

The name of the game is *R*E*V*E*N*U*E*.

Ray

    re: -.1:
    
    "The name of the game is R*E*V*E*N*U*E"
    
    Unfortunately, all too many people in the company believe this to be
    true.
    
    The true "name of the game" is P*R*O*F*I*T.
    
    There is a big difference, and part of Digital's recent pains is due to
    the fact that very few people seem to be able to recognize it.
    
    -DM-

    re: .98
    
    You need a revenue stream to make a profit.  Turning away business
    because we are unable to deliver it is not a formula for profitability.
    
    The barriers to profitability are largely due to a bloated corporate
    structure.  An army of HQ staff (or marketeers, or manufacturing
    engineers, or financial analysts, or ...) cannot deliver technical
    consulting NOW.  It is idiotic to stop the revenue stream for 18 months
    (or two years or whatever) on the hope that maybe they can be trained
    to do so.
    
    Digital is in trouble because we have too many people designing and
    building products our customers don't want or otherwise doing jobs that
    just don't need to be done.  Let's fix the problem in the most
    compassionate way we can afford, but that's no reason to be stupid.
    
    The Kodak project is the kind of large integration business Digital
    says it wants to be in - that place where giant margins are waiting to
    be earned.  If we are not prepared to do what it takes to WIN and
    DELIVER opportunities like this, let's drop the pretense and quit now.
    
    Al