Posted on 10/22/2015 2:12:22 AM PDT by markomalley
I first heard about this yesterday, and this was the conversation that popped into my mind:
REPLACEMENT H-1B WORKER: “Hi Mr. X, I was told I could call you for advice on the code you wrote for this process before they laid you off and hired me. We added a new process, and the code doesn’t work. Could you help me fix it?”
LAID OFF MR. X: “Sure. Just un-comment this line here, comment out this line and recompile. That should fix it for you.” Click.
Later...
REPLACEMENT H-1B WORKER: “But sir, I did as Mr. X suggested, and it wrote data to the wrong part of the database, and we can’t undo it...our records are unusable, all the key fields have been overwritten and the backups are no good!”
This sounds vaguely rotten to me, and I'm not sure I would agree to it -- but I don't know how large the severance package might be. But in any case, workers who have been paid should not be said to be "required to work for free". It is not accurate.
It’s a given that what SunTrust has done is not ethic.
Additionally, I can’t see how this meets labor regulations, labor decision case precidents?
Coerced work obligations without pay in their severance package?
And how the hell can this practice be Sarbanes Oxley, Payment Card Industry, and HIPAA compliant?
Identity Access Management and Privileged User Management standards usually require individuals to have a continous employee or vendor recertification for privileged user access.
Once an individual is terminated, they’re supposed to lose access.
Reclassifying terminated employees as unpaid contractors and letting them have privileged access to sensitive financially significant systems doesn’t seem like that would pass compliance audits.
Idiotic bastards.
As an ex-techie, I am SO looking forward to all of the comments and further installments about this story.
It’s Buttered-popcorn time!
In the 1950’s and 1960’s, companies were run by executives from manufacturing and sales. To rise in the organization they had to lead people and value people. Employees were generally loyal to companies and companies were loyal to their people.
In the 1970’s companies shifted from appointing operating executives to senior roles to appointing financial managers and lawyers. This generation of executives viewed employees as an expense, not an asset. Hence three decades of downsizing, offshoring and restructuring have virtually eliminated employee loyalty toward company. It has also resulted in poor management and leadership skills within organizations.
Perhaps the mellennial generation will force organizations to develop better leaders and begin viewing employees as assets to be nurtured instead of wage slaves to be discarded.
This may be true, but the cost of doing business in the US, especially manufacturing, has left executives with few options.
The severance package isn't payment for work... it's payment for being let go through circumstances beyond your control.
This may be true, but the cost of doing business in the US, especially manufacturing, has left executives with few options.
You may also want to consider the role of 401k's and fund managers in that mix. As an investor, chances are that you care about Black Rock Small Cap Growth's performance. The actions that the Jack-In-The-Box (one of the fund's investments) takes to maintain share price and quarterly dividends is not really much of concern to you. Fund managers know that and base their decisions on that fact.
If you, as a corporate manager for (as an example) Jack-In-The-Box, take an action that is best in the long term but might temporarily reduce returns for a quarter or two in order to achieve long-term growth, you will be called on the carpet like nothing you've ever seen because your shareholders (the majority of whom are institutional owners, such as Black Rock Small Cap Growth) won't tolerate a loss of returns for even a quarter.
That changes how corporate managers act and how they think. IMHO, not always for the positive.
Someone is actually using F#???
Number-cruncher: “Say! We can get THREE Indian IT resources at the same salary as one of our American IT resources, AND we don’t have to pay them benefits!”
IT (technical) manager: “The American resources work much more efficiently, design better code, are always available outside of business hours, and they speak clear English.”
Number-cruncher: “But THREE instead of one?! AND we don’t have to pay them benefits? C’mon! Surely you could train them to perform at the same standards as the American worker. Where’s the downside?”
IT (technical) manager: “Historical and anecdotal evidence suggests otherwise, and American resources are here, face-to-face, and they’re easily managed versus a resource on the other side of the planet.”
Number-cruncher: “I’m sorry, but the big boss man is going to appreciate having a bigger bonus check more than he will with what you deem to be higher quality staff.”
IT (technical) manager: *sits back and folds his arms across his chest* “Well you surely know how to do my job better than me, so please, by all means, let’s go for it. When the systems are smoking heaps of garbage in eight to twelve months, don’t say I didn’t warn you.”
When Disney pulled the same stunt, they offered the severance package only if the worker signed it that minute. If they wanted to discuss it with,say, their lawyer, the severance offer was revoked.
The workers would have been better off if they all walked away, and let SunTrust negotiate openly to bring them back to train their replacements. That's pretty much what unions are supposed to do. I'm not a fan of unions, but I think the IT industry is reaching the point where are the lesser evil.
F# is that like FORTRAN 2015? I could do that.
Go ahead, let me back in to your system after you fire me. I dare you.
Delete C *.*
The comments following the story at the Register tell the tale. Not sure what SunTrust was thinking. Have been involved in projects where the majority of the new code is from offshore. Management had a hard time figuring out why their cost-cutting measure didn’t improve their bottom-line. Really.
Did I say RM? I’m sorry, I meant MV. My bad. You’ve got backups, right?
I work in IT support, servicing many companies, and see the disaster this practice has done in corporate America. On the side, I have advised many personal friends whose companies (number-crunchers) were considering laying off their IT staff and hiring a “managed services” company (usually based out of India) to really consider the longterm costs. However, the number-crunchers are usually planning to take their bonus for “saving” the company so much $$$ and jumping ship before hitting the iceberg. I probably should write a book on my observations and experiences with this “practice”, but will have to do so after I am retired or replaced, as the powers that be would not be happy with the expose....
Let’s see...Fifty years of undocumented program modifications, line after line of dead or stunt code, misleading comments, etc. What could go wrong if an H1-B makes a few minor changes here and there? After all, they were taught good programming practices and strictly follow all the rules in the books, But real programmers know its like a sewer down there and things can get really dirty in hurry if you don’t know what you’re doing, namely the traps, pitfalls, and what to avoid. It’s an art and experience comes with a price. Not to say there aren’t any good H1-B programmers, but many should be working at Mickey D’s for their $10/hr, not on critical software. Put H1-Bs and complex related systems together and you have a potential disaster lurking in your IT systems long after the H1-Bs are gone.
That's the discussion that was had at one of my former companies, almost verbatim. Were you listening in? :-)
Outsourcing, of course, was implemented, because the board wanted it. And, of course, it was a disaster. I got out before things got *really* bad, though. Strangely enough, I heard through the grapevine that they needed to bring in five (5!!) H1B's to take over my duties, and those five still couldn't do it.
I went through another IT outsourcing at a large Fortune 500 company. Basically, we changed employers and kept our desks. 85% of a 200-man IT dept (including me) quit within 6 months.
The end results were devastating for the company, the only way they survived was by throwing money (a billion +, if the rumor mill was right) at the problem until they were able to stabilize the situation. Everyone in management at the company who was involved in the outsourcing decision - from the COO down - wound up being fired over that one.
I've no idea why people do it. Arrogance, I suppose. "This has failed every other time, but only because *I* haven't tried it yet!".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.