This is an addendum to a previous post. Somebody asked about for opinions
about Cisco's announced layoffs of 8500 people.
I responded that every tech company is going through hell right now, but
Cisco had the forethought and compassion to offer 6 months severance (2
months automatic, an additional 4 if you sign their severance agreement),
which stands in stark contrast to certain other companies who not only gave
no severance, but declared bankruptcy while still owing backpay and expenses
to employees (the Web consulting company Marchfirst immediately comes to
mind - the bankruptcy judge of that case has even declared that employees
who are owed backpay/expenses have to get in line behind the major
creditors, so you know those employeers are going to get nothing). Then
there are stories of people getting severance checks that bounced, companies
laying off people in violation of the Federal WARN labor laws, companies
giving job offers and then trying to retroactively withdraw the offer after
the offer was accepted (presumably the candidate had turned down other
competing offers to take the offer which is now being withdrawn), etc. etc.
If you're going to have to lay off people, offering 6 months severance seems
to be a more-than-compassionate way to do it. Several other posters talked
about similar deals offered by Nortel and other companies when they laid
people off. So it's pretty clear that some companies have positioned
themselves as 'the good guys' (as opposed to other companies who have
clearly shown themselves to be the 'bad guys'), so that they will be the
employer-of-choice when the economy picks up again. These companies have
tried to preserve goodwill among the networking community so that they will
have little problem in hiring again.
While I am not trying to downplay the pain that those laid-off Cisco or
Nortel employees must be feeling, on the other hand, they could have been
working for one of those www.fuc*edcompany.com employers like Marchfirst.
Well, to build up even more goodwil, recently, it was announced that John
Chambers is cutting his salary to $1. The chairman (forgot his name) is
also cutting his salary to $1. The management stated that since so much
cost-cutting was going on at Cisco, management should share in the pain.
I don't begrudge company execs getting rich when times are good, but it is
so refreshing to see execs sharing in the bad times. A world of difference
from the usual M.O., where execs slash thousands of jobs and still reap
their millions. As stated in fuc*edcompany: "These guys seem to have worked
out that you don't have to be an as*hole to make money. Bravo. About fuc*ing
time someone got a clue"
Now some of you may be thinking that the $1 salary is just a Cisco
publicity stunt. Sure, maybe so. But then I don't see the exec's of those
other companies who have laid off thousands (Intel, Yahoo, etc.) doing
anything comparable.
""Victim"" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> What is your opinion on "cisco fire / umemploy staff " ?
> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=2416&t=641
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
