Conference 7.286::digital

    	I, for one, am shocked! Next thing you know, they'll be changing
    the Digital logo! I guess this means I won't be getting that $40k
    bonus, big raise, limo and dancing girls either....Darn it!

    ...or dancing boys!  
    (couldn't resist)
    
    KB
    

    was the bi-weekly pay raises, in case you forgot

    
    >"Layoffs at DEC will continue through fiscal 1994, Allen said."
                 ___
    
    Not to worry ...
    We are "Digital", he must have been referring to another company.
    
    

    
    	Well, as long as we continue to get the turkey at Christmas, the
    	trip to Canobie Lake in the fall, the excellent medical coverage
    	at reasonable rates, the ability to accrue two full years worth 
    	of vacation, DELTA, no need for WC4 to report sick time, etc. etc.,
    	I'm not worried.
    
    	What?.. what's that you say?  ;)
    
    	John

    Knock, knock...
    
    Who's there?
    
    Not you, anymore...

    face it. layoffs have become a permanent part of dec business
    practices and will be enacted at anytime.

    This is why I am glad to be getting the package next week.  Better
    now, with a small life raft, than later, without.
    
    Joel
    

    
    Layoffs are our only product.
    
    

    
     Can you imagine being offered the first package, as I was, and being
     around now to experience all this confusion. I can't say it hasn't
     been interresting. At the beginning it was much different than it is
     now. All I can say at this point is. Learn to live with it, or go to
     Mexico. Yes, go west young man, go west!
    
    

Who can stop the rampant cynicism?

    I was not always a cynic. Its hard not to be the way things are. I know
    things change. 
    
    
                      I M A G I N E .... No more layoffs.

    Hi all,
    
    Who is Brad Allen? Some CEO or near it?
    What can we really expect during FY1994. Thoughts, figures.
    
    Ohh BTW; saw an add in the latest TIME magazine all about the Olimpics.
             Olimpic organization depends on commercial sponsoring and all
             kinds of companies do there best to be there with their
             add/support. Why don't I NEVER see Digital or DEc for that
             matter with the other adds?

>Note 2550.14 JGODCL::KWIKKEL 
    
>	      What can we really expect during FY1994 
    
    Well, that's a tough one, being one thousand, nine hundred years
    beyond FY94.
    
>             add/support. Why don't I NEVER see Digital or DEc for that
    				       ^^^^^
>             matter with the other adds?
    
    So don't I

    I heard that Digital (Bob Palmer) has stated that there will be more
    layoffs thru the remainer of the calendar year 1993 and that the goal is
    to get down to 67,000 employees.  Can anyone confirm that this number
    is true or not?  Does anyone know what the employee headcount will be as of
    July 1st?
                                                                               

    I've heard Palmer is determined to get to 85K by July 1.   Back here
    their dropping entire groups now.
    
    I've also heard the following new target headcount rumours:
    
    69K
    64K
    68K by January

OK, I thought that Uncle Bob was after a 95K headcount. If the
rumors be true is he lying intentionally or are the future plans
of the company so wildly dynamic that headcount predictions will
change from quarter to quarter? I was also under the impression
that DECTFSO (I've productized it) was supposed to be over for
a while after this past round. So, what gives? I think the messages
about the state of the company and its internal business are right
confusing.

    Bob stated in an interview that he would like to save 85-90k jobs.  He
    also came and spoke here in Atlanta and stated that he would like to
    get the major TFSOs out of the way this qtr if possible.
    
    This is the first I've heard of 67k.
    
    Bing

    FWIW, FY94 = FY'94 = FY1994.
    And, FY3894 is Fy1994 plus 1,900 years.

re. Note 2550.20   GIAMEM::MEDRICK
    
>    FWIW, FY94 = FY'94 = FY1994.
>    And, FY3894 is Fy1994 plus 1,900 years.
     
    - or - LAITW, ;^)
    
       FY94+1=FY95  
       FY95+1=FY96 
       ...... 
       FY1992+1=FY1993
       FY1993+1=FY1994
    
    

    
    Wouldn't that be:
    
    FY91+FY1=FY92
    FY92+FY1=FY93
    FY93+FY1=FY94
    
    or;
    
    FY1991+FY1=FY1992
    FY1992+FY1=FY1993
    FY1993+FY1=FY1994
    
    cbc

    
    :-)
    
    cbc

    To bad Hank Rearden's not around to run the company.

    Bet he could have handled Chips and Software as well as he did the
    Hardware and "Softwho" he was involved with }8-)}
    
    

    Anybody have any idea how many of us there are left now?
    

    Anyone heard about Europe downsizing in the next Fiscal Year?  Some
    sources I hear say Europe is not as profitable as it was in previous
    and that large rightsizing will occur.

Seven sales support and three sales were "notified" two weeks ago, i.e., 
Monday June 14, in the soon-to-be former Los Angeles Accounts Group.  

Of those in sales support, one was picked up by the PSC, one by a CBU, two 
have taken sales positions.  Of the three sales, two apparently "asked" for 
it and are glad to be moving on, one has been picked up by a CBU.

In the management ranks, one sales support manager and three sales managers 
found themselves without anything to manage.  The sales support manager is
taking a job in another part of Digital, two of the sales managers were 
picked up by a CBU and another will be a workstation sales rep.

Are we getting down to the numbers Robert wants or not?

Bruce

.30> Of the three sales, two apparently "asked" for it and are glad to be
.30> moving on...

And when those two "move on" Digital has lost a combined total of 33 years
of Digital experience in selling.

Bubba

    
    
    	re .30 by MBALDY::LANGSTON
    
    >> 		     Of the three sales, two apparently "asked" for
    >>it and are glad to be moving on,	
    
    
    	If this is true, they asked for and received the package because
    	of their request, then this is just another example of inconsistent
    	application of procedure in this corporation. Why should some be
    	allowed to volunteer for TFSO while others cannot?
    
        John
    	

{Extracted from the January 1993 issue of Inc. Magazine, w/o permission}

Under the topic of Managing People:

FIRING

Severance Pay

The almost universally accepted rule of thumb on severance pay is a week's 
pay for every year a worker has been with a company.  But that formula may 
not accomplish what you want.  In establishing your policy, consider --

* Your objective.  The rationale for providing severance pay is to bridge 
  the gap between a worker's employment in your company and his or her next 
  job.

* The remaining workers.  You want them to feel secure that the person fired
  was treated fairly.  The great fear -- that they will be next -- should be
  mitigated by the reassurance that they'll be treated well if it does happen 
  to them.

* Who's neediest.  In theory, the more elevated a worker's position and pay,
  the longer it takes to find another job.  Ditto for aging workers.  
  Reexamine those conventions.  A lower-paid worker may have fewer resources 
  to fall back on.  In today's economy, it could take just as long for a 
  clerk to find a job as it does an office manager.

* Noncash aid.  Cash isn't the only thing out-of-work employees need.  They 
  may also need health benefits, job counseling, life insurance, or retraining
  guidance.  Consider creating a package of options on which terminated 
  employees can "spend" their severance.

* Flexibility.  There are many reasons to make your policy responsive to
  individual cases; there's one big reason to make it rigid:  avoiding 
  lawsuits.  Seek a balance between protecting yourself and taking care of 
  your former employees during a tough time.

    Some more food for thought.
    
    Someone said to me the other day (paraphrased):
    
    "There are two main ways to 'down-size'. Firstly, you can define the
    markets you intend to address, and fire those people who can't help you
    address those markets. Secondly, you can indiscriminately hack away at
    the workforce until you reach the size you desire. If you choose the
    second option, you'll certainly need to revisit it at some stage, soon
    after you think you've finished".
    
    Laurie.

    
    re:. 33
    
    Consider also that we are in a small, interconnected world.  Some of
    the people laid off will become customers; some, competitors; others,
    business partners.
    
    Management should do everything humanly possible to treat people
    with all the diginity that can be mustered.  Having a former
    employee who has lost their house, life savings, and health
    insurance become an influential voice at a major account down
    the road could be disastrous.
    
    Also, you don't want former employees jumping into internet or 
    Compuserve discussions on your products and either deliberately
    spreading false information, or exposing known weaknesses of
    your products or strategies.
    
    Glenn
    
    

    What I've heard very recently:
    
    7 weeks is the FY94 package....that's all (not confirmed, but I have
    confidence in the bearer's ability to be right)
    
    Many layoffs were held over into FY94 to:  1) retaliate against
    certain individuals (no way to prove this), and 2) lower the overall
    cost of layoffs to the company (if the reserve is already used up,
    this could be valid, but I suspect we still have a way to go).
    
    Interesting to see what Q1 brings.
    
    Mark
    

    Mark,
    
    I have serious concerns of my being held as your 1) suggests.
    I am not all that comfortable with "You're considered a valued
    employee".   

    
    	Now that we are in FY 94... has anyone heard what the "package"
    	is now?  I know there are a couple of rumors around, just checking 
    	if anyone has heard/seen anything definite.
    
    	Ed

)0 U.S. News                                      LIVE WIRE
 qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq
 Resumption of U.S. Transition Program (19-Jul)              Date: 19-Jul-1993
 qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq
Page   1 of 1  
                       Resumption of U.S. Transition Program 
   
        (Following is the text of a memo from Dick Farrahar, vice president, 
   Personnel, regarding the U.S. Transition Program in Q1.)
   
        In keeping with our normal business practice, the U.S. Transition 
   Program was reviewed at the conclusion of Q4. Following that review, a 
   new Transition program will commence on July 19, 1993. At the end of Q1, 
   the program will be thoroughly reviewed in the context of Digital's 
   business goals and the worldwide restructuring and reengineering effort.  
   Based on that assessment, a decision will be made regarding the program 
   in Q2.
        The financial support package previously offered to U.S. employees 
   selected for transition has been reviewed and revised. The package that 
   will be offered during Q1 includes reduced cash payments, but still 
   compares favorably with separation plans offered by other companies in 
   our industry. The revision reflects current business conditions, the 
   company's current financial performance, and our intent to manage 
   transition activity within the limits of existing restructuring funds. 
        The elements of the package include four weeks of continuous pay, 
   plus a lump sum payment based on years of service; continuation of 
   medical, dental and life insurance coverage for a period represented by 
   the total payments; formal outplacement assistance; and where applicable, 
   a five-year acceleration of restricted stock options.
        The total payments will continue to be as follows:
   
   0-15 years of service             Four weeks of continuous pay, 
                                        plus a lump sum payment of one 
                                        week of pay for every year of 
                                        service up to 15 years,
                                        minimum of four weeks' lump sum
                                        (i.e., 4-week lump sum payment 
                                        for employees with 0-4 years 
                                        of service).
   
   16 or more years of service       Four weeks of continuous pay, 
                                        plus a lump sum of 15 weeks of 
                                        pay, plus two weeks of pay for 
                                        every year of service between 
                                        16 and 32 years of service, up 
                                        to a maximum of 52 weeks. 
   
        The U.S. Transition Program will continue to be implemented and 
   managed business unit by business unit.  The plans will be reviewed on a 
   business-by-business basis by the Cross-Organization Committee.  The 
   company must continue to move expeditiously to restructure and transform 
   itself; however, there is an equal need to continue to proceed in as 
   careful and caring a manner as possible, as Digital defines the resources 
   required to meet current and future business needs.  



                       FOR DIGITAL INTERNAL USE ONLY
 

    in spite of the hassles i've recieved in other notesfiles i believe
    this "layoffs as 'normal' business practice" is a horrible management
    failure. what i said elsewhere is.............
    
    
    i haven't seen anything that convinces me that dec will survive.
    nothing. as a stockholder i hate to admit it folks. but the party could
    well be over. dec as it exits even today -- won't tomorrow. why do i
    fell like that? easy. consider:
    
          - we have an awful lot of customers mad at us, just about all
            are at least confused
    
          - we have a VERY SERIOUS morale problem - worldwide
    
          - we have a VERY ineffective set of management throughout the
            field (i have a new manager - 11th one in seven years)
    
          - we have all but wiped out technical resources in the field
    
          - we will SOON announce the 'defunding' of some product lines
            that will further alienate customers
    
          - we have admitted that we cannot manage the business without
            having layoffs a "normal business practice"
    
          - we still have eons of management that view their jobs as one
            of 'managing' instead of 'leading' their subordinates
    
          - lots of management types are resorting to an ever hardening
            type of management by intimidation (a word from the bottom -
            the mice have stopped running)
    
          - how many people do you know spend a large chunk of their time
            dealing with the internal turmoil?
    
          - at least here where i sit we have yet another set of
            measurement metrics that guarantee failure becuase they don't
            reflect what customers want from us
    
    it has become quite painful watching dec consume itself. very painful.
            
        

    
re: -1
   
Back several years ago there was an interview with Ken Olsen in which he
was asked about the possibility of having to consider layoffs.  He had
responded then that he considered layoffs as a failure of management.
That seems to be fairly clear about where accountability lies.

    Yes, but the layoffs we continue to experience are largely due to the
    failure of pre-Palmer management.  The only thing that I can fault
    Palmer on is not acting quickly enough and cutting deeply enough so
    that we can all look forward instead of over our shoulder.  Yesterday,
    I heard that the new number we are trying to get to is 69,000.

    The reason the layoffs continue is that Ken Olsen organized the company
    into a single monolith without "P&L" or financial accountability.

    When it came time to shut down an "unprofitable business" (as many
    companies do) there was

    (a) no idea what constituted a "line of business" within Digital.

    (b) no idea what revenues matched what expenses within Digital.

    So rather that sell off or close "Division A" to save "Divisions" B
    through Z, the idea was to ask everyone to share in the "sacrifice".

    Now as payroll costs decline and revenue doesn't fall as fast as or
    faster, the obvious way to a profit in not to earn it by new products
    or the displacement of a competitor, it is by cutting payroll.

    People, including Ken Olsen, have said that this is a liquidation of
    the business, especially if it's not part of a plan that substitutes
    the valued-added of those employees with those of other employees,
    suppliers, or channels.

    There's a sort of black/white philosophy about layoffs that is
    Digital's groupthink: before 1992 layoffs were terrible because
    employee morale would permanently collapse and the lift would be only
    temporary.

    That's inverted now.  If one were to believe some of the Senior
    Leadership Team the announcement that no end is planned for the layoffs
    would be taken as positive for morale.

    
    The real number will be more than 69,000 and less than 85,000
    don't expect more than 6,000 to go in any one given quarter.
    
    cbc

    
    
    Ok, enough is enough.
    Already I have a particular situation outside of DEC is
    doing its best to ruin my life (divorce involving kids)
    but enough of this number guessing. If you do not know
    for a fact do the world and me a favor and say nothing.
    "Oh gee, I just heard 10,000 this quarter." Whoopy !
    
    Until the noter's name happens to be Palmer first initial P
    I do not believe any of this nonsense.
    
    And please do not give me that "just do not read the conference"
    bull.
    
    Apologies to whoever mayby offended but folks I have had
    enough of this 'bull'.
    
    Best of luck to all of and remember (not to get religious)
    but "God only gives what we can handle"
    
    Peace, and thanks for listening.
    
    Rick A

Re:<<< Note 2550.45 by BOOKS::ANGELONE "Failure: line of least persistence." >>>

>    Until the noter's name happens to be Palmer first initial P
                                                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I woulnd't trust that person either...  :-)

-  David

    Re: .46 by BSS::CODE3::BANKS:
    
    Perhaps someone 'downsized" R by getting rid of the foreleg and got P ?

Note 2550.45 by BOOKS::ANGELONE 
    
    >Until the noter's name happens to be Palmer first initial P
    >I do not believe any of this nonsense.
    
    rick,
    
    sorry but you have two choices. leave this conference permanently. or
    wait till BP decides to write here. personally, i would not hold my breath
    for door number 2.

I tend to agree with Rick. My philosophy is not to worry about
something that I can't control, so I don't worry about weather,
layoffs, etc. I'm not the one making those decisions. As a result, I
don't feel very stressed.

Wouldn't it be great if we could ask, "What *good* will this do for
Digital?" before posting something? All of these 'reports' and
guess-timates contribute *nothing* to improving morale or turning this
ark around. And if you're about to respond with "but this is the only
source of information we have", then the problem will never be solved
until we make that frustration clear to those from whom we expect to
receive information.

Financial, political, technological, and other factors are positioned
to help us regain the position we held some years ago. I think we know
what needs to be done, and we'd get there much faster if we'd all just
get down to doing things that contribute rather than erode.

Pete

    In 1988 (January issue as I recall) the IEEE Spectrum had an article on
    how to respond to rumors and such.  The advice boiled down to paying
    attention to rumors, keeping your head and sticking with your company
    until a better opportunity comes along.  I think it's good advice.  You
    need to pay attention to rumors so that you will have some idea of what
    is happening.  And, you need to pay attention to official
    proclamations. In my opinion, you should trust neither, but use it all
    to try to get a complete picture of what is going on so that you can
    make wise career decisions.  Ignoring information that is available to
    you is not wise as it may not allow you to make wise career decisions.
    
    Steve

    Re: P. Palmer
    
    Today at the the FY94 kickoff at the Long Beach (California) Airport
    Marriott, Ed Lucente referred to Robert Palmer as "Paul Palmer, I mean
    Bob Palmer..."
    
    If the you get a chance, don't miss this road show.  The SLT team
    members who presented to the Worldwide Sales and Marketing conference in
    the first week of July were recorded on videotape and played back for
    us in a rather well-produced show.  
    
    Lucente and Russ Gullotti arrived, live and in person, in the
    afternoon.  Those in attendence, ~1000 sales, sales support, delivery
    and admnin folks from San Diego, L.A. and Orange counties, applauded
    loudly and sincerely for at least 30 seconds when the level III manager 
    for the western states introduced Lucente.  I believe it was mostly 
    desparate encouragement to him to make us right again.  Nonetheless, I
    found it somewhat surprising and uplifting.
    
    Lucente said some press person asked him what he was looking forward to
    at Digital after so many years at IBM. Lucente said he told the
    reporter he "was looking forward to finally selling leadership products. 
    And I meant it!"
    
    Does anyone really care about products, anymore?
    
    Gullotti apologized profusely to us several times for what we had been 
    put through in FY93.  He said he never wanted to go through that again 
    and promised that we wouldn't.  He also thanked us for sticking it out 
    and, somehow, doing our jobs in spite of it all.
    
    Pesatori, on video, said that we doubled our PC sales this year, over
    last year and went from the low twenties to the number nine PC vendor 
    this year.  He said he wants to double the number again by next year.
    
    He seemed sure that we'll do it.
    
    Strecker said that UNIX now gets the largest slice of "R&E" pie.  He
    came across very well, the first time I've ever seen him speak.
    
    Janet Shipman, a stiking figure on the big video screens, at least, 
    made a pretty good case for the "Branding Campaign."  I
    don't want to start another discussion of DEC vs. Digital here though.
    
    Bruce
    
    P.S. Oh yeah, there was a "surprise visitor" to the event, who was 
    rather entertaining in a non-shticky way.

Re. -1

This is probably only a nit but I wonder in whose league table we're the ninth 
largest PC vendor. Anybody know ?

According to Datamation (June 15th 1993 ?) Digital isn't even in the top 15.

- Paul.

   It is true that one should not worry about layoffs. However to make decisions
  in your personal life necessitates stability at work.

    - Bob

    
    I got official word that info about the next "package" will hit
    LIVEWIRE by week's end.
    
    -Ed
    

    Yes it is down to 4 weeks + 1 week per year of service. 8 weeks
    minimum.
    
    Dave

    re -1
    
     Thats what it is now. Isn't it? I got tapped on the 11 of Oct and was
    told 4w + 1w for every year up to 15 + 2w for every year over 15.
    
    Did they drop the 2w for every year over 15?

    
    >Did they drop the 2w for every year over 15?
    
    Yes.
    
    			Alfred

    The TV news on WBZ this morning reported
    
    "DIGITAL announced they will continue layoffs to raise revenues"
    
    Sigh, isn't that a bass ackwards approach to improving our results ?
    

    re: -1
    
    It's worked so well up til now.
    

    Sorry for the doom and gloom (or is it gloom and doom)... BUT.....
    
    I truly believe (my opinion) that there is no real desire on the part
    of the upper crust of this company to turn things around...
    
    I'm starting to believe this downward trend is the actual plan. I have
    to feel there is someone that is being coax'd into causing this #2
    company to fail.... I DO HOPE I'M WRONG...!!!!!
    
    Just my opinion!!!!
    
    Bob
    

    Re .-1
    
    Make the recent hiring of all the ex IBMers into high positions into
    Digital is part of a long term strategy on the part of Lou Gerstner
    to kill off DEC once and for all.
    
    Dave

RE: .55

>>    Yes it is down to 4 weeks + 1 week per year of service. 8 weeks
>>    minimum.
    
From the official memo I read, it says a minimum of 4 weeks:

    	 >>                                minimum of four weeks lump sum. 
    	 >>(i.e. 4 week lump sum payment for employees with 0 - 4 years of 
    	 >>service)

And it was supposed to be updated to LIVEWIRE by 8 am this morning but I
haven't seen it yet.  

    Well, I saw it!  It was there for about 15 minutes!!!!  I read it and
    then it was gone by the time my next cube neighbor tried to read it.
    I did save it in a file to prove to people that I wasn't hallucinating!
    
    CN
    

    .63
    
    Probably took it off to change the base to 2 weeks instead of 4.
    
    :-)
    

    How do you say "mushroom syndrome"...
    
    
    Being kept in the dark and dining on B??? S???...!!!!
    

    

    some people when they find there is something wrong in their software
    program, like there is a bug in it and it keeps crashing, and they dont 
    know how to fix it, they use the brute force approach, they start 
    removing chunks of randomly selected code out of the program hoping 
    the problem (the bug) will be removed along the way, they keep removing 
    more and more code until the bug disappears, and the program runs 
    without crashing. then they are happy because they fixed the problem.

    So may be the big managers are doing just that, they will keep TFSO'ing 
    and TFSOi'ing DECeees until DECeees works right.

    \bye
    \nasser

    Re: .66 (/nasser)
    
    Good point... it has been said that every program can be made one
    instruction shorter and that every program contains at least one
    bug.  Therefore, by induction, every program in the world can be
    reduced to a single instruction that doesn't work 8-)
    
    If applied to corporations, it works like this: every corporation
    can shed at least one employee and every corporation has at least
    one department that doesn't function properly.  Therefore, every
    corporation can be reduced to one employee who always screws up 8-).
    
    Just random musings...
    
    --jim
    

    I saw a copy of the memo announcing resumption of TFSO - it's quite a
    paradox that the company's current financial performance that justified
    BP's 20% raise also justifies more firings with a smaller package.

    HOW MANY jobs would be saved by that 20%.....????????????????????????
    

>HOW MANY jobs would be saved by that 20%.....????????????????????????
    
    About two.  Nevertheless, the gesture would have been nice.

A front page articale in the Nashua Telegraph reported that the current 
employee population is at 93000, with a target of 85000-90000.  

My interpretation is that FY94 layoff will be between 3000-8000 people!

Did anyone else see the article, or could correct my interpretation?


							-Paul

U.S. News                                                   LIVE WIRE
Resumption of U.S. Transition Program ...                   Date: 21-Oct-1993

                Resumption of U.S. Transition Program announced
 
         Digital announced that the U.S. Transition Program for Q2 begins
   today.  According to Dick Farrahar, vice president, Human Resources, "The 
   package that will be offered during Q2 includes reduced cash payments, but 
   still compares favorably with separation plans offered by other companies 
   in our industry.  The revision reflects current business conditions, the 
   company's current financial performance, and our intent to manage transition 
   activity within the limits of existing restructuring funds."
         The elements of the package include:
 
         o  Four weeks of continuous pay, plus a lump sum payment of one 
            week of pay for every year of service, minimum of four weeks 
            lump sum (i.e., four week lump sum payment for employees with 
            0-4 years of service).
 
         o  Continuation of medical, dental and life insurance coverage 
            for a period represented by the total payments.
 
         o  Formal outplacement assistance for a period of six months. 
 
         o  Where applicable, a five-year acceleration of restricted 
            stock options.
  
         At the end of Q2, the program will be thoroughly reviewed in 
   the context of Digital's business goals and the worldwide restructuring 
   and re-engineering effort.  Based on that assessment, said Dick, "a 
   decision will be made regarding the program in Q3.
         "The U.S. Transition Program will continue to be implemented and 
   managed business unit by business unit," he continued.  "The plans will 
   be reviewed on a business by business basis by the Cross-Organization 
   Committee.  The company must continue to transform itself to serve 
   customers better and to compete more effectively. At the same time, we 
   will proceed thoughtfully to define the resources required to meet 
   Digital's current and future business needs." 

                       FOR DIGITAL INTERNAL USE ONLY

    depressing to say the least.

What is the difference between .72 and what was originally posted in VTX and
abruptly yanked out?

Bob

Re .74:

Spelled numbers vs. digits, some added quotes, some additional punctuation.
				/AHM

 Digital - Reports big loss despite cuts
	{The Boston Globe, 21-Oct-93, p. 41}
   Digital Equipment has proved that it knows how to cut costs, but making
 money and generating sales growth remain elusive.
   Despite deep cost reductions, the Maynard computer company reported a fiscal
 first-quarter loss from continuing operations of $103 million, or 76 cents a
 share.  A one-time gain from accounting changes brought the net loss to $83
 million, or 62 cents a share, which was still far worse than Wall Street
 expected.
   Revenue for the quarter ended Oct. 2 dropped 9% to $3.01 billion from $3.31
 billion in the year-ago quarter.
   Digital, the state's second-largest employer, also said it expected to lay
 off more employees, though officials would not say how many.
   The company shed 15,000 workers in the past year.  It currently has 93,200
 employees and has said the payroll could eventually drop to as low as 85,000.
   "We don't have exact numbers to give you" on future layoffs, William D.
 Steul, Digital's chief financial officer, said during a telephone press
 conference.  "It probably will be smaller than it was over the last four
 quarters."  The company has $600 million left from a $1.5 billion fund it
 created in 1992 to pay for layoffs and restructuring.
   The first-quarter loss was far greater than the average 13-cent to 19-cent
 per-share loss anticipated by two surveys of Wall Street analysts.  However,
 it was narrower than the $260.5 million, or $2.04 a share, Digital lost in the
 first quarter last year, and some analysts agreed with Digital's assessment
 that the company could soon turn a profit.
   "The magnitude of the loss appears large, but I think DEC is very close to
 break-even," said Shao Wang of Smith Barney in New York.  "If you breath on
 the revenue line and get a bit of a goose, you can get into black ink again."
   "That "goose," Wang said, would come from the combined effect of past
 cost-cutting and a seasonal improvement in sales.
   Digital's stock dropped 7/8 to 35 1/8 on New York Stock Exchange trading of
 1.48 million shares.
   The company had posted its first profit in nearly two years during the
 quarter ended July 3, but it warned at that time that the profits would not
 extend into the most recent quarter.
   Yesterday, Digital officials set several revenue targets for themselves.
 Steul said revenues in the second quarter would top the $3.7 billion of the
 same quarter last year.
   And Wang said the company had told analysts that the third quarter would
 bring even higher revenues than the second - an anomaly, Wang said, because
 sales that quarter are traditionally soft.
   But yesterday, at least, many analysts focused on the meager revenue total
 that Digital reported for the past quarter.
   "Obviously, it was no good," said David Wu of S.G. Warburg & Co.  "It's
 pretty self-explanatory what happened: business stinks in Europe and they
 really weren't selling many things besides PCs and workstations."  Personal
 computers and other low-end hardware carry smaller profit margins than many
 other Digital products.




   "The cost side of the equation is very good," said Marc Schulman, president
 of Technology Strategies Group, a Connecticut-based consulting firm.  "If you
 don't have revenues, it doesn't matter how low your costs are."
   Robert B. Palmer, who took over as president and chief executive last year
 from ousted founder Kenneth H. Olsen, blamed the revenue decline on weak
 European sales, especially in Germany and Italy.  The company also said it was
 hurt by a slight drop in US sales, by unfavorable currency exchange rates and
 by a smaller gross profit margin.
   Digital products based on the new Alpha AXP microprocessors are growing in
 popularity, company officials said, and account for 10% of all product sales.
 The company is betting that sales of Alpha-based systems and PCs will offset
 the decline in its previous generation of products.
   Palmer, who this year won a 20% pay raise, to $900,000, has been able to
 narrow the company's operating losses in the past year.  Under his tenure,
 Digital has reduced research, sales and administrative costs from nearly $1.6
 billion in the second quarter of 1992 to $1.2 billion in the most recent
 quarter.  Research and engineering costs were down 22% in the past quarter
 from the year-ago period, while sales and administration costs dropped 23%.

re: .75

For that they yanked it out of VTX???

Bob

|For that they yanked it out of VTX???

Six Sigma lives, don't cha know....

    
    The "continuous pay...lump sum" statement in the announcement is very
    confusing. Does a TFSO with four years get 4 (four) weeks pay, or
    8 (eight)?
    
    I had hoped they'd yanked the first announcement to clear that up.
    How naive!
    

Everybody gets 4 weeks of "continuous pay."  Everybody who signs on the
dotted line gets 4 or more weeks of "lump sum."  Hence someone who's been
here for four years or less gets 8 weeks' pay.

I've heard that "all contractors" were told yesterday that today would be their
last day (except for data entry temps (and?) for accounts receivable who
get 30 days notice).  This probably makes someone feel good, but it is likely
to result in our being unable to deliver products on time.  Contractors
get hired to do specific necessary jobs for which no qualified internal
transfer candidate can be found.

How many ways can this company shoot itself in the head?

			Steve

    
    this does not seem to be the case here.

.81 is not the case around here, either

    Our group has several consultants and contractors here; there
    has been nothing to indicate that they are to be let go.
    
    						andrew

Hmm - very interesting.  This is what was told to a friend of my wife's,
who was a contractor and was let go.

			Steve

    Remember there are different ways of counting contractors, etc.  Some
    look like heads, some look like boxes of paper.
    
    

    ... are involved in "direct revenue generation", ie, delivering
    consulting to customers on behalf of Digital.

     We've still got swarms of contractors at CXO.  No sign of any change
to that situation.

                                      Greg

    Ours are soon to be history....along with about 70 perms.
    
    As for the new package, it only affects folks that have more than 15
    years of service. Other than that it is the same package as Q1

    re: .81 - .88
    
    it's cheaper in the long run for the corporation to run it's business
    with contractors than with full time employees who must be paid
    certain benefits, reduce the cost of the benefits increases the
    bottom line....that's the theory as far as does it work in practice
    
    time will tell...digital isn't alone with this business model it's
    going on all over the country in other businesses also...
    

Re .77:

>For that they yanked it out of VTX???

Shucks, I did make an assumption: that the first VTX posting was identical to
the version sent to managers the day before it was posted.

This kind of last-minute wordsmithing is common in high-level memos.  From Scott
Adams's _Build a Better Life by Stealing Office Supplies_:

"
			The Bureaucracy

			Group Writing

Dogbert:
	Few things in life are less efficient than a group of people trying to
	write a sentence.  The advantage of this method is that you end up with
	something for which you will not personally be blamed.

Dilbert (pointing at a flip chart with "THE" written on it):
	How's this for a start?

Attendee 1:
	It might offend people named "*The*odore".

Attendee 2:
	That's a loaded word.

Attendee 3:
	It's overused, if you ask me.

Attendee 4:
	This ain't Shakespeare; let's use words we *all* understand.
"
				/AHM
P. S.  An alternative is that there were *3* versions in circulation.

    
    I couldn't help but notice the BIG Digital Help Wanted Ad in the Sunday
    Globe.  It seemed like these were permanent positions for hardware and
    software engineers in the Storage area, there was even one in CXO
    (wonder if it comes with relocation funds?).   Strange place, Digital.
    
    

    
    >>it's cheaper in the long run for the corporation to run it's business
    >>with contractors than with full time employees who must be paid

    Cheaper in what regard? Only in cash. What is the real price we are
    going to pay for a company full of workers who have no dedication or
    commitment to the big picture? They get paid for the contract and 
    go home. No accountability, no follow up, nothing. If it doesn't work,
    they just hire someone else to fix it. Granted with today's morale in
    the dumps I'm not sure all badge carrying employee's take 
    responsibility, but I know most do.
    
    Gail

    re: .93
    
    I agree 100% and was only stating aFACT of business in my previous
    reply...I've seen many times what you refer to and it ends up costing
    more IMO but alas not all "decision" makers understand this...the
    bottom line...that's what counts, and in most cases it's the immediate
    bottom line cause most of them don't plan on being here long term...so
    make it look good now so I can move on to bigger and better is all that
    seems to concern them...

re Note 2550.93 by TRACTR::HATCH:

>     What is the real price we are
>     going to pay for a company full of workers who have no dedication or
>     commitment to the big picture? 

        If there were a "big picture" then it might matter, but there
        isn't, so it doesn't.

        Bob

    I have a surprise for you.
    
    The variable cost of a contractor in Software Engineering is HIGHER
    than the variable cost of an employee even if you do include benefit
    cost for the employee.
    
    Contractors are good for ONE or TWO thing only. That's for organizations
    that are so screwed up that they can't predict their labour needs more than
    6 months in advance or they have a known degree of work that swings
    wildly up and down in a cycle of less than a year or two.
    
    Dave

    RE: .96 No wonder Digital uses so many of them. :-)
    
    			Alfred

    
    
    		re.-.96  Dave , Have you ever watched the Master Schedule
    	for Manufacturing........it's the moving Target syndrome, and we
    	use a LOT of contract agency folks here in ABO/AMO.(O.K. , so 
    	their days are numbered.......)
    
    		re.-97 Alfred, I take it you think you're just kidding.
    I'm not when I say the use of contract employees in Manufacturing
    should be reviewed from the perspective of skills development, and
    a contracts dedication/devotion to a quality job. They were poorly
    trained here, and even those who were not merely waiting to hit the
    revolving door to a Permanent position were "just" getting up to 
    the "Digital" way of doing things when their 1-year contract expired.
    	I intend no "bad mouthing" of Contract Agency personell at all,
    rather the way they have been utilized here in Manufacturing at ABO.
    Me thinks if the hidden costs of Training due to turn-overs, Quality
    hits on products during the training period, and effectiveness of
    the Agency people during the learning curve were all considered,it
    would compensate for the Permanent Employees costs. Only difference
    would be that they wouldn't send a Perm. home because there were no
    parts to build systems with during the week, then pay straight time
    for Saturday work after the parts come in............
    
    		So much for the rats-hole...as I alluded to earlier, most
    of our Contract Agency people will be let go around the 12th of Nov.
    when those Permanent Employees who were fortunate enough to have found
    a job in Stage 2 or Mfg. Support will be filling their positions. 
    
    			TFSO 94 Lives and breathes in ABO/AMO.
    
    
    					Pablo
    
    

    RE: .99 

    2.5 years? Some people with badges don't last that long. Sounds like you
    have a good work ethic, glad you're here. But being here for such a long
    term, there is accountability built into your job (not wanting to take
    away from your personal commitment). I was thinking more of the
    contractors with permanent "short timers" attitudes.
    
    Gail

I've now heard from a number of sources that there was no company-wide
"let's dump all the contractors" edict.  I had heard this from a contractor
in Finance who had been dumped and had been given this as an explanation -
it's possible that it applied only to Finance.

					Steve

    From the October 25 (Digital Today)
    
    U.S. Area Vice President Russ Gullotti added,
    
    "While business conditions mandate the continuation of a transition
    program for the company, I want our direct sales force to understand
    that we do not have any plans which would affect them.  Quite the
    contrary, we are expanding our direct sales force in the U.S."
    
    jon

    
    	Could someone clarify .89 please?  I read it as if you have more
    	than 15 years, you get the smaller package, but if you have less
    	than 15 years, you get the larger package.  Wouldn't that cause
    	the company all kinds of problems????
    
    	thanks, Glenn
    

    
    >	Could someone clarify .89 please?  I read it as if you have more
    >	than 15 years, you get the smaller package, but if you have less
    >	than 15 years, you get the larger package.  Wouldn't that cause
    >	the company all kinds of problems????
    
    What .89 said is that there was no change for people with less than
    15 years. The old package was 4 weeks plus 1 week per year for them
    and so is the new one. However, the old package was somewhat better
    for people with more than 15 years. Under the old package they got
    2 weeks for year 16 and up. Now they just get one week for each of
    those years. 
    
    			Alfred

    
    Yet again, it seems that internal rumours and the press are giving us
    details about how many people will be layed off here before any
    official word.
    
    When will this company ever learn to communicate? It also really cuts
    to the bone when some managers, when asked about the situation, swear
    blind that they have no idea what is happening, when a later 'phone
    call reveals that the particular manager did know the situation re:
    layoffs but 'didn't want to lower morale'! 
    
    Communicate. we are old enough and mature enough (well, most of us ;-))
    to take good and bad news, especially when it is factual.
    
    I don't expect it will ever change.
    
    Cheers,
    
    Mark.