Conference 7.286::digital

    Corporate Personnel Policy 6.06 (available from your manager or via
    VTX ORANGEBOOK) is the policy that covers conflicts of interest.
    
    		Alfred

    It is a conflict of interest, which is NOT to even suggest that
    anything inappropriate is actually going on.  I'd suggest that next
    time you discuss payment (with everybody who must signoff on it)
    *before* you incur any expenses.  It is reasonable for Digital to be
    careful with arrangements of this sort.

    RE: .0
    
    You FOOL!  You are trying to save Digital money!! When you shoot
    pictures for the local newsletter, go to some store and buy the film.
    Get a receipt. Send DEC the bill.
    
    Once you shoot the photos, go to a custom photo lab and
    have them make you a proof sheet or supply intitial prints. Get a
    receipt. Send DEC the bill.
    
    Have said lab make final prints. Get a receipt. Send DEC the bill.
    
    You won't lose money this way. If DEC does, that's their problem.
    Explain this to an intelligent purchasing agent, and they will either
    agree to a methodology to do things YOUR way, or pay these outrageous
    prices to do it the "EASY WAY".
    
    Steve_who_has_been_around_a_couple_of_blocks
    

Re .0:  Several years ago I wrote a brochure that several
documentation groups used for miscellaneous purposes (mostly
giving to interviewees and college recruiting officials, and
also distributing at DECUS). The photography was done by a
fellow DECcie who had his own outside photography business.

As I recall, he charged DEC for materials only -- i.e., nothing
for his time, for carrying his equipment around, etc. I don't
recall there being any hassle at all (though I can't say for sure,
since I didn't see the actual payment; however, he never mentioned
any problems).

If you're interested, send me mail, and I'll fill you in on the
details and also put you and him in touch with each other.

    .0  
    
    Do not do work from your own business for materials only! as someone
    in the .4 story did.  If you do not charge for all of your expenses
    (your labor included), than you will not make a profit.  All U. S.
    businesses are required to make a profit (in a certain period of time)
    -- that is the law.  And that is the right thing for you to do.
    If DEC polocies don't allow that, than you should allow DEC to get the
    job done at the higher costs and point out their short falls.  if you 
    can get the policy changed to improve DEC than great.  If no, than
    spend your time doing the things that really count within your job.
    
    I used to have a business of my own, a rather large business (which I
    successfully sold).  If you want to make it you have to be tough.  Give
    your customers quality, not free-bees.  
    
    good luck 

Re .5:  Hey, far be it from me to knock capitalism and the American Way.
(In fact, I wouldn't mind earning a bundle myself at DEC and/or in some
lucrative moonlighting endeavor. Now, if only I could figure out how...)

The person I referred to in .4 did receive some "intangible" benefits from
his actions:

   1. He contributed to a brochure that won praise and got used within DEC.
 
   2. The brochure included a "Photography by <name>" acknowledgement,
      so it provided a nice sample that he could show to potential clients.

Now, whether he actually benefitted monetarily as a direct result of that
project (e.g., getting a bigger raise, winning clients for his photography
business, etc.), I have no idea. My only point is that the author of .0
shouldn't dismiss the possibility of doing some photography work for DEC
for materials reimbursement, plus some possible "other" (intangible) benefits.

As for how much a DEC employee is entitled to for such work... the person
already works for DEC; and if the photography is done on "company time"
(or even after hours if the employee is salaried), the person is just
earning his or her pay (albeit in in a way different from his/her "normal"
job). Sure, the employee is entitled to decline the photography task and
denounce DEC's policies, but it might not be a very smart thing to do.

               <<< Note 999.5 by PNO::HORN >>> 

   >All U. S. businesses are required to make a profit (in a certain
   >period of time) -- that is the law.  

   I'm sorry, I just don't believe this. What happens if you don't
   make a profit - do you go to jail? Pay a fine? If not, what does
   this statement mean? 

   I know this is a rathole, but I'd really like to know . . .


      Marge

    RE: .7
    
     If you don't show a profit in a 5 year period, it just means
    that your chances of being audited by the IRS are *VERY* high.

    At least for small businesses, you cannot claim a business loss
    for more than 4 (or 5) straight years.  That was the way is was
    a few years ago, anyway.

	The logic behind the law is to keep people from setting up businesses
	to fund the expenses of what is really a hobby.  I would gladly take
	up flying if I could get the IRS to fund 28% of the costs of lessons
	& a plane.  But the rule is designed to prevent this.

	Larry

    >...the person already works for DEC; and if the photography is
    > done on "company time" (or even after hours if the employee is
    > salaried), the person is just earning his or her pay......
    
    Sorry, Chuck, but this theory doesn't hold water.  This individual
    was not hired by DEC to do photography, and just because he possesses
    the skill and equipment, he should not be expected to do the work
    for his cost.  Suppose you are handy at home renovations, and you
    own all the necessary tools, would you expect to bring your tools
    into work and cut an opening in the wall for your boss' new office,
    and just get re-imbursed for materials?  I think not.  If his plant
    wants to be a stinker about proper remuneration, then he should
    suggest that some staff member bring in a Polaroid camera and take
    the shots (and you can always tell by looking at the photos which
    plants do exactly that).
    
    Norm

    New IRS rules require that you show a profit for at least 3 out
    of 5 years...OR...you may be audited and the IRS may decide to
    disallow business LOSSES for more than 2 out of 5 years.
    
    As mentioned in a previous reply, this is to "discourage"
    taking "business losses" for a "hobby" year after year after year.
    
    	Pennie

Re .11 (Norm): Sorry, I'll still maintain my position. I guess we have
to distinguish between what DEC has the right to do and what it ought to
do. In brief, I think DEC has the right to use its employees' talents
in "unusual" ways and reimburse for materials and other extra expenses
(e.g., if travel is required). I also think, though, that this ought to
be strictly voluntary on the employee's part, and that DEC ought to bend
over backwards to make the experience pleasant and beneficial for the
employee (e.g., not hassle about expense claims, give acknowledgements and
recognition, etc.).

The office renovation analogy is interesting, but has some flaws. 
If I were handy in that way, DEC would be crazy to have me do such work
in my boss's office, for many reasons. One is liability -- if I electrocuted
myself, DEC's lawyers would have a hard time defending the company in court
against my widow's lawyer! Also, if I botched the job, DEC would look foolish
suing or complaining to the Better Business Bureau. Moreover, presumably my time
is more valuable to DEC if I do what I'm hired to do (software technical
writing), so it would probably be a stupid business move to pull me off my
assigned projects to do office renovation work.

However, let's assume that some idiot thought it made sound business
sense to have me do the renovation... If it were a voluntary thing on my
part, I'd agree to do it only if there were guarantees that my technical
writing workload would be reduced so that my net work hours would be the
same, that there would be no negative impact on my future career (raises, 
promotions, assignments) in technical writing, that DEC would pay any
expenses for materials or extra travel, and that I could refer to my renovation
work for DEC in promoting my outside home-renovation business.

If DEC decided to make me do the renovation work against my will - or
penalized me in some way for refusing - I don't know if the law would permit 
this; but in any case, if the company tried, there would be some serious 
hell-raising.

Finally, I think there's something in the Policies & Procedures manual
that says DEC employees can't "moonlight" for DEC (i.e., can't earn
wages, salaries, or fees in addition to the compensation earned from
their regular jobs). VTX is unavailable on my system now, so I can't
check for sure. I imagine such a policy would exist (if it does) to
prevent abuses regarding conflict-of-interest and favoritism in the
awarding of work, and perhaps to minimize the temptation of managers
to "skimp" on expenses (and take risks with quality and liability) by
pressuring their employees to do tasks they shouldn't be doing.

I find this discussion VERY interesting in light of the fact that some people
do not feel that it is appropriate for DEC to ask an employee to do something
that they were not hired to do (ain't my job syndrome?). While in another
discussion people thought it quite appropriate to have those employees on
TMP doing tasks that DEC currently has contractors performing. Why is it
OK for the later case and not this case?
After all, if DEC wants me to do something that is out of the ordinary how
could I possibly justify refusing? Unless of course its a job that requires
a licensed person to perform, i.e. electrical work.
I can see it now, boss, "George, I would like you to deliver this mail to
the appropriate employees", me, "Sorry boss, but thats not what I was hired
to do, go find a secretary". I thinks they call that insubordination.

- George

    re: .13
    
    Chuck, I am in no way implying that DEC is trying to force this
    photographer to do work for the company, only that if he is asked
    to do so, he should be re-imbursed at the same rate that he would
    bill any other customer.  It may still be a lot cheaper than to
    send a company photographer to that site, or than hiring a local
    full-time pro.
    
    re: 14
    
    Not the same scenario at all.  If people in TMP have nothing to
    do, and management wants to move them around (especially in the
    same plant) to do normal DEC-work that they are qualified to do
    (i. e. count inventory), then I see no reason for anyone taking
    umbrage.  I am not saying they should be expected to do
    carpentry, electrical, plumbing etc. even though they may be very
    well qualified to do those jobs outside of DEC.  But if the
    shipping-receiving dept. are caught short-handed, I think DEC  has
    every right to expect non-productive people to give a hand if
    requested.  But DEC has no right to expect anyone to bring his
    personal tools or equipment to do work for the company.  I will
    go one step further;  if the company were willing to furnish that
    photographer the necessary equipment, he still should not HAVE to
    it.
    
           

    Is it actually "policy" that you can't moonlight while at dec? So if an
    employee was a boomerang fish thrower, he couldn't do this on his own
    time and get paid while at DEC? 
    
    

Re: < Note 999.16 by ACESMK::KUHN "Jay Kuhn MKO2" >

>    Is it actually "policy" that you can't moonlight while at dec? So if an
>    employee was a boomerang fish thrower, he couldn't do this on his own
>    time and get paid while at DEC? 
    
No, I didn't say "can't moonlight while at DEC," but rather can't moonlight
*for* DEC.  For example, I (and some other DECcies I know) sometimes teach 
college courses on a "moonlighting" basis. That kind of thing is OK, as long
as the moonlighting work doesn't involve conflict of interest. However, if
DEC wanted to hire someone to teach evening or weekend seminars, I don't
think it could "hire" me for that and pay me extra (the fee it would have
paid an external consultant or instructor, in addition to my "day job" salary).

Another example: If DEC wanted to hire part-time evening security guards 
at my work site, I believe it would be against policy for the company
to hire me and pay me my regular salary plus the part-time guard salary. 
If I wanted to be a part-time evening security guard, I'd have to do it 
for some other company (and not a Digital competitor either).

I looked through the Personnel Policies & Procedures document in VTX; and
while I didn't see anything explicitly forbidding "moonlighting for DEC,"
I think it's implicit in a lot of the discussion of the various kinds of
employee status (full-time, part-time, temporary). I also recall some
discussion of moonlighting for DEC years ago, but can't recall the particulars.
Finally, if anyone knows I'm wrong in my assumptions, please let me know --
I'd love to pick up some extra money for coming in evenings and weekends!

    
    
    RE: .17 
    
    	    Chuck, your example with the security guards does not appear to
                   correct.  Here in Burlington (Vt), many of the
                   auxillary officers are those that work in manufacturing.
                   They also may fill in during their normal working hours,
                   as long as their supervisor agrees (i.e. for someone
                   sick, etc).  I am not sure how the pay thing works out,
                   but it may be worth you to look into if interested.
    
            craig

    how about this:
    
    Customer wants to have a course taught (by me) but my time (working
    hours) are all tied-up so DEC could not deliver this. If I were to
    moonlight and teach the course on my own time, will there be a conflict
    of interest? After all, DEC isn't going to make those money anyway.
    
    HW

    
    .19> Customer wants to have a course taught (by me) but my time (working
    .19> hours) are all tied-up so DEC could not deliver this. If I were to
    .19> moonlight and teach the course on my own time, will there be a conflict
    .19> of interest?
    
       Most definitely. This is business that Digital could deliver through
    a number of departments (Ed. Serv., Sales Support, PSS). If you were to
    provide the service on your own, possibly using resources available to
    you as a Digital employee, you could get nailed for it.
    
    .19> After all, DEC isn't going to make those money anyway.
    
       Even if you could prove beyond any doubt that the customer
    absolutely will not purchase the service from Digital or any other
    vendor unless YOU specifically delivered it, your providing the service
    is still a conflict of interest. (It could be argued that the customer
    declined the service from Digital knowing that you would be available
    to do it as "moonlighting", at perhaps a lower billing rate.)
    
    
    Frank
    

    re .20
    
    Aw gee! One less happy customer and coupla quids less in my pockets :(.

    re .19 etc
    
    Apply formally for approval to management - if they approve your
    request then you have no problem. I know of people who give lectures
    'privately' on work related subjects - they asked for ruling on
    conflict and were allowed to go ahead
    
    j.e.

    re .22
    
    Asks them! They'll be so happy that the customer wants to take delivery
    outside hours, and make ME deliver it OUTSIDE HOURS! Without paying me
    overtime of course. I may not be very intellgent but I'm not stupid! :)
    
    hw (not that I mind working extra hours for old Ken, Hell! I'm already
    doing that anyway! The thing that bites me is they'll [ie some of the
    management] happily volunteer my service on weekends, nights,... try
    getting the DM to come back on weekends to attend a customer meeting!)

    You can moonlight all you like. What's taboo is moonlighting for a
    competitor -- or in a potentially competitive or conflicting situation 
    in a related industry.
    
    Mike

    re: .23---Consider this: get approval from your management to deliver
    it outside hours, and do the delivery.  Explain to the customer what
    is happening, and they will likely provide you some sort of compen- 
    sation, if only a good dinner.
        John Sauter

    re .25
    
    put it this way: I don't NEED to seek approval to deliver it outside
    hours FOR Digital. In normal circumstances, I wouldn't mind too. We
    have a system where we are given meal allowances (meager but still
    symbolic) for after hours work. What I so vehemently objects to is some
    of the managements' attitude that because they provide that ridiculous
    meal allowance, they feel justified to volunteer my after  hours'
    service without consulting me (and this is a long-stretch, working late
    into tomorrow). For management like this, I say to HELL with them!
    Sacrifice my own time to keep their PSS coffers! BAH!
    
    hw
    
    ps: sorry for the rattling flame...I feel better now, whew!

    re .23
    
    I was trying to say in .22 that these people were being paid (not
    by DEC) for what they did. They just made sure that there was (written)
    agreement/approval that they could go ahead before starting.
    
    j.e.

    Now, I'm really confused!  What is the difference between the security
    workers noted before and what I want to do - if I come in on Saturday
    (my time) and photograph a project for someone, what conflict is
    that?  We have no staff photographers, no conflict there, I am doing
    it on my own time, no conflict there either.  I am not talking about
    what I shoot for DEC on DEC's time, that is a different matter.
    So, what now?

    Maybe I can highlight what the personnel prespective 'appears'
    to be. 
    
    You are an employee of Digital. There is no way of seperating the
    employee of Digital from the photography business's employee,
    without the appearance that the Digital employee is receiving
    favored treatment over 'possible' competitors. You did not go
    through a bidding process, a purchase order was not approved,
    Digital is not a 'non-profit' organization (including company
    sponsored EAC groups) and cannot have time donated to it. If
    you were to receive compensation for your time, you would be
    receiving more than 52 weeks compensation in a 52 week period.
    If you are a regular employee of Digital and also report earnings
    from Digital as mumble Photography, the IRS could become upset
    with Digital. What if one of our plant electricians was moon-
    lighting for an electrical contractor that did work for Digital?
    While on vacation, the electrician enters a Digital facility
    and completes a job for the contractor. Who did the work if
    there is a liability question? How do you prove this in a court
    of law? The problem isn't as much a *real* conflict of interest,
    as it is the *appearance* of a *possible* confilct of interest.
    
    Bob Mc

    
    If you do not claim a profit with in a 5 year period, your business will be
    or can be classified as a hobby and your tax status can change with the
    I>R>S. This means all write-offs you have done can be claimed as income
    and the IRS and state can ask for their share.