Conference 7.286::digital

    I think that's been going thru many minds recently.
    
    Dick

    
    Maybe that's the idea......
    

    
    
    	I heard from a "friend of a friend" that when WANG files (filed?)
    	chapter 11, they would be laying off with no severance package at
    	all due to "fincancial constraints"...  
    
    	Hope we don't find ourselves in the same situation...
    

There is a good article in the Aug. 3 issue of "Industry Week" titled "Managing
Survivors - downsizing traumatizes those who remain behind as well as those who
are cast adrift". I recommend getting an issue and reading it. 

In it, they have tips for managers on downsizing. I recommend reading the whole
article to establish context:

1.  Don't duck the issues.
2.  Be honest and quick.
3.  Let the survivors grieve.
4.  Share information with the survivors.
5.  Give full disclosure (who, how many, will they hapeen again, etc.)
6.  Pat the survivors on the back.
7.  Provide ample advance notice of lay-offs (like 6 mos.).
8.  Prepare supervisors and managers for the layoffs.
9.  Increase managerial accessibility.
10. After the layoff, solicit employees so that they can actively shape the
    post-layoff environment.
11. Have the survivors work towards achievable goals.

Bruce

    re .0 - it's already happened.  The current package is not as lucrative
    as the original TFSO.  So the folks who were most obviously unnecessary
    got the best deal, the ones who were worth keeping if things took a
    turn for the better are getting a less attractive deal, and the people
    who are really worth retention will be likely to get the worst deal if
    it comes to that.
    
    That seems to me to be an inevitable consequence of the way things
    work, not a conscious decision by the corporation/management.
    
    But it highlights an issue that must be resolved by the company, in
    order to put this behind and get on with successful accomplishment. 
    How can the real acheivers be motivated to perform successfully, and to
    feel loyalty to the employer, when faced with these facts of life? 
    That's something that needs to be addressed, and the statement
    attributed to Palmer in .0 doesn't sound to me like the best solution. 
    Maybe it's an unfounded rumor, or maybe it was intended to motivate (in
    which case I wonder about the choice of stick vs. carrot).  I just hope
    there's more to it than the base note reports...

    One other side effect of this all, is the fact that those who have left
    DEC and will be leaving DEC in the near future, will be applying for
    jobs in other companys.... many of these companys will begin leveling
    off their own employment, to keep from becoming another Wang/DEC.
    
    Those left, who might someday find themself "rightsized", will find
    less money and the probability of a real small job market. This will
    mean a total change in careers, for most/some.
    
    Just something else to think about..!
    
    Bob G. (Still hanging in there)
    

Ditto, .5 and .6

The more loyal to the company you are, or the longer you try to stay for 
whatever reason, the more exposure you seem to have.  Already saturated job
market, ever diminishing package, more work to do before you get laid off,
and ever dwindling benefits on the way.  Presumably (or at least in theory), the
people lowest in the rankings got the best deal, and all the people higher up
in worth to the company get are more paychecks, possibly over a longer period
of time.

What the heck?  Maybe we should see the continued employment for a year or two
longer than the first people to TFSO as the "package" the more valuable 
employees get.  You just have to work a little harder for it than if you'd 
gotten TFSO 1, that's all.

I don't think this was the corporate intent - to penalize those who tried harder
and hung on longer - but it does seem to be the side effect.  In my more
cynical days, I'd probably have said:

It's just the company's way of saying "Thanks for a job well done".

    re: 'packages' becoming less 'attractive'
    
    As they used to say around WANG a couple of years ago, regarding those
    people targeted for the latest layoff:
    
    "Don't feel too bad for them...they may have caught the last lifeboat!"
    
    Something to think about on the day WANG goes Chapter 11.

    
    RE: .6 et al
    
    > those who have left DEC and will be leaving DEC in the near future,
    > will be applying for jobs in other companys....
    
    	and some of these companies may be considered 'customers' - how we
    treat these people now may have a lot of influence over whether we
    follow them - or serve their needs (and ours) in the future.
    
    2 sides to every coin!
    JN

    
    I heard quite some time ago that the current TFSO is the last.
    The round of lay-offs, which will begin Q2 (October) will provide
    the victim with four weeks of pay.
    
    That's a fine how_do_ya_do!
    
    Tom
    
    P.S.  The first TFSO was not TFSO or TFSO1, it was called TMP, and
    victims (or should I say winners -- up to 144 weeks of pay!) of that
    program said it stood for Too Many People.
    
    

       I think the Maximum in the TMP days was 104 weeks.
                                     Denny

    
    That's what I thought too, but the person that told me about no
    more packages INSISTED it was 144.  I must have a bad source of 
    information.
    
    Tom
    

    re:  .10
    
    Who is your source of information (no names please but
    perhaps his/her level)? I find it hard to believe that
    after setting a precedent of serverance packages for
    "poorer" performers, that DEC would leave itself open/
    vulnerable to class action lawsuits for minimal severance
    of "better" performers.

    The first package was not necessarily for "poor performance", but I
    don't know what the actual criteria was.
    
    Performance came into play sicne they started calling it TFSO.
    
    -sandy
    

    As an ex-WANG employee who saw four years of growth/excitement
    ('81-'85),  followed by three years of downturn/right sizing ('86-'88),
    I learned three lessons:
    
    1. Companies with no history of layoffs do a poor job initially with
       layoffs.
    
    2. After a layoff or two, companies do a poor job with layoffs.
    
    3. Once a company gets the "knack of it", they do a poor job with layoffs.
    
    As WANG enters Chapter 11, you can only wonder where this long and
    winding road will lead DEC.  
    
    
    
     
        
    

    re: last few.
    
    104 weeks was the maximum of the voluntary package only offered to
    certain elite within Digital.   Reference note 598.79 for specifics on
    that package!
    
    /Dan

    I don't know if all that got the first and second packages were poor
    performers but I do know that in AZ the first/second packages were
    given to people who for a least a year were sitting around reading and
    knitting in a manufacturing plant because there wasn't any work.  In my
    eyes they already got their package in the year prior to the lay-off.
    It seems like alot of us are getting other jobs outside of DEC and yes
    even for lessor pay BUT can see the "writing on the wall".
    
    DEC should have decided about packages BEFORE they started the
    lay-offs.  I have heard that there are many law suits against us
    because of inconsistency.  Not sure it this is just talk or really
    true but along with the talk is that DEC has lost some of the lawsuits. 
    Anybody have valid information on this?
    
    -pat

    RE: poor performers vs better performers
    
    For note of reference, I purposely put the words "poorer" and
    "better" performers in quotations because, as well all know,
    the TSFO packages were not *actually based soley* on
    performance. I was lacking a better term use use..

The onus is on all of us to bring in the revenue and make all the future
TFSO strategy an academic exercise for the corporation.
								- Ian W.

    Did DEC not take a multi-million dollar write-off for future downsizing
    this past quarter? If they did, and it was reported they did, then
    would that not lend to the rath of the IRS?
    
    Ted
    

 Digital - A voluntary severance plan

	{The Boston Globe, 13-Sep-89, p. 69}
	{By Jane Fitz Simon, Globe Staff}
	[Reprinted without permission]

   Faced with sluggish sales and too many manufacturing employees, Digital
 Equipment Corp. for the first time will offer voluntary severance to
 Massachusetts-based employees.
   The Maynard computer maker, which takes pride in having never had a layoff,
 will offer a generous "financial support package" to 700 employees on
 condition that they agree to leave the company.
   Digital disclosed the plan yesterday in part to quell rumors that layoffs
 are taking place. A spokesman for the company said that there continue to be
 no plans for any layoffs.
   Digital's stock, the fifth most-heavily traded stock on the New York Stock
 Exchange, closed yesterday at 99 1/2, up 2 1/4.
   Company officials last month confirmed the existence of a "working document"
 that calls on nine major departments to reduce head count by 25 percent by
 July 1991 through transfers and attrition. If implemented, the plan would
 affect an estimated 7,500 employees.
   Digital is suffering from a slump in US sales. Declining opportunities,
 intense price competition, and changing market demands are pressuring Digital
 and other suppliers of mid-range computer systems to reduce expenses and
 streamline their operations. In the fourth quarter ended June 30, the
 company's profit was off 22 percent from a year earlier.
   Digital's voluntary severance program is being offered to 500 employees
 located at a former systems manufacturing facility in Salem, and 200 employees
 based at other Digital facilities whose jobs are related to the affected
 business unit. The assembly and testing that used to be done by the
 manufacturing unit is now done at Digital plants in Phoenix,
 and Puerto Rico, said company spokesman Jeff Gibson.
   Since November 1988, 600 other employees who worked at the Salem
 manufacturing operation have been placed in other jobs within the company,
 Gibson said. The Salem facility, located on Northeastern Boulevard, houses
 about 1,200 other Digital employees who work for other business units. They
 will not be affected by the voluntary severance program.
   Digital has no plans at this time to offer the program to any other
 employees, said Gibson. But he did not rule out the possibility that it could
 be offered to other employees in the future.
   "It's a theoretical package that would be examined on a business-by-business
 basis if any other group decides to pursue it," said Gibson.
   The financial package is a new option in Digital's ongoing "work-force
 transition," a plan to reduce the manufacturing payroll by 4,000 this year
 through redeployment and retraining.
   Gibson said Digital offered a similar package in 1986 and 1987 to several
 hundred manufacturing employees in Arizona and Puerto Rico. But the package
 has never before been offered to employees in Massachusetts.
   Employees are being told of the voluntary option this week. Beginning in
 October, they will have 13 weeks to decide whether or not to accept the
 financial package.
   The package provides an allowance based on years of service. Employees with
 up to two years of experience will get 40 weeks of pay. Those with three to 10
 years will receive 40 weeks, plus three weeks for each year between three and
 10 years. Employees who have worked from 11 to 20 years will get 64 weeks of
 pay, plus four weeks of pay for each year served between 11 and 20 years. The
 maximum award is 104 weeks of pay.
   For those who accept the financial support package, Digital will maintain
 medical, dental, and life insurance coverage for one year. There will also be
 a limited acceleration of any restricted stock options employees may own.
 Outplacement assistance will be available.
   Gibson said that employees who do not opt for the program will be expected
 to look for other positions in the company while efforts are made to retrain
 them. There are manufacturing positions available elsewhere in the company, he
 said.
   Digital expects several hundred employees to accept the financial package,
 Gibson said. The company employs 125,800 worldwide, with 33,600 in
 Massachusetts.

    This package was only offered to select groups - such as the Printing &
    Circulations Services (P&CS) folks out of Northboro.  It sure wasn't
    offered to anyone in my group (Low End Systems).  I knew one man who
    had been with DEC for over 15 years - he got his 77 weeks of pay, took
    a month off to go to Hawaii, and then went to work for one of the
    printers he had used while working for DEC!  Granted, he couldn't do
    direct business with DIgital for 6 months, but his new firm found lots
    of other clients for him to work with.  He had it made in the shade!
    
    Kathleen
      

I think Digital employees should reflect on the fact that the U.S. economy has
declined markedly in the last three years. Look how low the interest rates are
now--if they were that low in 1989 home sales would be jumping through the
roof. 

Sure, the company was three or four years too slow to realize that it had too
many employees, and we can fault it (who's the "it"?) for that. But if you were
listening to the politicians, the economic pundits, etc. in 1989, you too might
figure that one big, generous layoff would take care of the overstaffing
problem, and that future "growth" (ha) would keep the rest of the employees
around. The economic gloom-and-doom people were correct, but who listens to
them?

I don't recall much discussion in this notes file in 1989 about the problems
the company was having and what to do about them. Why is everybody so wise in
retrospect?

Vicki Meagher

    Talk about mixed emotions, I was one of those folks eligible for the
    "TMP" :-)  The criteria was not performance; our group's function was
    being phased out to Colorado Springs.  To the best of my recollection,
    transferring to CXO was not offered as an option (to continue doing
    work for the group that was picking up the function).  It was voluntary
    as far as accepting the package; the other option was finding another
    job within DEC - 2 years ago that was still not too difficult if you
    had a good track record as a worker-bee.
    
    Since I had over 10 years with DEC, my package wouldn't have been
    chump change, but while I was mulling it over *friends* who were with
    Remote Sales Support kept coming to me and telling me to apply for
    a spot for their new "SW Services & Licensing Team".  Silly me, I
    decided to stay.....oh well.  Guess I should have taken my
    cue from my DM, UM and 2 peers who took the package :-(
    
    The base noter expressed what I've thought for some time; especially
    after seeing the last package diminish from the one offered last
    year.
    
    I'm no legal expert and I'm sure there are many "legal eagles" looking
    at the situation now; but we've had a lot of people try to volunteer
    since that first round and were told the package was for people who
    did not want to leave, i.e. if you're not happy with your job, quit!
    If folks band together in some sort of class action suit, DEC might
    wind up losing more money than if they just allowed people who wanted
    this package to take it.
    
    My first job was in a law office and I can remember when I was a
    licensed insurance agent for a LARGE company; female agents were
    not paid commission, nor did they receive the same benefits as the
    male agents.  I can remember thinking to myself before I quit, that
    the company was prime fodder for a class action suit.  It took about
    5 years, but I eventually read in the papers where the female agents
    nationwide banded together and nailed that insurance company good.
    
    I realize DEC's situation is slightly different, but it isn't all
    that different.  DEC has set a precedent with the packages....this
    can come back to haunt DEC.  The big gotcha here probably would be
    that if DEC goes the way of WANG; what would be left to liquidate to
    satisfy a class action judgment?
    
    I'm dealing with a SW licensing issue right now that goes against
    how we've done business for as long as I've been doing SW licensing.
    The memo that spelled out the new rules stated they came about because
    one account team made an exception to policy for a large project/opp-
    ortunity; thereby setting a precedent.  Other accounts found out about
    it, so now if anyone asks if they can do blah blah blah, we can't refuse
    them....a precedent was set.
    
    I am looking at the writing on the wall, although I do have to squint
    thru the bifocals a little more, but I am keeping my eyes open for an
    opportunity with another company <-- getting new bifocals so as not
    to miss anything :-)  I really do enjoy the content of my job, but as
    I've discussed in the note on disability, I really can't afford to
    hang in here too much longer because quite frankly a full blown cardiac
    episode would probably make it impossible for me to pass a physical with
    another company or perhaps get private insurance. 
    
    Younger, more highly technical people are being hired away by
    customers in droves.  Wonder how long this can happen before it has a
    major impact on DEC's ability to sell SW consulting services?
    
    I do know the words to Nearer My God to Thee (for the person who
    asked in another note :-) :-)
    
    Karen
    
    
    

    re .22
    
    You got that right...good ole B.C. made out like a bandit ;')
    
    

    Re 2056.5
    
    What makes you think that the people staying are worth keeping more
    than those whose work has gone away. Suppose I could do your job better
    than you can; should I have bumping rights?
    
    
    Lou

.26>  What makes you think that the people staying are worth keeping more
.26>  than those whose work has gone away.

There is a natural human tendency to blame the victim whenever we are
confronted by painful emotional issues.  It's especially hard to keep
an equanimous outlook when some people are destined to be survivors
when others will have gone away.

Hence the tendency (sometimes seen in this conference) to assume that
anyone being laid off must have been deadwood, must have been less
worthy than ourselves.  A similar kind of survivors' remorse seems to
occur after true mortal disasters -- it's tough to cope with walking
away from a plane crash which killed most passengers, for instance.

Not unrelated (IMO) is a tendency to assume that workers are somehow
responsible for the current state of the company, when demonstrably
it was strategic decisions which got us here.  (That's what KO said
at ZKO, anyway.)  It would be less painful in a way if workers WERE
responsible, since then there'd be some measure of things workers
could do to influence their own destiny.

    re:. - back a few......
    
    i sent a message to Bob Palmer approximately 3 weeks ago regarding the
    downsizing pain that we are going through. I attempted to articulate in
    my own terms what staying on here with the prospects of future layoffs
    without a package would do to the psyche. I also took a stab at
    offering a potential solution. I haven't heard anything back from him
    to date. I suppose I ought not to expect I would or should for that
    matter but it sure would be nice if someone would at least acknowledge
    its receipt.
    

    >> it sure would be nice if someone would at least acknowledge
    >> its receipt.
    
    Don't hold your breath ... I sent a memo to one of our VP's about a
    business issue a couple of years ago.  To this day I don't even know
    whether or not he ever even received it, much less read it.
    
    ... Bob
    

    
    > I also took a stab at offering a potential solution.
    
    I wish I had seen your solution to this dilemma. Really, what can
    Digital possibly do differently? Initially offer a small package and 
    increase (or at least keep equal) following packages until layoffs 
    are no longer needed?
    
    Digital did only what it could do: give as generous a package as
    possible with available funds. We are running out of cash. The packages
    have to be smaller. 
    
    If the idea of being given one week's notice with $0.00 dollars to walk
    away with scares you, don't blame Digital. Digital owes you nothing 
    except for your services rendered. I don't believe that the company
    owes you a supplement for fidelity, faithfulness, or whatever. I
    accepted a job, not an emotional engagement.
    
    On the bright side, there is someone to blame. Someone DOES owe you
    financial security and the opportunity to work. That is the government.
    Our gov. should define the laws concerning the legal obligations between
    company and employee, and then help us with reasonable unemployment
    checks, medical, and job placement assistance. Most European countries
    offer much better benefits than we do.
    
    Above all, the government should work towards rebuilding our economy.
    

    re .30
    	I partly agree, but am skeptical about the gov't
    being the solution.  After all, how the gov't pays you
    what it owes you is by swiping something out of your
    pocket, either by taxes or by inflated currency!
    	By all means, vote yer conscience in Nov.!
    
    	Dick
    

    Re: .30
    
        "On the bright side, there is someone to blame. Someone DOES owe you
    financial security and the opportunity to work. That is the government." 
    
    	 I think this attitude and approach doesn't work as well as
    an attitude in which people see themselves as responsible for their
    own employment and financial security.  The only real security is
    a strong economy.  While the grass may look greener in Europe, I
    don't see people leaving the US to move to Europe.  Especially 
    Eastern Europe where people looked to their governments for
    security until recently.  
    	Governmental leaders are human beings fully capable of mistakes.
    I have more confidence in Bob Palmer's understanding of the economy 
    than in Gov. Clinton's.  I think we are better off with thousands
    of Bob Palmers running their individual companies to be productive
    than with politicians running the economy whose measure of success 
    is power and popularity whatever their good intentions.
    
    						end-of-soapbox
    

    neither bob palmer nor george bush are able to control or do better in
    a New World disorder of economic depression... The very free market
    solution you seem to advocate is actually responsible for the current
    slide into economic chaos- Even if Bush becae a born again Stalinist,
    he wouldn't be able to control the mess - it would just be US
    incorporated vs the EEC, as opposed to DEC versus BULL...
    
    Winton           

    
    > I don't see people leaving the U.S. to move to Europe.
    
    I did. I work in DEC France now after 4 years with DEC in Nashua. :-)
    
    But I won't be an "I told you so" jerk about it. As a working person,
    my standard of life was vastly higher in the U.S. But I'll tell you,
    non-working people in the U.S. have it really rough compared to 
    non-working folks here. (But of course Americans aren't going to move
    here because the layoffs benefits are better!)
    
    To get back to the original point: I don't think DEC owes any of us
    any kind of package. People seems to think that some type of money
    is due to them and in this note, they have stated reasons like, "I've
    been with DEC for....", "I could've taken this great package and
    didn't...", etc.
    
    I personally don't find the reasons valid, but I do think that these
    stem from the perfectly valid universal panic of "Omigod, how do I
    pay the mortgage with no income and no lump sum settlement? I can't
    be responsible, I haven't done anything! Who did this?"
    
    Well, DEC is the easy target to blame. But geez, DEC can't pay the
    mortgage either. And DEC could blame the industry. And the industry
    could blame the gov't. And so on....
    
    I was clumsily trying to suggest to stop looking for the target and 
    instead look at the fear itself. I think that if I knew that I would
    get help from the government until I found my next job, I'd feel just
    slightly relieved.
    
    Unemployment was designed to help people between jobs. Too bad it's
    got this bad rep as a haven for deadbeats and drug addicts.
    
    And you're right, I was full of baloney about the gov't having control
    over the economy. I was just inventing facts to support my theory.
    
    

    To the person who wrote Bob Palmer a message-
    
    A person in my group also wrote him a message.  It was not about
    the layoffs it was about advertising (both of us are Marketers)
    and he did respond!!  We were very surprised!!  It was a short little
    note but at least he read it and took the time to send something back.
    I hope you get a response.........I hope we all do.....
    
    Still hangin' in there, but don't know for how much longer,
    Renee

	Could you post the original note and reply ?

	-Steve-

    It wasn't a note, it was an All in 1.  I'll have to check and
    see if I still have it.
    
    Renee

>The very free market
>    solution you seem to advocate is actually responsible for the current
>    slide into economic chaos

First off, we aren't in a free market, unfortunately. Second, are you
advocating a more socialist system. Judging by what happened in
the USSR and Eastern Europe, that doesn't seem to work.

    re. 35..
    
    	Someone from the Delta program got in touch with me suggesting I
    	post my message to him through them. I have as of this afternoon.
    	

.30>    Digital owes you nothing except for your services rendered. 
    
    Digital owes each and every employee a fair shake.
    
.30>    Our gov. should define the laws concerning the legal obligations 
.30>    between company and employee, 
    
    Our government has defined some laws that codify the requirement of
    fairness in the treatment of employees.  Digital is not exempt from
    them, quite apart from any moral or ethical obligation.

    Reply :39
    
    
    I have sent in 5 DELTA Leads in 3 years. 
    
    1 - Became a cost saving plan within my Region.
    
    3 - Placed in a file somewhere.
    
    1 - May someday be responded to. I have a Lead number but, no action.
    
    
    It appears that people would rather worry about being laid off than
    push a piece of electronic mail a little closer home.
    
    There are people in DELTA that DO care and thay will help if, you are
    LUCKY enough to reach them.
    
    
    Still believing!
    

    
    
    
    		I feel that corperate America has the wrong approach toward 
    it's worker's and needs to listen more , they are the strength .
    
    
    				Paul
     

    I can't agree, in terms of DEC.  I worked out of Merrimack/Boxboro/
    Westboro/Maynard.

    I now work in the field.  There are very real differences between
    the "field" and "corporate".  (There is far less emphasis on Digital
    as a "family" and far more on Digital as a "Business", IMO)

    I think Digital did everything possible to listen and respond to
    employees.  They had everything at their finger tips.  I even had
    a weight room across the building, nurses, paid MBA (and the prof
    actually taught in one of our classrooms).

    Everyone needs to understand the impact on our company due to the 
    fact we don't realize a gazillion percent profit on our margins
    anymore.

    Once that profit margin decreases (dramatically) so does the ability
    to keep our staff overhead.  Remember each employee incurs wages
    and other expenses as well as salary.  These other expenses usually
    amount to more than that salary.

    Palmer spoke thoroughly regarding our refocus, work-definition, and
    the subsequent allocation of resources.

    Before a company can ask the employee's "HOW" to do the job, they need
    to decide upon the work the company will do.  This is what Digital is
    currently doing, re-scoping/focusing on work.
    
    Chip