WDW IT Layoffs 1/30/2015

Nubs70

Well-Known Member
Because they'll likely walk out with a degree, but not the skills required for the job. Sad to say, but true.
However, if offered a competitive wage and benefits along with an engaging workplace, some may stay but some may leave. In either way, you get nice lower wage employees for a couple of years.

Additionally, by helping increase the pool of educated candidates, you help depress the wage demands. Maybe a too macro level argument.
 

Nubs70

Well-Known Member
Then there are also those who won't hire senior, experienced IT workers because they ASSUME that they cost too much, even though, when we are without a job for months, we tend to be extremely flexible and motivated in our asking salary!
And if you are flexible and entertain a lower than market offer, HR will ASSUME there is something wrong with you.
 

englanddg

One Little Spark...
However, if offered a competitive wage and benefits along with an engaging workplace, some may stay but some may leave. In either way, you get nice lower wage employees for a couple of years.

Additionally, by helping increase the pool of educated candidates, you help depress the wage demands. Maybe a too macro level argument.
All depends on what the role is and what systems that role will involve.

I hired a programmer once with the end goal that he could blue sky our POS system and rewrite a system I developed nearly a decade ago...

He ended up screwing up day to day operations on a regular basis (taking the system offline, etc) and, while competent IT wise, didn't have enough general life and business experience to understand that IT is generally not about technology know how alone, it's about how end users perceive and interact with it. It's a hard lesson to learn, and one that many in IT never learn (and therefore keep churning).

Of course, this is my opinion.
 
So, lets circle the wagons and forget my own challenges. Is it OK for a company to lay off seasoned employees and replace them with people with H-1B visas at 40% less pay? The roles were not eliminated, just the people.


Great article from Inc. that hits home:

http://www.inc.com/erik-sherman/6-reasons-layoffs-are-really-dumb.html

" When creating a product or service requires a group effort, then the group needs to be able to communicate and work together effectively. But even if you're not developing the latest title to slay zombies, you still have trouble with regular layoffs because creativity is one of the fundamental requirements for innovation. According to researchers, innovation is the product of groups working together, not of a few remarkable individuals. When you break the working relationships, you force employees to start from zero, which hampers ongoing competition.

Intellectual property loss.

Most companies depend on intellectual property--not just copyrights, trademarks, patents, and trade secrets, but all the know-how of making business processes work. Every time you send people out the door, you lose the knowledge they have of the business.

Business relationships.

Business also runs on relationships with partners and customers. Technically the relationships are with the company, often detailed in contracts. But the realrelationships are with the people the customers and partners do business with. When you send those people out the door, your organization has to start rebuilding the interpersonal aspect of business all over again.

Cost.

This is an ironic one. When a company lays people off, it thinks it is saving itself money. And it does in one sense. But every time you have to staff up again for that next big project, you have the costs of finding and hiring new people and then getting them up to speed, which means lost productivity and all sorts of soft costs that can be hidden--and significant.

Trust.

When people are often sent on their way, you undermine any sense of trust that the remaining employees might have. How long before they're in the next batch? That affects morale, employee effectiveness, and productivity.

Turnover of important talent.

When employees don't trust the employer, they start looking for other opportunities. The ones most likely to leave are the ones that will have the easiest time finding something else. In other words, you chase your top talent off to your competitors.

It may be that you really have to lay people off at times. But if so, better take some time to reevaluate your business model and strategy and all the stacks of hidden costs of doing so. It may be that there's a better and more predictable way of doing business that ultimately increases the bottom line.
 

CaptainAmerica

Premium Member
So, lets circle the wagons and forget my own challenges. Is it OK for a company to lay off seasoned employees and replace them with people with H-1B visas at 40% less pay?
Yes.

ETA: Unless we do what @ford91exploder wants and shut down immigration for awhile. But there's no political will to do so because anyone who proposes such an idea will be accused of hating immigrants.

Edit 2: Quoting the tech press about how bad IT layoffs are is like quoting a vegan website about how bad the pork industry is. Not exactly a neutral source.
 

flynnibus

Premium Member
Not sure if racist.

Ignore the label.. and face that H1Bs are supposed to be only for work that can't be filled domestically. When you 'restructure' and hire in visa workers.. it defeats the intent.

I personally find it hard to believe Disney would be taking on lots of H1Bs in place of laid off workers... its not really cost effective because of the overhead of those workers. Now if they brought in contractors, that used a lot of 'imported' manpower.. I'd consider that more likely.

Visa holders aren't supposed to be underpaid vs the prevailing wage and include lots of paperwork/legal.
 

wm49rs

A naughty bit o' crumpet
Premium Member
So, lets circle the wagons and forget my own challenges. Is it OK for a company to lay off seasoned employees and replace them with people with H-1B visas at 40% less pay? The roles were not eliminated, just the people.


Great article from Inc. that hits home:

http://www.inc.com/erik-sherman/6-reasons-layoffs-are-really-dumb.html

" When creating a product or service requires a group effort, then the group needs to be able to communicate and work together effectively. But even if you're not developing the latest title to slay zombies, you still have trouble with regular layoffs because creativity is one of the fundamental requirements for innovation. According to researchers, innovation is the product of groups working together, not of a few remarkable individuals. When you break the working relationships, you force employees to start from zero, which hampers ongoing competition.

Intellectual property loss.

Most companies depend on intellectual property--not just copyrights, trademarks, patents, and trade secrets, but all the know-how of making business processes work. Every time you send people out the door, you lose the knowledge they have of the business.

Business relationships.

Business also runs on relationships with partners and customers. Technically the relationships are with the company, often detailed in contracts. But the realrelationships are with the people the customers and partners do business with. When you send those people out the door, your organization has to start rebuilding the interpersonal aspect of business all over again.

Cost.

This is an ironic one. When a company lays people off, it thinks it is saving itself money. And it does in one sense. But every time you have to staff up again for that next big project, you have the costs of finding and hiring new people and then getting them up to speed, which means lost productivity and all sorts of soft costs that can be hidden--and significant.

Trust.

When people are often sent on their way, you undermine any sense of trust that the remaining employees might have. How long before they're in the next batch? That affects morale, employee effectiveness, and productivity.

Turnover of important talent.

When employees don't trust the employer, they start looking for other opportunities. The ones most likely to leave are the ones that will have the easiest time finding something else. In other words, you chase your top talent off to your competitors.

It may be that you really have to lay people off at times. But if so, better take some time to reevaluate your business model and strategy and all the stacks of hidden costs of doing so. It may be that there's a better and more predictable way of doing business that ultimately increases the bottom line.
Circle the wagons?
 

CaptainAmerica

Premium Member
I personally find it hard to believe Disney would be taking on lots of H1Bs in place of laid off workers... its not really cost effective because of the overhead of those workers. Now if they brought in contractors, that used a lot of 'imported' manpower.. I'd consider that more likely.
This.
 

note2001

Well-Known Member
I work in IT and the layoffs are bad. Very bad. Worse I've seen my industry in a while.

The IT layoff wave machine. It exists, but needs to be put out of its misery (much like the Poly's.) Those who initiate the waves are typically the ones in need of laying off.
 

CaptainAmerica

Premium Member
Job security is 'bad' out there..
But that doesn't mean it's a "bad" thing. Yes, it's bad for the guy who loses his job, but that's a reality in any economy. The classic example is the buggy whip manufacturer. When the automobile rose to prominence and replaced the horse and carriage, the buggy whip manufacturer had to either adapt to the new economy or be replaced.
 

jloucks

Well-Known Member
The layoffs stink. I remember several years ago Disney did a big layoff that included several friends. One was in the middle of a big project. On the first day of being laid off the office called my friend 5 times with questions. My friend trying to be a good person answered all their questions. The next day the same thing. On the third day my friend said to them..."you have got to be kidding. You guys laid me off and I am looking for a job so that I continue to support myself. Don't call me again." A week later my friend had their job back. I was always fascinated by my friends story. Makes you wonder how those decisions are made.
I hope he got a nice raise. I'd have been temped hard negotiate that return.
 

Nubs70

Well-Known Member
Ignore the label.. and face that H1Bs are supposed to be only for work that can't be filled domestically. When you 'restructure' and hire in visa workers.. it defeats the intent.

I personally find it hard to believe Disney would be taking on lots of H1Bs in place of laid off workers... its not really cost effective because of the overhead of those workers. Now if they brought in contractors, that used a lot of 'imported' manpower.. I'd consider that more likely.

Visa holders aren't supposed to be underpaid vs the prevailing wage and include lots of paperwork/legal.
Or if a company is denied an H1B visa based on the fact there is domestic talent. So the company hires domestic, let's go at 89th day because of lack of fit, claims domestic talent, gets 2 H1B visas each at 1/2 of the wage the single dometic.

It happens
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom