HP to cut 25-30k jobs(bbc.com)
bbc.com
HP to cut 25-30k jobs
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-34265094
317 comments
Your dad needs to think about the next best 5 guys, and how to pick them up for cheap when the layoffs happen. At his age striking out on his own will seem absolutely terrifying.
Work on him for a few months. He must have built up some serious contacts over the years. His pitch is straightforward. HP can't actually support their products anymore, they don't have the staff. He knows the hardware inside and out. Sell support contracts. Snipe the best after the layoffs.
You don't look for a job when you need one. this rumor is going to terrify customers. Since he has good personal relationships with those fortune 1000, he needs to monetize that. He must have some idea of what HP charges for his time. He can send the new guys, and come in to rescue at the end.
I know this sounds crazy. Think really hard about it though. There isn't anyplace that will hire him at 100k. He needs to set up his own shop. Think of it this way, 0.05 < P(new_biz_fail) < 0.1. What is the chance of him getting a good new job in 6 months? i'd guess less than 10%. With your mom, he needs to bring in serious cash. He's in a position to do that. If he picks good helpers, it won't consume his life, anymore than the current job. He really only needs 1 contract, and can build from there.
It sounds super scary. Hell, it is super scary. If he needs stability for the next 15 years or so, this is a really good way to do it. Really, in his position, as good as he is, it's less scary than going and looking for work.
Work on him for a few months. He must have built up some serious contacts over the years. His pitch is straightforward. HP can't actually support their products anymore, they don't have the staff. He knows the hardware inside and out. Sell support contracts. Snipe the best after the layoffs.
You don't look for a job when you need one. this rumor is going to terrify customers. Since he has good personal relationships with those fortune 1000, he needs to monetize that. He must have some idea of what HP charges for his time. He can send the new guys, and come in to rescue at the end.
I know this sounds crazy. Think really hard about it though. There isn't anyplace that will hire him at 100k. He needs to set up his own shop. Think of it this way, 0.05 < P(new_biz_fail) < 0.1. What is the chance of him getting a good new job in 6 months? i'd guess less than 10%. With your mom, he needs to bring in serious cash. He's in a position to do that. If he picks good helpers, it won't consume his life, anymore than the current job. He really only needs 1 contract, and can build from there.
It sounds super scary. Hell, it is super scary. If he needs stability for the next 15 years or so, this is a really good way to do it. Really, in his position, as good as he is, it's less scary than going and looking for work.
This sounds like a great idea, but I don't know if he's such an entrepreneur or risk-taker. Some people are, some people aren't. It's a natural thing.
I'm not sure of the papers he's signed (non-competes...), or the contracts that HP has with their customers (there must be some), but... he could definitely "get the band together" and pull off such a feat. Again, I think this goes back to the contracts he had.
He's one of 4 remaining from the "blue days" (time with Digital); I think they'd be able to pull it off if they did go this route. They're all pretty awesome.
I'm not sure of the papers he's signed (non-competes...), or the contracts that HP has with their customers (there must be some), but... he could definitely "get the band together" and pull off such a feat. Again, I think this goes back to the contracts he had.
He's one of 4 remaining from the "blue days" (time with Digital); I think they'd be able to pull it off if they did go this route. They're all pretty awesome.
Most states are "right to work" states, which means that it is difficult (or impossible) for an employer to enforce a non-compete if they lay you off. Unless he signs something to the contrary while taking severance. It'd be worth the $150 half-hour lawyer fee to get an official legal opinion on this.
You should 100% check with a lawyer about those supposed non-compete things you sign. In many states, as I understand, they aren't even worth the paper they are printed upon.
Small world - my dad's another one of those 4 HP-ES folks left from the blue days. I agree with the advice here and I've forwarded him a link to the comments (hi dad!).
The vast majority of people who are great aren't great because they want to be. they don't have a choice, they need to be. He's got some time, he can figure it out. Maybe partner with those friends. Sharing the load is incredibly motivating.
At least get him to take a long look at those contracts. Heck, he might be released from them on severance.
Talk to him about it. No matter what happens, it's going to be a rough time for him. If he feels safer going and looking for work, good for him, there's no judgement. But you make it sound like he really needs to take care of his family. Just keep this option in mind. Time is on your side, for now.
At least get him to take a long look at those contracts. Heck, he might be released from them on severance.
Talk to him about it. No matter what happens, it's going to be a rough time for him. If he feels safer going and looking for work, good for him, there's no judgement. But you make it sound like he really needs to take care of his family. Just keep this option in mind. Time is on your side, for now.
Thanks, I'll be sure to echo this to him.
Those contacts are worth a ridiculous amount of money. Niche consulting for the enterprise can yield literally millions of dollars/a year in support for a client like UPS. An Alpha setup.. I'm guessing OpenVMS? Mission critical to their business. Whatever support contract they're paying HP, he can join any big-name tech consulting firm, play golf with the CIO or purchasing authority in charge of maintenance/support and just _happen to mention_ he moved firms.
He doesn't have to go on-site to UPS to bring that business over to another firm, and when you build up _30 years_ of trust, that Rolodex and trust is worth 50x the best technical engineers ability (in terms of generating billables). He's in a great position. Senior Partners at McKinsey aren't paid millions because of their ability to put together a nice deck. They're paid that way because they have 20 years of billables and reliable after-work. If he's laid off and not picked up in 2 weeks, tell him to e-mail me.
He doesn't have to go on-site to UPS to bring that business over to another firm, and when you build up _30 years_ of trust, that Rolodex and trust is worth 50x the best technical engineers ability (in terms of generating billables). He's in a great position. Senior Partners at McKinsey aren't paid millions because of their ability to put together a nice deck. They're paid that way because they have 20 years of billables and reliable after-work. If he's laid off and not picked up in 2 weeks, tell him to e-mail me.
Word. Your dad needs to gather up all his contacts, put them in a spreadsheet and figure out who he's got. Then, figure out which of his customers will get screwed in this. Then, collect his team. Then, figure out the noncompete. It's very doable, but very scary.
And whatever tasks he doesn't like, accounting, bookkeeping, etcetera. He can hire someone full time or even just part time to handle for him. That way he can focus on the things he does well, selling and doing the work.
My dad was working as a consultant (environmental consultant, basically handling the creation of reports needed for a company's legal compliance with emissions standards, etc.) for an industrial trade org. They had a rule not to compete with member companies, so when a consultancy joined the org, they shut down his division, even though the new member only offered services that were tangentially related. He ended up working for himself (one man shop) for the last 13 years of his career before retiring, doing exactly the same thing he'd always done. He's not a sales person by any means, and striking out on his own definitely seemed outside his comfort zone at first. But he was able to base his business on the relationships with customers that he'd already established, and since he's got such a specialized skill set and works so diligently, his customers kept coming back and recommended him to others. So I just wanted to give an example that this sort of thing is possible (assuming there's no non-compete clause to undermine the whole thing - in my dad's case he did it with the blessing of his former employer - sometimes they'd even send him leads when they had to turn away a customer)
As long as he can get the legal stuff square (non-competes, etc) it's not that risky. You're not trying to start a unicorn tech company, just convert a few contacts into customers to replace your old income and hopefully make more than you did before. My dad did this last year, at 60, and it's been going pretty good. Having a big network is a huge plus.
>He's one of 4 remaining from the "blue days" (time with Digital); I think they'd be able to pull it off if they did go this route. They're all pretty awesome.
From personal experience, I want to add some long-term expectations about commanding premium consulting rates -- especially as it relates to vendor-proprietary knowledge.
I used to work for an enterprise software firm and was on their "crisis firefighting team". I'd travel to customer sites at less than 24 hours notice and fix their worst problems. These were the problems that were escalated to the CEO.
When I left the company and struck out on my own as a freelance "subject matter expert", I was able to command $300k a year for a few years. My background and rate was easy to sell: I was trained directly by the people who wrote the software.
The thing is that I always knew I was living on borrowed time because that high income was based on my previous association of being in the "inner circle" of how the software works. I had to diversify my skills away from that software because with each year that passed by, I became more of an "outsider" just like everyone else.
To relate to your dad's situation ... yes he's very good at what he does, but some of that value may also be his inside feed of information from HP. After he's separated from HP, as each new generation of server & printer hardware is released, his "aura" of HP knowledge can become outdated and less relevant value for customers. In other words, he needs to charge whatever premium rate he can, save as much as he can, all with an eye towards diversifying his income. Diversity could mean new tech skills such as learning AWS architecture or buying real estate to get income from rental properties.
From personal experience, I want to add some long-term expectations about commanding premium consulting rates -- especially as it relates to vendor-proprietary knowledge.
I used to work for an enterprise software firm and was on their "crisis firefighting team". I'd travel to customer sites at less than 24 hours notice and fix their worst problems. These were the problems that were escalated to the CEO.
When I left the company and struck out on my own as a freelance "subject matter expert", I was able to command $300k a year for a few years. My background and rate was easy to sell: I was trained directly by the people who wrote the software.
The thing is that I always knew I was living on borrowed time because that high income was based on my previous association of being in the "inner circle" of how the software works. I had to diversify my skills away from that software because with each year that passed by, I became more of an "outsider" just like everyone else.
To relate to your dad's situation ... yes he's very good at what he does, but some of that value may also be his inside feed of information from HP. After he's separated from HP, as each new generation of server & printer hardware is released, his "aura" of HP knowledge can become outdated and less relevant value for customers. In other words, he needs to charge whatever premium rate he can, save as much as he can, all with an eye towards diversifying his income. Diversity could mean new tech skills such as learning AWS architecture or buying real estate to get income from rental properties.
For people who work with legacy technologies, it can actually be the reverse situation. Yeah, your knowledge of The Latest Hipster Web Framework becomes less valuable year on year, but the situation is a little different for senior personnel running Fortune 50-level ops on legacy technologies. They aren't exactly churning OpenVMS systems architects out of coding boot camps. It's a lot the same situation as COBOL programmers are in - they're not something you need a million of, the work may not be 100% stable, but when you do need them they're fixing mission-critical systems that have millions/billions of dollars of business riding on them and the rates are astronomical.
Uh, this sort of hardware doesn't get upgraded in a year or two. Or ever. One word: COBOL.
If this is anything like the last set of layoffs and sell offs the the early 2000s, there will be a lot of smaller companies starting up that will handle the business that HP will start to lose.
I worked at a large company that used HP hardware with large, multi-million dollar contracts and a lot of our business went out to these smaller companies. The level of service that your father can provide is important to large enterprises. If your father doesn't want to start his own company, someone else will. He should start talking to his colleagues and his boss - maybe someone is already thinking of starting something.
These sorts of layoffs can create opportunity for people like your dad. HP can't just lay off that many people without hurting parts of their service line.
I worked at a large company that used HP hardware with large, multi-million dollar contracts and a lot of our business went out to these smaller companies. The level of service that your father can provide is important to large enterprises. If your father doesn't want to start his own company, someone else will. He should start talking to his colleagues and his boss - maybe someone is already thinking of starting something.
These sorts of layoffs can create opportunity for people like your dad. HP can't just lay off that many people without hurting parts of their service line.
he can do it with your help and guidance. the midwest and south are littered with many small tech consulting outfits like this, we work with several. they all bill slightly under coastal market (we're based in california) but high for the midwest ($~150-200/hr). we use them for things like tech-focused CPA work and commercial software support i.e. oracle, sql server etc.
i personally bootstrapped my startup with 0 outside funding by doing commercial i.e. "enterprise" software consulting on a platform i had experience in from two jobs ago, with my partner, for 2 years. we each booked about $250k of revenue a year for 2-3 years before the work dried up after several buyouts etc. by then our 'real' business was self sustaining.
it's time-capped, and you'll have to hustle for the work, but you can bill an outrageous sum of money that will pad their retirement and help secure their future in an otherwise shit situation.
i personally bootstrapped my startup with 0 outside funding by doing commercial i.e. "enterprise" software consulting on a platform i had experience in from two jobs ago, with my partner, for 2 years. we each booked about $250k of revenue a year for 2-3 years before the work dried up after several buyouts etc. by then our 'real' business was self sustaining.
it's time-capped, and you'll have to hustle for the work, but you can bill an outrageous sum of money that will pad their retirement and help secure their future in an otherwise shit situation.
When CFEngine got bust (well, the company was put on life-support) all the guys who know the technology (even if it was just a 1-2 years of experience) resigned and turned into contractors with a semi-permanent contracts and 2-3x income boost.
It's not hard.
It's not hard.
>> I'm not sure of the papers he's signed (non-competes...), or the contracts that HP has with their customers
You should do a few things.
1 - Contact an employment attorney and see if they can determine if he signed a non-compete. If it helps, I was involved in two scenarios (in Minnesota) where I signed a non-compete and went to work for a competitor. Both times, the judge threw out the case saying the company couldn't keep me from being gainfully employed if I wasn't going to disrupt their business. It was a hard sell since I was going to a startup and they were a fortune 1000 company.
2 - Tell your Dad to start planning as if he will get laid off. Start putting together a plan for his own business. Contacts, companies, phone numbers, information on their equipment - anything he can get his hands on. In short, start stockpiling information now. The more he has, the sooner he gets off the ground. Also, start talking to people to see how motivated they would be to start something on their own.
4 - Tell him to dust off his resume and start sending it out to recruiters. I know for a fact there's a ton of HP hardware vendors or re-sellers that could use his experience.
In short, start planning for the worst. Hopefully he gets through this, but he should assume the worst and hope for the best. If he does get laid off, he's already ready to hit the ground running instead of wallowing about being a company for so long. Trust me, companies would die to have a guy with his contacts and experience. This is by no means a dead end or career ending by any stretch.
You should do a few things.
1 - Contact an employment attorney and see if they can determine if he signed a non-compete. If it helps, I was involved in two scenarios (in Minnesota) where I signed a non-compete and went to work for a competitor. Both times, the judge threw out the case saying the company couldn't keep me from being gainfully employed if I wasn't going to disrupt their business. It was a hard sell since I was going to a startup and they were a fortune 1000 company.
2 - Tell your Dad to start planning as if he will get laid off. Start putting together a plan for his own business. Contacts, companies, phone numbers, information on their equipment - anything he can get his hands on. In short, start stockpiling information now. The more he has, the sooner he gets off the ground. Also, start talking to people to see how motivated they would be to start something on their own.
4 - Tell him to dust off his resume and start sending it out to recruiters. I know for a fact there's a ton of HP hardware vendors or re-sellers that could use his experience.
In short, start planning for the worst. Hopefully he gets through this, but he should assume the worst and hope for the best. If he does get laid off, he's already ready to hit the ground running instead of wallowing about being a company for so long. Trust me, companies would die to have a guy with his contacts and experience. This is by no means a dead end or career ending by any stretch.
An additional idea to supplement income while building his business or looking for a new job would be to join an expert network. Consultants/investors can pay upwards of $1000/hour to speak with industry veterans across all different functions.
Some examples: GLG (Gerson Lehrman Group) Cognolink AlphaSights
Some examples: GLG (Gerson Lehrman Group) Cognolink AlphaSights
This.
He has the contacts. Make sure he takes his rolodex when he leaves. Day one after layoffs, call those clients up and say "Hey, they laid me off. Want me on contract?"
Even if he only gets 3 or 4 clients from this, the money they paid HP now goes to him, and it will be a LOT more than his salary. His client contacts are his core IP. Use em.
He has the contacts. Make sure he takes his rolodex when he leaves. Day one after layoffs, call those clients up and say "Hey, they laid me off. Want me on contract?"
Even if he only gets 3 or 4 clients from this, the money they paid HP now goes to him, and it will be a LOT more than his salary. His client contacts are his core IP. Use em.
This is very similar to what my father did around the same age, though in a different field (construction). The company he was VP at went into Chapter 11, he took a few of the people who worked for him, started a small company, and took over all their contracts (this was done amicably, they even rented equipment from the company). He did very well.
One thing to remember about hardware support is access to replacement hardware in a timely manner. With large support contracts server parts need to be available sometimes within hours of a failure. HP may not play ball. Something to think about.
I also wanted to say people like your Dad are worth their weight in gold. Good hardware tech's are hard to find.
I also wanted to say people like your Dad are worth their weight in gold. Good hardware tech's are hard to find.
What you described sounds an awful lot like the Michael Scott Paper Company, which, ironically, was quite a success (all things considered).
There is probably a non compete exactly for this situation.
Maybe, but if you get laid off all bets are off really. Maybe it is different in the US, but in the UK I've known of cases of people who have been laid off who then went on the form competing companies. There may have been some law suits flying around behind the scenes, but in the end these companies settled and were successful.
My understanding is that being laid off is a "termination of contract" - therefore making any noncompete terms in said contract null and void.
Not to mention that "restrictive covenants" such as a noncompete won't fly in this sort of situation. Then again, my experience is with UK employment law so please don't take this as legal advice.
Not to mention that "restrictive covenants" such as a noncompete won't fly in this sort of situation. Then again, my experience is with UK employment law so please don't take this as legal advice.
This depends on one's jurisdiction, in the U.S. at least. For example, in Illinois, non-competes are generally enforceable.[0] In California, they are generally not.[1]
[0] http://www.isba.org/ibj/2012/01/lawpulse/employmentcovenants...
[1] http://www.cnet.com/news/calif-supreme-court-finds-noncompet...
[0] http://www.isba.org/ibj/2012/01/lawpulse/employmentcovenants...
[1] http://www.cnet.com/news/calif-supreme-court-finds-noncompet...
Even when you have been made redundant?
It seems to depend on the totality of the circumstances, in Illinois, so I'd imagine the nonvoluntary nature of the termination would be taken into account. But there doesn't seem to be a clear answer. If it ended up in litigation it could get messy; there isn't a terribly large amount of guidance from the courts.
Regardless of the possibility of litigation, the logic is very simple: 1) a non-compete indicates that the employee has some skillset or knowledge that the business does not want to lose to a competitor; 2) the involuntary release of that same employee indicates that (1) is no longer true, unless the released employee is fairly compensated for the non-compete period.
I would feel pretty comfortable presenting this argument to a judge, even without a lawyer present.
I would feel pretty comfortable presenting this argument to a judge, even without a lawyer present.
> I would feel pretty comfortable presenting this argument to a judge, even without a lawyer present.
I'm gonna go ahead and ignore any legal advice you give, then. That's completely bonkers.
I'm gonna go ahead and ignore any legal advice you give, then. That's completely bonkers.
Personally I'd still talk to a lawyer (easy for me to say as I have a friend who is a business lawyer), but I wouldn't go so far as to say not having a lawyer here would be "bonkers"
The argument is pretty clear and rational; unless the judge was in the pocket of the company on the other end of the suit (in which case you're fucked anyway), I think representing one's self would be pretty straightforward in this case.
The argument is pretty clear and rational; unless the judge was in the pocket of the company on the other end of the suit (in which case you're fucked anyway), I think representing one's self would be pretty straightforward in this case.
Representing yourself is never, ever, ever a good idea. Not even if you are a lawyer (and if you were, you'd know this). "The man who represents himself has a fool for a client" is one of the few legal truisms that is actually true.
That aside, your argument may be "pretty clear and rational," but that does not mean it follows the law (which is rarely either of those things). Without a lawyer you have no way of knowing (self-studying law is a great way to royally fuck yourself if you ever try to apply it in a real scenario).
That aside, your argument may be "pretty clear and rational," but that does not mean it follows the law (which is rarely either of those things). Without a lawyer you have no way of knowing (self-studying law is a great way to royally fuck yourself if you ever try to apply it in a real scenario).
http://www.wbjournal.com/article/20120903/PRINTEDITION/30830... says otherwise, as do other resources I've checked.
Now, you usually have to be a bigger fish to get a non-compete enforced, or you have to threaten business. Most places that have a contract with HP will still have a contract even after hiring an expert. Fortune 1000 companies have better lawyers that know how to craft jobs to avoid exactly these scenarios.
Now, you usually have to be a bigger fish to get a non-compete enforced, or you have to threaten business. Most places that have a contract with HP will still have a contract even after hiring an expert. Fortune 1000 companies have better lawyers that know how to craft jobs to avoid exactly these scenarios.
Yep. Even then. I've had a company that put one on my employment, do a mass layoff and even put a reminder that I signed the document in the termination letter.
I see no chance in the world that a bleeding company busy laying off and restructuring will sue a laid off worker because he's trying to make 50-100K a year. Why would they pay more expensive lawyers to do that?
If the lay him off, it really meams they don't want that kind of business anyway. Companies are driven by business people, not lawyers.
If the lay him off, it really meams they don't want that kind of business anyway. Companies are driven by business people, not lawyers.
They still have to sue you to enforce it- better to have a 6 figure income and a non-compete lawsuit winding its way through court than to be handing out carts at Walmart.
It bothers me when people suggest unrealistic possibilities to people being layed off like starting their own businesses.
There's 10% unemployment. Is that really a legit solution?
Capitalism is built on the idea of everyone 'working' and 'having a job' and theres lots of people like his dad who really want work, and are loyal and hardworking.
But there's not enough jobs to go around and the amount keeps decreasing due to automation.
So what happens next?
There's 10% unemployment. Is that really a legit solution?
Capitalism is built on the idea of everyone 'working' and 'having a job' and theres lots of people like his dad who really want work, and are loyal and hardworking.
But there's not enough jobs to go around and the amount keeps decreasing due to automation.
So what happens next?
It's obviously not a legit solution for all 10% of people out there but this is kind of an exceptional case - The guy is literally the best person in the world to fill the gap in the market which is about to be created by the lay-offs, so why is starting his own business unrealistic? Especially given that he's really just trying to do the exact same work without HP as a middle-man
>Capitalism is built on the idea of everyone 'working' and 'having a job'
I think it was just built on the idea of selling stuff to people and making as many things as you can sellable commodities.
Whether those working are many or few doesn't matter, as long as you get to sell to enough people to make your profit.
In the days of advanced British etc capitalism, the homeless/jobless/disenfranchised living in London etc, were very many.
That you need to pay more people to be able to build a wide market is more of a 20th century addition (Ford and his workers, the New Deal, etc).
I think it was just built on the idea of selling stuff to people and making as many things as you can sellable commodities.
Whether those working are many or few doesn't matter, as long as you get to sell to enough people to make your profit.
In the days of advanced British etc capitalism, the homeless/jobless/disenfranchised living in London etc, were very many.
That you need to pay more people to be able to build a wide market is more of a 20th century addition (Ford and his workers, the New Deal, etc).
So whats the solution to the multitudes of people in need of work?
> Capitalism is built on the idea of everyone 'working' and 'having a job'
Capitalism wouldn't work if everyone who wants a job has one, so I really doubt that. Employees could just demand ever increasing salaries until all profit is gobbled up, and there's nothing the business can do about it because they can't replace them since everyone who wants a job has one.
Capitalism wouldn't work if everyone who wants a job has one, so I really doubt that. Employees could just demand ever increasing salaries until all profit is gobbled up, and there's nothing the business can do about it because they can't replace them since everyone who wants a job has one.
But everyone who wants a job already has one, by definition. (Think about it.)
Not enough jobs to go around? I disagree.
There are ~5.8 million job openings as of the end of July. The highest level maybe in 15 years [1]. The unemployed worker per job opening ratio is also at the lowest in 15 years [2]. The U6 unemployment rate for people that have some college is 5.x%; the unemployment rate for people with a four year degree is 2.x%. There have been eight million full-time jobs added in just four years.
The challenge, as always, is finding the job you want, at the salary you'll accept, matching skills you possess. I'd argue there are plenty of job openings in technology and sales.
[1] http://i.imgur.com/imAwheB.png
[2] http://i.imgur.com/2jQ4uaR.png
There are ~5.8 million job openings as of the end of July. The highest level maybe in 15 years [1]. The unemployed worker per job opening ratio is also at the lowest in 15 years [2]. The U6 unemployment rate for people that have some college is 5.x%; the unemployment rate for people with a four year degree is 2.x%. There have been eight million full-time jobs added in just four years.
The challenge, as always, is finding the job you want, at the salary you'll accept, matching skills you possess. I'd argue there are plenty of job openings in technology and sales.
[1] http://i.imgur.com/imAwheB.png
[2] http://i.imgur.com/2jQ4uaR.png
Maybe if you are under 30, look like Mark Zuckerberg, and have a CS degree from Carnegie Mellon or Stanford.
Can you give sources for your stats? For instance, when I looked at the BLS for the unemployment rate for people with four year degrees this morning, it did not appear to be U6 (which was listed as a separate metric) and furthermore only accounted for people who were at least 25 years old.
I think that it's reasonable to assume that the average college grad is < 25, so that statistic doesn't necessarily reflect the experience of the recently graduated.
If you take people with high school or higher education who are > 25, there are 5.5 million unemployed. I'd be curious to know what that number changes to if you lower the age to 22 or so.
See http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t04.htm
I think that it's reasonable to assume that the average college grad is < 25, so that statistic doesn't necessarily reflect the experience of the recently graduated.
If you take people with high school or higher education who are > 25, there are 5.5 million unemployed. I'd be curious to know what that number changes to if you lower the age to 22 or so.
See http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t04.htm
I remember reading somewhere that it's a bit different for the over 50 crowd, even for PhD's.
There is definitely a higher expectation for someone over 50 and with someone with an advanced degree. It's both unfair and understandable because the subconscious implication is experience and advanced degrees cost more, so they will be subject to intense scrutiny to make sure paying someone a premium is worth it. Basically, a guy over 50 with a PhD better be a convincing Donald Knuth or good management material.
Also, I think team leads tell themselves they can mold young developers in their image. Not only are you getting a developer at a discount, you're getting a potential clone. What's not to love?
Also, I think team leads tell themselves they can mold young developers in their image. Not only are you getting a developer at a discount, you're getting a potential clone. What's not to love?
> Capitalism is built on the idea of everyone 'working' and 'having a job'
Capitalism is structured so that everyone without substantial capital holdings needs a job. OTOH, its not built on everyone working and having a job, in fact, the desperation that comes with people not having jobs and people currently working being at risk of not having jobs -- and the effect that has on the wages and conditions those employed are willing to accept -- is important to capitalism (though its one of the effects modern mixed economies have attempted to mitigate in moving away from pure capitalism.)
Capitalism is structured so that everyone without substantial capital holdings needs a job. OTOH, its not built on everyone working and having a job, in fact, the desperation that comes with people not having jobs and people currently working being at risk of not having jobs -- and the effect that has on the wages and conditions those employed are willing to accept -- is important to capitalism (though its one of the effects modern mixed economies have attempted to mitigate in moving away from pure capitalism.)
If he's called-in to early retire or otherwise let go, make sure he doesn't sign a non-compete at that time. He should have anything he has signed, and is asked to sign, reviewed by an attorney. It's just not reasonable for companies to terminate someone's job and tell them they can't compete including being hired by a competitor, but they try this all the time in blatant ways and it's not just the old guard companies like HP that do this. I've seen my share of "umm, excuse me but this basically puts me out of business, I'm not signing it" type contracts.
Contract work is not as difficult as it sounds. He already knows the work involved, can do a good job of estimating the hours of work, and getting the number of employees to match that work, and then par for the course is 2x-3x of the salaried rate because a.) the contract can be terminated, no severance, no health care, no bennies, b.) the companies can afford it and are likely already paying that or more for the same contract with HP, c.) he'll need business liability insurance, and slightly more complicated book keeping and tax assistance. It's completely sane for him to ask a company he has a very good relationship "what's in the budget?" if he doesn't already have an idea what this amount ought to be. Don't undercharge. It's reasonable to offer a discount for say 2 or 3 year contracts. If it's hourly, it should be expensive to incentivize contracts.
Anyway, this can also be referred to as "slow retirement" which is a working retirement.
Oh and the home improvement investments seem sane also. They certainly aren't getting done, and will need to be done at a bad time if he does get let go or goes for early retirement.
Contract work is not as difficult as it sounds. He already knows the work involved, can do a good job of estimating the hours of work, and getting the number of employees to match that work, and then par for the course is 2x-3x of the salaried rate because a.) the contract can be terminated, no severance, no health care, no bennies, b.) the companies can afford it and are likely already paying that or more for the same contract with HP, c.) he'll need business liability insurance, and slightly more complicated book keeping and tax assistance. It's completely sane for him to ask a company he has a very good relationship "what's in the budget?" if he doesn't already have an idea what this amount ought to be. Don't undercharge. It's reasonable to offer a discount for say 2 or 3 year contracts. If it's hourly, it should be expensive to incentivize contracts.
Anyway, this can also be referred to as "slow retirement" which is a working retirement.
Oh and the home improvement investments seem sane also. They certainly aren't getting done, and will need to be done at a bad time if he does get let go or goes for early retirement.
Would HP really try to get someone they are laying off to sign a noncompete contact?
I don't know about HP, but a common tactic is present a noncompete few weeks before a mass layoff and stipulate it is: "Sign or be fired". In some states, this works because your future employment can be viewed as sufficient consideration.
IMHO Noncompetes should be banned, or there needs to be legislation which requires the employer to pay 100% of the salary of the laid off person for the rest of the term of the noncompete. If they want to prevent the ex-employee from going into business and competing against them, they need to pay the ex-employee for the privilege.
IMHO Noncompetes should be banned, or there needs to be legislation which requires the employer to pay 100% of the salary of the laid off person for the rest of the term of the noncompete. If they want to prevent the ex-employee from going into business and competing against them, they need to pay the ex-employee for the privilege.
I would assume they are in a very defensive mode and are thinking about liabilities and risks as they continue to hemorrhage employees and potential revenue. This makes it much more likely that they would try to protect themselves through any legal means possible. No company would plan on laying off 20k+ people without thinking about minimizing their liabilities and protecting their sources of business.
Often times this stipulation can be part of a severance package.
Do not underestimate hilarity of corporate legal.
He has probably already signed one as part of his employment.
I sympathize with your family's predicament and I hope something works out.
At the same time, I would suggest severely redacting your post. Its one thing to overshare the details of your own life, its another to overshare those of someone else (particularly their income, health, and other factors which might affect hiring).
At the same time, I would suggest severely redacting your post. Its one thing to overshare the details of your own life, its another to overshare those of someone else (particularly their income, health, and other factors which might affect hiring).
"Who would hire him at this age, with this kind of experience?"
This is a question that only the market can answer. While we can speculate all day long, none of us have any idea who would hire him or not. One thing is a certainty: if he never tries to get another job, he will not get any.
Here's something I learned from watching hundreds or perhaps thousands of folks navigate the tech labor market: people skills and networking rock -- much more than technical skills! If your dad has all of these companies who only want to work with him? Wow! The day he gets laid off, if he does, he picks up the phone and starts calling all of his friends. After that it's just a numbers game. For his tech and people skills there are a certain percentage of folks that will positively respond. If that percentage is 10% and he knows 20 or 30 people? Odds are pretty good that he'll have a lead on a new job before the day is over.
The difficult part here is psychological. Very difficult to work for one company for a long period of time and then feel confident talking to others about getting work, even if they like you a lot. Older folks such as myself also start carrying a chip around on their shoulder, looking for ageism everywhere (Yep, it exists, but staying angry or depressed about it is not very motivating)
The psychological part is the hardest. He could be 10 seconds away from getting another job and manage to talk himself out of it instead of trying. It's a very difficult spot to be in.
This is a question that only the market can answer. While we can speculate all day long, none of us have any idea who would hire him or not. One thing is a certainty: if he never tries to get another job, he will not get any.
Here's something I learned from watching hundreds or perhaps thousands of folks navigate the tech labor market: people skills and networking rock -- much more than technical skills! If your dad has all of these companies who only want to work with him? Wow! The day he gets laid off, if he does, he picks up the phone and starts calling all of his friends. After that it's just a numbers game. For his tech and people skills there are a certain percentage of folks that will positively respond. If that percentage is 10% and he knows 20 or 30 people? Odds are pretty good that he'll have a lead on a new job before the day is over.
The difficult part here is psychological. Very difficult to work for one company for a long period of time and then feel confident talking to others about getting work, even if they like you a lot. Older folks such as myself also start carrying a chip around on their shoulder, looking for ageism everywhere (Yep, it exists, but staying angry or depressed about it is not very motivating)
The psychological part is the hardest. He could be 10 seconds away from getting another job and manage to talk himself out of it instead of trying. It's a very difficult spot to be in.
Networking is so important. Just be pleasant and easy to work with. I see so many young devs who get so involved in code related pissing matches, debating irrelavant crap in the work place, being arrogant and difficult. A lot of guys I never want to work with again.
True story, former employer had a lay off, the company I was at sent me an email with a list of everyone who had been laid off asking me (I was in good standing, and respected) who we should go after. You bet I black listed the jerks, and got the guys I considered to be good developers, and easy to work with.
Sure this was all my opinion and who am I anyway? But the point is: this stuff happens, and all you guys who think it doesn't are kidding yourselves.
True story, former employer had a lay off, the company I was at sent me an email with a list of everyone who had been laid off asking me (I was in good standing, and respected) who we should go after. You bet I black listed the jerks, and got the guys I considered to be good developers, and easy to work with.
Sure this was all my opinion and who am I anyway? But the point is: this stuff happens, and all you guys who think it doesn't are kidding yourselves.
This is very tough to learn, but critical.
The catch-phrase is "fierce opinions, lightly held"
I'll argue the shit out of whether or not brackets stand alone in C++ code, but at the end of the day we all agree on something and move on. We're still friends. You have to both be passionate about what you do -- and willing to see the big picture -- to be a true professional.
The catch-phrase is "fierce opinions, lightly held"
I'll argue the shit out of whether or not brackets stand alone in C++ code, but at the end of the day we all agree on something and move on. We're still friends. You have to both be passionate about what you do -- and willing to see the big picture -- to be a true professional.
It sounds like the situation my dad was in. He had to switch careers in his early 50s, going from project engineering for a defense contractor to right-of-way acquisition and management in the oil and natural gas industry. He lost his job again at 60, but was able to parlay his leadership and management skills into a high level position with a company in Houston, partly through contacts he made while learning the oil business ropes.
Your father needs to put some serious effort into getting on paper all the skills, both technical and soft "people-type", that he's learned over his career and put himself out there. Minneapolis is a big city and it sounds like he's made quite a few contacts that he could leverage for help getting a new career.
Above all, encourage him not to give up!
Your father needs to put some serious effort into getting on paper all the skills, both technical and soft "people-type", that he's learned over his career and put himself out there. Minneapolis is a big city and it sounds like he's made quite a few contacts that he could leverage for help getting a new career.
Above all, encourage him not to give up!
One possibility is for him to take a job at one of his clients, running the procurement process for HP products and services (more generally, the business lines he supports). He probably knows a lot about the cost structures for HP and competitor offerings and can help the client not only drive the hardest bargain and play competitors off each other, but also minimize spend (inhousing less complicated services, etc.)
Wow. Rant incoming.
Im just aghast how shitty your country is.
I can understand living in fear of mortgages and the like, jak with at will nonsense and the like (gags)
But your employer having a gun to your beloved's head - that what it basically is - is just rotten.
I genuinely wish that any libertarians here (in Poland) move to USA or, Friedmans beloved, Chile. I hope they get to experience shit like that. I guess im a filthy little commie for expexcting to be able to live my life without shit like that /s
But your employer having a gun to your beloved's head - that what it basically is - is just rotten.
I genuinely wish that any libertarians here (in Poland) move to USA or, Friedmans beloved, Chile. I hope they get to experience shit like that. I guess im a filthy little commie for expexcting to be able to live my life without shit like that /s
>Im just aghast how shitty your country is.
We have a lot of social programs for the poor, especially in regards to health. No its not Euro-style universal healthcare, but this idea that they'll starve in the streets if they lose their jobs is ridiculous. That's on top of COBRA, which allow you to stay on your employers plan for a bit while you work out a new provider. Or subsidized ACA exchange insurance. We are down to 11% uninsured right now. In the 90s we were getting close to hitting 20%.
There's a lag period before you can apply for and get benefits, but that's what unemployment insurance (which is mandatory) is for and you know... your own savings. You are putting away savings right?
The real problem here is that I find most middle-class people have no idea how welfare works. None. They've never had to apply for these things. They just think they're for "welfare queens" and "drug addicts." They don't realize that these programs are pretty much everywhere in the USA. For example, food stamps are mostly used by white people. So these people have unrealistic ideas of what loss of income means. They think they're going to debtors prison and being forced to die in their basements from lack of healthcare. Europeans like yourself buy into this nonsense because they have an anti-US bone to pick. The reality is that you're both being incredibly disingenuous. Perhaps you should do some basic research before making these shoddy generalizations?
Its also worth mentioning that every HP product we use is fairly terrible. All of our servers, printers, etc. A lot of sysadmins I've talked to are either considering moving to Dell or already have moved. These jobs are going to migrate to Dell or elsewhere I imagine. That's how competition works. Yeah, its ugly, but HP has not been competitive for some time in many areas. You can't expect a lifetime of labor without shake-ups, especially in the volatile tech sector.
We have a lot of social programs for the poor, especially in regards to health. No its not Euro-style universal healthcare, but this idea that they'll starve in the streets if they lose their jobs is ridiculous. That's on top of COBRA, which allow you to stay on your employers plan for a bit while you work out a new provider. Or subsidized ACA exchange insurance. We are down to 11% uninsured right now. In the 90s we were getting close to hitting 20%.
There's a lag period before you can apply for and get benefits, but that's what unemployment insurance (which is mandatory) is for and you know... your own savings. You are putting away savings right?
The real problem here is that I find most middle-class people have no idea how welfare works. None. They've never had to apply for these things. They just think they're for "welfare queens" and "drug addicts." They don't realize that these programs are pretty much everywhere in the USA. For example, food stamps are mostly used by white people. So these people have unrealistic ideas of what loss of income means. They think they're going to debtors prison and being forced to die in their basements from lack of healthcare. Europeans like yourself buy into this nonsense because they have an anti-US bone to pick. The reality is that you're both being incredibly disingenuous. Perhaps you should do some basic research before making these shoddy generalizations?
Its also worth mentioning that every HP product we use is fairly terrible. All of our servers, printers, etc. A lot of sysadmins I've talked to are either considering moving to Dell or already have moved. These jobs are going to migrate to Dell or elsewhere I imagine. That's how competition works. Yeah, its ugly, but HP has not been competitive for some time in many areas. You can't expect a lifetime of labor without shake-ups, especially in the volatile tech sector.
>For example, food stamps are mostly used by white people.
Not how ratios work. In absolute terms, there are more white people who use food stamps than non-white people because 3/4s of the country's population is white. Per capita, many more non-white people are on food stamps than white people.
Not how ratios work. In absolute terms, there are more white people who use food stamps than non-white people because 3/4s of the country's population is white. Per capita, many more non-white people are on food stamps than white people.
> The real problem here is that I find most middle-class people have no idea how welfare works.
I got a taste when I applied for PFL in California when we had a baby. The scale of people the State serves is insane, and navigating the system could be a full-time job in itself.
(PFL is California's supplemental program that pays some fraction of your salary for family leave - in my case new child bonding)
I took 3 weeks leave, and on the last Friday got a phone call from the PFL office: "We have a question about your PFL application, and if you don't return our call today we will deny your claim". I call, and after battling the phone tree got, "Our system is over capacity. Please try again later click". I finally got through at the end of the day via email.
I finally got paid the first day I returned from leave (!). Luckily for me I wasn't depending on the money or else my kids would have been eating rice. What a nightmare. I don't envy anyone who has to use social services.
I got a taste when I applied for PFL in California when we had a baby. The scale of people the State serves is insane, and navigating the system could be a full-time job in itself.
(PFL is California's supplemental program that pays some fraction of your salary for family leave - in my case new child bonding)
I took 3 weeks leave, and on the last Friday got a phone call from the PFL office: "We have a question about your PFL application, and if you don't return our call today we will deny your claim". I call, and after battling the phone tree got, "Our system is over capacity. Please try again later click". I finally got through at the end of the day via email.
I finally got paid the first day I returned from leave (!). Luckily for me I wasn't depending on the money or else my kids would have been eating rice. What a nightmare. I don't envy anyone who has to use social services.
I am wondering about using Chile as another example - as far as I know they have public healthcare?
Grue3(4)
You don't have to pay your mortgage if you get laid off in Poland?
In some European countries (probably not Poland) the unemployment you get for about 2 years if you lose your job is sufficient to cover a mortgage. The philosophy is that it is cheaper for the state to help people stay in their existing home than to have them lose it and potentially have to house them and them never go back to being a net contributor.
All states in the United States have unemployment assistance programs, as well as programs like Medicaid to provide health care to the poor. OP's dad is nearing retirement age and can probably take advantage of some state-provided retirement benefits, like social security and/or Medicare.
While things may be less extreme here than in Europe, you aren't just left to die if you become unemployed. Government-provided insurance that you have to be either poor or old enough to get is actually much better than a lot of the private insurance plans that are the only option for the middle class.
While things may be less extreme here than in Europe, you aren't just left to die if you become unemployed. Government-provided insurance that you have to be either poor or old enough to get is actually much better than a lot of the private insurance plans that are the only option for the middle class.
They said they understood the mortgage part, it's the health care they don't understand.
Chile is a far stronger economy than Poland will probably ever be.
Is this a joke? Poland has a larger population than chile, better per capita GDP, and is a power house in the middle of Europe. They do still have some internal problems but this is nothing compared to the (low key) international conflicts Chile still is involved in.
I love both countries though.
I love both countries though.
Why would you think that's a joke? GDP is only one metric, you know. And Poland's GDP Growth Rate is 1.67% to Chile's 4.07%. Chile also has a lower unemployment rate, and ranks higher than Poland on economic freedom.
And how is GDP growth more relevant than GDP itself?
And what about humongous, growing income inequality?
Chile doesn't really rank that well, does it?
140th out of 159 ranked countries
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=gini+index+chile
So why are there so many Polish immigrants and so few Chilean ones?
[deleted]
>I genuinely wish that any libertarians here (in Poland) move to USA
Lots of Poles, libertarian or not, do that for the massive quality of life increase.
Lots of Poles, libertarian or not, do that for the massive quality of life increase.
But... ,in a libertarian country, HP wouldn't exist in the first place.
Crony capitalism still is not capitalism.
Crony capitalism still is not capitalism.
The worst, unchecked, crony cap Papuan is exactly the system for which the name "capitalism" was coined, and crony capitalism had been part of what the term had referred to -- and an element of all real-world systems with the name -- since the real-world nineteenth century system that features it was named "capitalism" by its critics.
Cronyism is central to capitalism, and you can't have one without the other.
Cronyism is central to capitalism, and you can't have one without the other.
Cronyism, referring to a system where incompetent agents are given special favors, doesn't survive in the free market - merciless competition destroys any underperfoming organization.
Cronyism only exists when competition doesn't work by means of a government. Get some politicians, create regulations, build a monopoly. No matter how uncompetitive it is, you're still a billionaire.
Cronyism only exists when competition doesn't work by means of a government. Get some politicians, create regulations, build a monopoly. No matter how uncompetitive it is, you're still a billionaire.
> Cronyism, referring to a system where incompetent agents are given special favors, doesn't survive in the free market
The "free market" in which that is a defensible claim is a counterfactual construct that is sometimes useful as a simplified analytic model, but fundamentally incompatible with the behavior of real human beings and conditions in the real world.
> merciless competition destroys any underperfoming organization.
In real unregulated markets, that may happen initially, and the most successful parties in that situation mercilessly move to lock-in advantages against future competitors by use their economic power they have as a result of that success to monopolize key inputs, preventing competition.
> Cronyism only exists when competition doesn't work by means of a government
Yes, and a particular, common, real-world version of cronyism by which government structures the economic regime to favor the interest of the capital-holding class was identified by its critics in the 19th Century, and given the name "capitalism".
The "free market" in which that is a defensible claim is a counterfactual construct that is sometimes useful as a simplified analytic model, but fundamentally incompatible with the behavior of real human beings and conditions in the real world.
> merciless competition destroys any underperfoming organization.
In real unregulated markets, that may happen initially, and the most successful parties in that situation mercilessly move to lock-in advantages against future competitors by use their economic power they have as a result of that success to monopolize key inputs, preventing competition.
> Cronyism only exists when competition doesn't work by means of a government
Yes, and a particular, common, real-world version of cronyism by which government structures the economic regime to favor the interest of the capital-holding class was identified by its critics in the 19th Century, and given the name "capitalism".
>government structures the economic regime to favor the interest
That's it. If there's central planning(no matter to whom) it's socialism. And, regarding 'lock-in advantages', without a government-backed credit expansion, it'd be really difficult for companies to get as much market cap.
That's it. If there's central planning(no matter to whom) it's socialism. And, regarding 'lock-in advantages', without a government-backed credit expansion, it'd be really difficult for companies to get as much market cap.
> If there's central planning(no matter to whom) it's socialism.
No, the dominant system of the developed world in the 19th Century that socialists reacted against and coined the word "capitalism" to describe isn't socialism.
No, the dominant system of the developed world in the 19th Century that socialists reacted against and coined the word "capitalism" to describe isn't socialism.
By this argument we should just accept that "communism" involves the widespread murder of political enemies, as that has always happened in "communist" countries.
Why wouldn't they? Crony capitalism is still capitalism. It's a company using it's capital to gain an advantage.
> Crony capitalism still is not capitalism.
This reminds me of some people who pointed out that communism was never implemented and all the totalitarian regimes were still in the socialism phase. A phase which was obviously never going to be replaced with the communist utopia.
This is just a delay tactic. We all know what we talk about when we say "communism" and it's the same for "capitalism" - we mean the real-world, flawed implementation.
This reminds me of some people who pointed out that communism was never implemented and all the totalitarian regimes were still in the socialism phase. A phase which was obviously never going to be replaced with the communist utopia.
This is just a delay tactic. We all know what we talk about when we say "communism" and it's the same for "capitalism" - we mean the real-world, flawed implementation.
Not really.
Anyone with a background on classical economics realizes the U.S is much closer to socialism than capitalism. The existence of 'prices' and greed doesn't imply it's capitalism.
Anyone with a background on classical economics realizes the U.S is much closer to socialism than capitalism. The existence of 'prices' and greed doesn't imply it's capitalism.
> Anyone with a background on classical economics realizes the U.S is much closer to socialism than capitalism.
Anyone should recognize that the dominant system of the modern developed world is a hybrid retaining largely the capitalist structures and property regime, but adopting many strategies with origins in socialism (including advocated in the communism of Marx and Engels) for mitigating some of the effects for which 19th Century socialists criticized the dominant system of the developed world at that time, for which they coined the term "capitalism".
Its probably not particularly productive to argue about whether this synthesis is "closer" to socialism or capitalism.
Anyone should recognize that the dominant system of the modern developed world is a hybrid retaining largely the capitalist structures and property regime, but adopting many strategies with origins in socialism (including advocated in the communism of Marx and Engels) for mitigating some of the effects for which 19th Century socialists criticized the dominant system of the developed world at that time, for which they coined the term "capitalism".
Its probably not particularly productive to argue about whether this synthesis is "closer" to socialism or capitalism.
Exactly. The US (and to a greater extent, the West) never really grew out of mercantilism... the "capitalism" only shines through when it's convenient propaganda (spreading democracy and capitalism, one bomb at a time!) or when there's vast amounts of money to be made in ethically dubious circumstances (like doing business with Nazis) and some sort of justification is needed.
I have such a background and I can't think of any metric in which the US is closer to socialism than capitalism.
Is Sweden a socialist country, according to your metrics? Government spending makes up just over half of their economy. We're somewhere between 35-38%, federal, state & local. I'll leave it at that.
So neoliberalism is socialism?
If you are implying the US is somehow close to what neoliberal thinkers would propose, that couldn't be more wrong.
Neoliberalism doesn't mean watered down free-market liberalism. The term describes a certain movement in (classical) liberal thought which wanted to seperate itself from former thinkers primarily based on the time they where living in.
While those thinkers have little in common, they genuinely disliked a productive state (as in the production of goods or the delivery of a service), cartels, interventions in the price mechanism etc.
All of that is far away from what the US or European countries are currently doing.
At least in Europe it's also used as a meaningless buzzword to scare people who think that the prefix "neo" means evil.
Neoliberalism doesn't mean watered down free-market liberalism. The term describes a certain movement in (classical) liberal thought which wanted to seperate itself from former thinkers primarily based on the time they where living in.
While those thinkers have little in common, they genuinely disliked a productive state (as in the production of goods or the delivery of a service), cartels, interventions in the price mechanism etc.
All of that is far away from what the US or European countries are currently doing.
At least in Europe it's also used as a meaningless buzzword to scare people who think that the prefix "neo" means evil.
If your dad becomes unemployed and has very little income, he would most certainly qualify for a heavily subsidized ACA health care plan with caps on maximum out of pocket expenses. And that would tide him over until his mid 60s when medicare (and social security) kicks in. Point is, don't stress too much, they will likely be fine. Health care for the poor and elderly in the US is a much more accessible and affordable resource than we are led to believe, especially in a state like MN which has lots of doctors.
> They cannot afford to lose healthcare coverage.
And with Obamacare, they don't have to. They should be able to purchase decent coverage on the exchange, right? That's what we did when I quit my job.
And with Obamacare, they don't have to. They should be able to purchase decent coverage on the exchange, right? That's what we did when I quit my job.
With what money?
The amazing coverage they have is barely cutting it. He pays pennies on the dollar for the coverage they get. I can't imagine it would be like this at all on the exchange.
Good news: you're almost certainly wrong :)
Obamacare in MN is through https://www.mnsure.org/ . Your father being fired or laid off qualifies as a special enrollment event.
If your mother is seriously ill, look at gold plans and simply look at the maximum out of pocket. Find a plan with a maximum out of pocket of $2k or even $1k pp. They'll spend it all, and after that, your out of pocket expenses will be limited to copays. They will even be eligible for assistance paying for it if your parents' income falls.
From a brief poke around the above website, for zip 55401 and two adults born 1/1/1960, you should be able to find a plan for under $1k/mo unsubsidized with a $3k/family/year maximum out of pocket. This is almost certainly less than cobra will cost. Be careful of narrow networks though, particularly if your mother is being actively treated by a doctor/hospital.
Good luck to you and yours.
Obamacare in MN is through https://www.mnsure.org/ . Your father being fired or laid off qualifies as a special enrollment event.
If your mother is seriously ill, look at gold plans and simply look at the maximum out of pocket. Find a plan with a maximum out of pocket of $2k or even $1k pp. They'll spend it all, and after that, your out of pocket expenses will be limited to copays. They will even be eligible for assistance paying for it if your parents' income falls.
From a brief poke around the above website, for zip 55401 and two adults born 1/1/1960, you should be able to find a plan for under $1k/mo unsubsidized with a $3k/family/year maximum out of pocket. This is almost certainly less than cobra will cost. Be careful of narrow networks though, particularly if your mother is being actively treated by a doctor/hospital.
Good luck to you and yours.
At $1,000/month that's over 10% of his pre-tax income at his current job. That's a lot of money if you aren't working and your income goes to zero.
Yes, but if that happens, thanks to the other half of Obamacare (the Medicaid expansion), if income goes to zero / povertylevel for any adult (no longer merely special classes of disabled or child-raising adult), then healthcare becomes free.
People with big enough health problems that the heavily subsidized Silver market category is insufficient, but who have only a middle class income, do get stung in this system; But before Obamacare they would have been treated much, much worse should their employer fail to provide them with good health insurance. The Silver market plans are supposed to represent the standard level of care, and be subsidized on a sliding scale from 99% right above the Medicaid threshold, down to 0% at ~$100k income or so, IIRC.
People with big enough health problems that the heavily subsidized Silver market category is insufficient, but who have only a middle class income, do get stung in this system; But before Obamacare they would have been treated much, much worse should their employer fail to provide them with good health insurance. The Silver market plans are supposed to represent the standard level of care, and be subsidized on a sliding scale from 99% right above the Medicaid threshold, down to 0% at ~$100k income or so, IIRC.
Note also that this is reliant on not being in a state where a Republican governor has decided to turn down federal money for Medicaid expansion because Obama is a Communist Muslim Death Panelist.
MN, thankfully, has chosen to implement Medicaid expansion.
MN, thankfully, has chosen to implement Medicaid expansion.
Well, you have two options:
1 - If you have enough income, you will still be eligible for obamacare through the national but not state obamacare organization: healthcare.gov . The coverage gap is between medicaid on the low end if you have a family (no coverage if you're a single adult) and 100% fpl where obamacare kicks in.
2 - if you have too little income, and you should go on Medicaid expansion but unfortunately live in a state run by bigoted morons, you can always lie and claim your income is higher than it is. It turns out nobody will go after you for this. You just have to claim enough income to get yourself out of the medicaid income bracket and into the obamacare income bracket. You'll still end up with health insurance that costs (guessing) on the order of $50 to $100/mo after maximal tax credits.
In most states, that is $11,770 for a single adult. Your circumstances may be complicated, though; ask someone local. There are people who will help you with this.
and oh yeah: pull your head out of your ass and vote for Democrats. And make sure all your friends and family know that they're not just voting against communist muslim death panels, they're actively hurting you as well.
1 - If you have enough income, you will still be eligible for obamacare through the national but not state obamacare organization: healthcare.gov . The coverage gap is between medicaid on the low end if you have a family (no coverage if you're a single adult) and 100% fpl where obamacare kicks in.
2 - if you have too little income, and you should go on Medicaid expansion but unfortunately live in a state run by bigoted morons, you can always lie and claim your income is higher than it is. It turns out nobody will go after you for this. You just have to claim enough income to get yourself out of the medicaid income bracket and into the obamacare income bracket. You'll still end up with health insurance that costs (guessing) on the order of $50 to $100/mo after maximal tax credits.
In most states, that is $11,770 for a single adult. Your circumstances may be complicated, though; ask someone local. There are people who will help you with this.
and oh yeah: pull your head out of your ass and vote for Democrats. And make sure all your friends and family know that they're not just voting against communist muslim death panels, they're actively hurting you as well.
From what I can tell it doesn't do this until you've been unemployed long enough to file a return with zero income.
No, you can call obamacare (not the insurer), explain the loss of income, and ask for the credit. You'll get it, obviously with penalties if you lied.
Do they not count the most recent income? What if you get laid off (or even quit) and suddenly have no income, but for the last year you were making a lot?
The tax credits are calculated on your annual income. So if your income suddenly falls, you have two options:
1 - if you have the savings, just pay the bill and you'll get even with Uncle Sam when you do taxes next year
2 - call obamacare and ask for immediate credits. The credits are based on your annual income, so for example if you got laid off in June you'll get one set of credits for that year, since you had an income for half of it, and larger credits the next year, assuming you still need obamacare and don't have a job.
1 - if you have the savings, just pay the bill and you'll get even with Uncle Sam when you do taxes next year
2 - call obamacare and ask for immediate credits. The credits are based on your annual income, so for example if you got laid off in June you'll get one set of credits for that year, since you had an income for half of it, and larger credits the next year, assuming you still need obamacare and don't have a job.
If you have someone in the family with serious medical issues, though, it's free money. A trip to the ER and a few days in the hospital runs tens of thousands.
If his employment does end, he can do COBRA for 18 months (although he'll lose the employer contribution of course).
Afterwards, ACA guarantees that a plan will be available. Depending on the state, you may be able to even get a quick quote online to get an idea of what the cost would be today.
Afterwards, ACA guarantees that a plan will be available. Depending on the state, you may be able to even get a quick quote online to get an idea of what the cost would be today.
COBRA is not a realistic option for most people. Without the employer contribution, most health plans end up costing more than $1k/mo. That's too much for a steadily-employed person to afford, let alone someone who was just laid off.
You don't need to go on COBRA and exhaust its benefits before signing up with the ACA. IMHO, the only reason you would want to sign up for COBRA is if you or a family member are undergoing care at a hospital and you don't want the continuity of that care interrupted.
The ACA is going to be far less expensive than COBRA . If you are on COBRA and the company declares bankruptcy, you lose COBRA and must sign up for the ACA.
The ACA is going to be far less expensive than COBRA . If you are on COBRA and the company declares bankruptcy, you lose COBRA and must sign up for the ACA.
You don't have to imagine anything. Get a quote from their 24 hour telephone hotline.
https://www.healthcare.gov/contact-us/
https://www.healthcare.gov/contact-us/
Years ago I did a website for a person who sold health insurance for businesses. It turns out that a business is defined as 2 people and can come in most any form. With business healthcare they accept anyone even if you have pre-existing conditions. It gets around trying to buy health insurance directly. Cost is pretty reasonable.
There are no pre-existing condition exclusions in private insurance through obamacare. That was the biggest change it brought and is the reason for the mandate (so you don't wait to get sick and then take advantage of the lack of exclusions).
Great advice - also, there are a few states that allow a one person business to qualify for group coverage.
I forget all of them, but I think the following states still allow "groups of one" with respect to a business acquiring health insurance:
Connecticut, Delaware, Mississippi, North Carolina
My apologies if I'm wrong on any of these, it's just off the top of my head since the last time I looked into it.
I forget all of them, but I think the following states still allow "groups of one" with respect to a business acquiring health insurance:
Connecticut, Delaware, Mississippi, North Carolina
My apologies if I'm wrong on any of these, it's just off the top of my head since the last time I looked into it.
A two person business won't be able to negotiate a group rate or decent benefits package very well. At this point you're better off looking at these ACA exchanges. They've done the negotiation for you with these larger carriers.
You're right - private health insurance will be far more expensive than what he's paying now.
I don't think there's any way around that.
If he can afford to pay the vig, then COBRA makes the most sense for the short term.
I don't think there's any way around that.
If he can afford to pay the vig, then COBRA makes the most sense for the short term.
cobra is often much more expensive than obamacare; at least it was for me
I think with the mother you would want at least a gold level plan, right? That's pretty expensive.
Posts like this remind me how shitty the business model of most Fortune 500 companies is. They lay off people just to increase profits regardless of productivity goals. For most management councils out there everything is about numbers. Perhaps we ought to do something as a community to stop such practices. Like boycott the shit out of companies that adopt them.
Its important to note this is a dying company with no hope at all for the future. The more employees they shed, the faster they shed them, the longer they can minimally keep on operating, or rephrased they're hoping the total sum revenue will be higher if they stretch out the death of the company as long as possible.
And the reason why that's important is it doesn't matter how good of an employee he is, there's no way to stretch the death of HP out 15 years, so he needs a plan for WHEN hp dies, not IF.
The alternative is to fire everyone all at once in maybe 4 years.
And the reason why that's important is it doesn't matter how good of an employee he is, there's no way to stretch the death of HP out 15 years, so he needs a plan for WHEN hp dies, not IF.
The alternative is to fire everyone all at once in maybe 4 years.
Maybe Alcatel can swoop in and buy them up.
they're laying off not to increase revenue but to slash costs. It's a defensive move not an offensive one.
HP is particularly dumb in this area. My personal acquaintance with this was with their strict "up and out" policy that was in effect several years ago. A decade ago I had a secondary responsibility of supporting a legacy DEC terminal environment.
The crew supporting it were HP badged guys not making alot of money, but being billed at some wacky rate. Never heard from HP hq until some VP of something flew in to tell me the whole crew was being laid off due to not getting promoted. (Keep in mid they were easily clearing $2M a year in profit)
Long story short, they all left, started a little consultancy and were able to win a bid at half the billing rate that 3x their take home.
The crew supporting it were HP badged guys not making alot of money, but being billed at some wacky rate. Never heard from HP hq until some VP of something flew in to tell me the whole crew was being laid off due to not getting promoted. (Keep in mid they were easily clearing $2M a year in profit)
Long story short, they all left, started a little consultancy and were able to win a bid at half the billing rate that 3x their take home.
You can restate that as "HP encourages employees to form their own business" :)
The new corporations are about efficiencies they are not paternalistic as their post-war incarnations. The situation is unfortunate but HP Enterprise Services has a goal of 60% off-shore workforce (http://finance.yahoo.com/news/meg-whitman-hp-offshore-60-224...). That would mean HP is going IBM route even though IBM got wacked big time.
What was IBMs service offering? I'm not very familiar with the industry. The joke is, my father "gets paid to drive" because he's always in his car. Probably... 65% of the time he's in his car, 30% onsite, and 5% at the home office.
Can't offshore that, or can you?
Can't offshore that, or can you?
They really, really try. Back when I was an AS400 jockey they started the transition. It went from having a guy on-site whenever we needed anything to having someone on the phone walking someone (usually someone unsuited for the task) through a debugging process.
If there's as much demand for him as you're describing, he could probably make a much better living doing consulting for these companies than he could working for HP.
I don't know why I didn't think of this. I'm 24, a bit naive, bleh. I let him know in a text. Thank you.
I referred to HN as "my Silicon Valley friends"
I referred to HN as "my Silicon Valley friends"
Definitely. Or, if consulting isn't to his taste, take a job with one of them.
In his shoes, I'd also make sure I keep contact information for all his best customers. Because if he gets laid off suddenly, he'll want to go back to them at least to say, "Hey, do any of your vendors need a reliable field service engineer?"
In his shoes, I'd also make sure I keep contact information for all his best customers. Because if he gets laid off suddenly, he'll want to go back to them at least to say, "Hey, do any of your vendors need a reliable field service engineer?"
keeping contact information is probably against his contract, and covered as customer information under noncompetes
discovering an interest in being linkedin friends with them is not afaik
discovering an interest in being linkedin friends with them is not afaik
Yeah, I was suggesting the latter. The purpose of a non-compete is to keep him from taking information to the competition, so if he merely uses his phone contacts list to get a job, I don't think HP's going to sue.
I am sorry if this question comes of as naive. Is the medical cost so high that it can only be covered with an insurance? Would a small amount of savings set aside for this purpose be viable in case somebody loses their medical insurance? Also would you not be able to take your own medical insurance which is independent of the company you work for? I am just trying to understand how the medical system there works. I hope I phrased the question appropriately.
CA/usa, broken ankle, two surgeries: $110k in billings. All told, probably 10-12 doctor-hours.
Insurance, beyond insuring you, does something perhaps more important: they negotiate massive discounts with all medical practices/hospitals/etc. My insurer negotiated that to something reasonable (approx $35k, though memory fails me); I could even afford that if I needed to. Crucially (and I understand this is fucking stupid; go 'murica), uninsured people pay way more than insured people even including what the insurance pays. Like integer multiples greater than 3 and up to 20 times more.
Insurance, beyond insuring you, does something perhaps more important: they negotiate massive discounts with all medical practices/hospitals/etc. My insurer negotiated that to something reasonable (approx $35k, though memory fails me); I could even afford that if I needed to. Crucially (and I understand this is fucking stupid; go 'murica), uninsured people pay way more than insured people even including what the insurance pays. Like integer multiples greater than 3 and up to 20 times more.
"uninsured people pay way more"
A minor but important correction is they are billed way more, not necessarily pay way more.
For example I dated a girl who just out of high school with no insurance had a really badly broken arm (car accident IIRC) and the hospital "charged" her, in total, $100K+ as an imaginary amount, complained at her for awhile, and then they wrote her off after some token payment (more than they would have gotten in bankruptcy, less than it would have cost her in legal fees to file bankruptcy, but a moderately huge amount of money at part time minimum wage income).
Now whats important is the difference between the imaginary retail price of $100K and what it actually cost to provide services is incredibly valuable from an accounting standpoint. Also from a marketing standpoint her "$100K" of services was donated by a gracious company to the poor, they sure as heck don't publicize the actual cost of providing that service was only $10K even including minor surgery and recuperation. They did a good job, by the time I met her, I had no idea her arm had been so ruined just a year or two ago until she told me and showed me her arm, by no means did they cheap out on her care or recovery just because she was uninsured.
Finally the hope is that if they charged that poor girl a fair $10K then it would be hanging over her head for years until she could pay it off or more likely bankruptcy filing fees costing less than $10K they'd get nothing at all, but if they "charge" $100K then they might jackpot and she could qualify for some govt grant or fundraiser or whatever. If they know she's going to declare bankruptcy no matter what they charge and they're going to get $0 revenue, then game theory shows they should ask for $100M on the off chance by a miracle she wins the lottery, or qualifies from some weird govt grant or school support fund or something.
I think something foreigners often don't understand is we charge poor people $100K for a broken arm but we only charge them like $2K to file bankruptcy, so there are no acute medical problems that cost more than $2K, and for chronic problems they make life hell until either the chronic problem goes away and so do the bankruptcy bills, or the victim dies, but its not really expensive. The business model ruins middle class aspirations (how will I have the vacation home and RV if I file bankruptcy?) but we solved that problem by shipping off all the middle clss jobs to China, not having a middle class means not having to worry about a middle class anymore, there's just really rich people and peasants who own nothing.
A minor but important correction is they are billed way more, not necessarily pay way more.
For example I dated a girl who just out of high school with no insurance had a really badly broken arm (car accident IIRC) and the hospital "charged" her, in total, $100K+ as an imaginary amount, complained at her for awhile, and then they wrote her off after some token payment (more than they would have gotten in bankruptcy, less than it would have cost her in legal fees to file bankruptcy, but a moderately huge amount of money at part time minimum wage income).
Now whats important is the difference between the imaginary retail price of $100K and what it actually cost to provide services is incredibly valuable from an accounting standpoint. Also from a marketing standpoint her "$100K" of services was donated by a gracious company to the poor, they sure as heck don't publicize the actual cost of providing that service was only $10K even including minor surgery and recuperation. They did a good job, by the time I met her, I had no idea her arm had been so ruined just a year or two ago until she told me and showed me her arm, by no means did they cheap out on her care or recovery just because she was uninsured.
Finally the hope is that if they charged that poor girl a fair $10K then it would be hanging over her head for years until she could pay it off or more likely bankruptcy filing fees costing less than $10K they'd get nothing at all, but if they "charge" $100K then they might jackpot and she could qualify for some govt grant or fundraiser or whatever. If they know she's going to declare bankruptcy no matter what they charge and they're going to get $0 revenue, then game theory shows they should ask for $100M on the off chance by a miracle she wins the lottery, or qualifies from some weird govt grant or school support fund or something.
I think something foreigners often don't understand is we charge poor people $100K for a broken arm but we only charge them like $2K to file bankruptcy, so there are no acute medical problems that cost more than $2K, and for chronic problems they make life hell until either the chronic problem goes away and so do the bankruptcy bills, or the victim dies, but its not really expensive. The business model ruins middle class aspirations (how will I have the vacation home and RV if I file bankruptcy?) but we solved that problem by shipping off all the middle clss jobs to China, not having a middle class means not having to worry about a middle class anymore, there's just really rich people and peasants who own nothing.
Except:
1. Bankruptcy can only be filed once every 7 years. What happens if there are medical complications and you are re-hospitalized after you filed for bankruptcy? Answer: You are screwed.
2. It's usually far cheaper and less hassle to purchase an ACA policy to prevent being presented with these large bills in the first place.
1. Bankruptcy can only be filed once every 7 years. What happens if there are medical complications and you are re-hospitalized after you filed for bankruptcy? Answer: You are screwed.
2. It's usually far cheaper and less hassle to purchase an ACA policy to prevent being presented with these large bills in the first place.
Your main point is not true.
First: hospitals are required by law to stabilize you regardless of your ability to pay. Stabilize. They are not required to treat you beyond getting you to the point you won't die on your way out of the ER.
Second: many of the better medical practices, UCSF Ortho for example, will not treat you if you don't have insurance.
Third: bankruptcy is not quite as straightforward as you make it sound, and if you have any assets, you may well lose them. You can have $10 or $20k and still find a $100k surgery very expensive. For example, in CA, you can only protect $3k or $5k, depending, of value in your car during bankruptcy. And there isn't a $3k or $5k car in the US worth a damn.
First: hospitals are required by law to stabilize you regardless of your ability to pay. Stabilize. They are not required to treat you beyond getting you to the point you won't die on your way out of the ER.
Second: many of the better medical practices, UCSF Ortho for example, will not treat you if you don't have insurance.
Third: bankruptcy is not quite as straightforward as you make it sound, and if you have any assets, you may well lose them. You can have $10 or $20k and still find a $100k surgery very expensive. For example, in CA, you can only protect $3k or $5k, depending, of value in your car during bankruptcy. And there isn't a $3k or $5k car in the US worth a damn.
wow that is lot of money, India should seriously kick medical tourism. Already happens but this can scale lot more. May be US can sponser MBBS students (There is huge amount of students does not opt for MBBS due to cost of up to $150,000 which includes donation to institutions) and then setup operting theators here in India.
Do you think it would help if prices were openly displayed before the procedures? (That would certainly encourage shopping around.)
> Like integer multiples greater than 3 and up to 20 times more.
Or maybe even real multiples. :)
Or maybe even real multiples. :)
Yes, even minor* medical issues can run into six-figures. I developed a non-critical arrhythmia last year, medication didn't fully control it, so I opted for catheter ablation.
The procedure itself, plus the related office appointments and tests, was around $50,000 (after insurance discounts). That included separate bills from the surgery center, the hospital (I was admitted overnight), the cardiologist, and the anesthesiologist.
That's for a one-off problem that is now corrected. If it were cancer, or something else that required ongoing treatment, costs rise rapidly.
* To the degree that any medical issue can be minor; my life was never in danger and risk permanent disability was low.
The procedure itself, plus the related office appointments and tests, was around $50,000 (after insurance discounts). That included separate bills from the surgery center, the hospital (I was admitted overnight), the cardiologist, and the anesthesiologist.
That's for a one-off problem that is now corrected. If it were cancer, or something else that required ongoing treatment, costs rise rapidly.
* To the degree that any medical issue can be minor; my life was never in danger and risk permanent disability was low.
I'd call "minor" something like wart removal or an ear infection, not heart surgery.
There are a few elements to this.
Many providers, including public providers, are exceptionally reluctant to see uninsured patients. If push comes to shove they cannot outright refuse, but they can be highly disinclined.
Insurance isn't just "we cover your bills", but "we negotiate rates with providers". Much healthcare billing is basically funny money. Or more specifically, there are huge fixed costs, but charges are based on specific services billed (HMOs excepted, though internally they likely operate somewhat similarly), so that what in a tremendous number of cases, the healthcare provider cannot tell you, as a private individual, what you'd be billed for treatment. But some hospital procedure or stay can billed entirely differently depending on who paying, with hugely varying rates.
And, since the uninsured has zero effective bargaining leverage (health plans can threaten to drop a provider or apply other leverage), they get the highest rates.
On top of all this, billing is tremendously disaggregated. You might see charges for facility, individual supplies, labs, transport, and individual medical personnel who charge independently. Many (if not most) doctors aren't employees of a hospital, but are independent service providers who charge separately.
It's a mess.
And a distressingly ineffective one. There's been very little real improvement in health outcomes since the 1950s (and for quite some time they got worse). Much of the improvement can be chalked up to improved environmental and lifestyle factors (removing lead from paint and gasoline, asbestos, less smoking and drinking). It's been improved health outcomes for the poor and minorities which account for much of the life expectancy gains as well. Earlier improvements largely came from public health measures: fresh, clean drinking water, sewerage systems, municipal waste removal, and quarantines for infectious disease. Even vaccinations and antibiotics were relatively late and minor interventions by comparison.
Many providers, including public providers, are exceptionally reluctant to see uninsured patients. If push comes to shove they cannot outright refuse, but they can be highly disinclined.
Insurance isn't just "we cover your bills", but "we negotiate rates with providers". Much healthcare billing is basically funny money. Or more specifically, there are huge fixed costs, but charges are based on specific services billed (HMOs excepted, though internally they likely operate somewhat similarly), so that what in a tremendous number of cases, the healthcare provider cannot tell you, as a private individual, what you'd be billed for treatment. But some hospital procedure or stay can billed entirely differently depending on who paying, with hugely varying rates.
And, since the uninsured has zero effective bargaining leverage (health plans can threaten to drop a provider or apply other leverage), they get the highest rates.
On top of all this, billing is tremendously disaggregated. You might see charges for facility, individual supplies, labs, transport, and individual medical personnel who charge independently. Many (if not most) doctors aren't employees of a hospital, but are independent service providers who charge separately.
It's a mess.
And a distressingly ineffective one. There's been very little real improvement in health outcomes since the 1950s (and for quite some time they got worse). Much of the improvement can be chalked up to improved environmental and lifestyle factors (removing lead from paint and gasoline, asbestos, less smoking and drinking). It's been improved health outcomes for the poor and minorities which account for much of the life expectancy gains as well. Earlier improvements largely came from public health measures: fresh, clean drinking water, sewerage systems, municipal waste removal, and quarantines for infectious disease. Even vaccinations and antibiotics were relatively late and minor interventions by comparison.
As it's been stated, the problem is that insurance negotiates a lower rate, in addition to helping pay for it.
Example: I needed a sinoplasty/septoplasty. The procedure was $26k if I was uninsured. My insurance company had negotiated the procedure to $4k. I owed 10% of the procedure cost at $400. This is for a minor outpatient procedure. So, losing insurance means paying 6500% more for healthcare in this case.
Example: I needed a sinoplasty/septoplasty. The procedure was $26k if I was uninsured. My insurance company had negotiated the procedure to $4k. I owed 10% of the procedure cost at $400. This is for a minor outpatient procedure. So, losing insurance means paying 6500% more for healthcare in this case.
Medical expenses for major problems can very easily run into the millions of US dollars (open heart surgery, etc). I'm not joking.
The market for private insurance is somewhat better now with Obamacare (depending heavily upon the state you live in) but it still can be very expensive. Especially if you're unemployed.
If you have a family member in poor health, employer-sponsored health coverage can be worth an order of magnitude more than your cash salary. If not more.
The market for private insurance is somewhat better now with Obamacare (depending heavily upon the state you live in) but it still can be very expensive. Especially if you're unemployed.
If you have a family member in poor health, employer-sponsored health coverage can be worth an order of magnitude more than your cash salary. If not more.
A job working for a hardware vendor like HP doing local area field support? That will probably be impossible to find.
I think the trick is to find a different (yet related) role with a company that is expanding rather than contracting their business.
Datacenter tech springs to my mind -- a fair number of tech companies have midwest sites (mostly Chicago, sometimes Minneapolis or Nebraska or elsewhere) that don't have local techs. Issues are often handled by the east coast team flying out, which is less than ideal. Someone with that many years of hardware experience is pretty hard to find for those types of roles.
I think the trick is to find a different (yet related) role with a company that is expanding rather than contracting their business.
Datacenter tech springs to my mind -- a fair number of tech companies have midwest sites (mostly Chicago, sometimes Minneapolis or Nebraska or elsewhere) that don't have local techs. Issues are often handled by the east coast team flying out, which is less than ideal. Someone with that many years of hardware experience is pretty hard to find for those types of roles.
I feel for your father, and mother. I hope they weather the storm.
I was going to mention, that if they are proactive; they might be able to keep their health care expenditures reasonable if they apply to Minnesota's department of health and human services. They will need to spend down assets, but they can usually keep their house, and car. (I know in California, the quality of medical care has gotten much better with the funds from the health care act--much better.)
I just noticed that Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty's (R) recent executive order intended to stop the implementation of federal health care reform in Minnesota? I just don't get his thinking? He's refusing millions in free money?
Again, I hope your father doesn't loose his job. I went to Sonoma State university, and all the business graduates went straight HP to fill out job applications. The company's corporate office was within throwing distance. After I graduated, the number one question was, "When are you going to apply to HP?" I hated anything related to tech back then, but the people who got jobs seemed pretty happy. Back then it was a pretty secure job.
I still cringe whenever I hear Carlie Fiorina brag about her tenure at HP. You don't brag when you pretty much ruin a company?
I had an difficult relationship with my father too.
I was going to mention, that if they are proactive; they might be able to keep their health care expenditures reasonable if they apply to Minnesota's department of health and human services. They will need to spend down assets, but they can usually keep their house, and car. (I know in California, the quality of medical care has gotten much better with the funds from the health care act--much better.)
I just noticed that Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty's (R) recent executive order intended to stop the implementation of federal health care reform in Minnesota? I just don't get his thinking? He's refusing millions in free money?
Again, I hope your father doesn't loose his job. I went to Sonoma State university, and all the business graduates went straight HP to fill out job applications. The company's corporate office was within throwing distance. After I graduated, the number one question was, "When are you going to apply to HP?" I hated anything related to tech back then, but the people who got jobs seemed pretty happy. Back then it was a pretty secure job.
I still cringe whenever I hear Carlie Fiorina brag about her tenure at HP. You don't brag when you pretty much ruin a company?
I had an difficult relationship with my father too.
I always thought the field service guys would be the last to go. But, after a number of conversations with SEs it seems that the efforts IBM/HP/etc have put into producing "choose your own adventure" guides to repairs and escalating everything else to remote "engineering support" have changed that. At least in the mind of the bean counters, my experience with a lot of the newer service engineers is that they can't actually fix anything that isn't already in the manual. AKA, the quality of service sucks and no one cares. My last couple of interactions were basically cases of me telling the SE how to fix the problem after the field service guide (which I asked for) failed to be helpful and the 24 hour turnaround to china for engineering support was dragging on for weeks.
A lot of people have given advice. I like the one about striking out with his own team. He is going to be scared. If you can be there for him in some way it will be great. Do you have a job where you can be with him for 1 weekend a month? Just be there to talk things out, help him, be able to ask for advice (like here on HN) when neither of you have answers. Be his on-call. He absolutely has to do it soon/now for himself and family (healthcare). He has the clients which are always the toughest to get, but he has to start the process now (incorporation, etc).
I know you said you do not have the best relationship, but you recognize he is human. You have compassion. He is family. I want your Dad to succeed. I am sure others in this thread do too.
I know you said you do not have the best relationship, but you recognize he is human. You have compassion. He is family. I want your Dad to succeed. I am sure others in this thread do too.
The company I work for very likely would hire him. We are field-service for hardware and have techs in Minneapolis. While it may not be as flashy as software development or support, the job field still exists and jobs are still available. Have a little bit of optimism!
That's how I feel when the local factories lay workers off. Guys and gals with 30 years in at the same plant, assembling parts day in and day out. On their feet for 12 hours a day, the factory shuts down and what is there for them to do? You might lay 3,000 people off from a plant and all they can do is work at Wal-mart or McDonalds.
Email me if he gets let go, there are tricks to getting healthcare that are questionable, but technically legal depending on the state that he is in. I'm not sure about Minnesota, but I could look into it.
I wish your dad all the good luck. I feel like the position and age combination he has is the worst to be at the moment, it's going to be tricky to move on.
Give him a hand if you're in the position to do so.
Give him a hand if you're in the position to do so.
Have him take a look through the current openings at MTS.com in Eden Prairie, we hire FSEs and related skillsets.
If he brought in $4MM in revenue and he's only making $98k he's incredibly underpaid.
You know layoffs are coming up when your boss starts announcing things like dress codes in R&D due to "customer complaints". Severance packages are way more expensive than people leaving on their own.
The executives completely renounced the whole dress code thing though. It was some middle manager who though it would be a great idea for his unit and got slammed after it hit public media.
Although this may seem bad for many of these workers, I know of a lot of other tech companies that will be chomping at the bit to pick up many of these talented affected workers, though it may require a relocation in some cases.
As for HPE moving to these "low cost centers" for their talent, this is actually something I've seen happening where many larger companies are moving to smaller and mid-sized cities farther inland or down south in the U.S., places with adequate amenities to support their infrastructure and a decent workforce, but also within striking distance of large metros. The overhead and salaries in the DC beltway and Silicon Valley, for example, can be as much as 30-50% higher than locations just a couple hours drive away from them. So such a move to lower cost of living areas makes sense from a business perspective if you're running a services company in the IT industry and especially if you're serving cost-conscious government clients which HP has been doing in a big way lately.
As for HPE moving to these "low cost centers" for their talent, this is actually something I've seen happening where many larger companies are moving to smaller and mid-sized cities farther inland or down south in the U.S., places with adequate amenities to support their infrastructure and a decent workforce, but also within striking distance of large metros. The overhead and salaries in the DC beltway and Silicon Valley, for example, can be as much as 30-50% higher than locations just a couple hours drive away from them. So such a move to lower cost of living areas makes sense from a business perspective if you're running a services company in the IT industry and especially if you're serving cost-conscious government clients which HP has been doing in a big way lately.
To me it's kinda obvious that any "major event" i.e. merger, large acquisition, split, extremely bad quarter etc. in a big company is an excuse to let people go. IMO the only way to survive these "events" in a big company is to make sure you are indispensable (which is not a reflection of how smart you are) or be politically astute. Despite this there are no guarantees, you just have to keep your eyes and ears open to the on goings of your company.
I do hope the Board of Directors sells off the Machine assets to a company that could actually pull it off (that's not Intel) like Microsoft or even, hell, Apple. The idea of moving processing to a memory-centered architecture just seems very interesting and possibly useful in non-trivial situations. And for that idea to die horribly with a company ill equipped just bothers me.
If they're hurting enough to layoff tens of thousands people, surely they can sell off the technology to settle some of their debts and live. Just an idea.
If they're hurting enough to layoff tens of thousands people, surely they can sell off the technology to settle some of their debts and live. Just an idea.
Assuming you mean the non-memristor version of the machine?
Microsoft are not a hardware company by any stretch. There are a few hardware engineers in small areas (Xbox, handsets, Surface), but almost none in server. Apple mostly make consumer facing equipment, again, no enterprise/server heritage.
If not HP, then who has a true system development background?
Well, not sure why you say not Intel. They are one of the few that actually does systems development.
IBM makes the most sense. They've distances themselves from x86, and still maintain a system development mindset, including heavy investment in big data processing. They have the OS development skills.
After IBM, there are a few maybe's:
Google would be a realistic company too, as they have shown system engineering skills, end to end, including a lot of OS development work.
Facebook - continue to do full system engineering in areas they believe are differentiators. I could see them doing something similar for analytics crunching.
Outsiders: Oracle could be viable. There must be a few Sun guys left there that do system development, and they need to show they are still relevant in big data, but they don't spend much in R&D.
Cisco - continue to do full system engineering, but would likely break this by making it too network centric. No real OS development heritage.
Broadcom - continue to expand their areas. This would be a huge step for them in systems integration, but not big at all in terms of silicon and interconnects.
Microsoft are not a hardware company by any stretch. There are a few hardware engineers in small areas (Xbox, handsets, Surface), but almost none in server. Apple mostly make consumer facing equipment, again, no enterprise/server heritage.
If not HP, then who has a true system development background?
Well, not sure why you say not Intel. They are one of the few that actually does systems development.
IBM makes the most sense. They've distances themselves from x86, and still maintain a system development mindset, including heavy investment in big data processing. They have the OS development skills.
After IBM, there are a few maybe's:
Google would be a realistic company too, as they have shown system engineering skills, end to end, including a lot of OS development work.
Facebook - continue to do full system engineering in areas they believe are differentiators. I could see them doing something similar for analytics crunching.
Outsiders: Oracle could be viable. There must be a few Sun guys left there that do system development, and they need to show they are still relevant in big data, but they don't spend much in R&D.
Cisco - continue to do full system engineering, but would likely break this by making it too network centric. No real OS development heritage.
Broadcom - continue to expand their areas. This would be a huge step for them in systems integration, but not big at all in terms of silicon and interconnects.
It's much easier to buy companies (revenue) than to produce it yourself. This is their strategy. Buy companies to get revenue up, then cut costs via layoffs where there's overlap.
When I first read the HN title, I thought it was that HP was going to cut somewhere between 25 and 30,000 jobs.
This is a good thing for the survival of the company. I worked at HP and let me tell you, from what I saw, HP was the most bloated company I have ever seen. The horrible work ethic by the full time employees wasn't the exception but more the rule. I saw jsut about every employee take half day lunch breaks, and they'd hire contractors to do their work. I found it so disgusting that I exited the company. The full time employees I saw did NOTHING all day. They were basically all 25 year career employees that sat around doing NO actual work and they could get away with it because their manager and their managers manager was doing the same thing. HP is a horribly run company. Just about everyone there at least in the division I worked at was dead weight just showing up to collect a huge paycheck.
No problem, the new "technology" in the Silicon Valley is AirBnB and Facebook. Let China do the hard stuff.
Yeah, because running Facebook isn't hard at all. Maybe you should clue them in how they don't actually need all these positions at all https://www.facebook.com/careers/teams/infrastructure
"Never mistake activity for achievement." - John Wooden
Is this another classic HP re-org?
HP's new business model for the last 2 years :
* cut costs (mostly by disabling essential business functions)
* buy back stock using proceeds
The result:
https://www.google.com/finance?chdnp=1&chdd=1&chds=1&chdv=1&...
The person in Charge : Meg Whitman. In 2008, she was cited by The New York Times as among the women most likely to become the first female President of the United States.
Because what "worked" for HP, we should apply to all of the US.
Also see:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-24/why-hewlett-packard...
* cut costs (mostly by disabling essential business functions)
* buy back stock using proceeds
The result:
https://www.google.com/finance?chdnp=1&chdd=1&chds=1&chdv=1&...
The person in Charge : Meg Whitman. In 2008, she was cited by The New York Times as among the women most likely to become the first female President of the United States.
Because what "worked" for HP, we should apply to all of the US.
Also see:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-24/why-hewlett-packard...
Doing the math on this, they apparently believe that each one of those people is costing the company $108k per year, net. Given that HP's revenue per employee is ~$350k, I find those numbers simply unbelievable.
And let's suppose for a second that HP is somehow right. How did they just notice that 10% of their employees are doing something totally worthless? On top of the 55,000 employees that they laid off in 2012? I don't understand how this isn't an admission of total management incompetence.
There's also the classic MBA mistake of seeing employees as expenses rather than assets. HP has been investing in these people for years. What a waste to just fire them all. And this is surely damaging another valuable asset, organizational morale. That they couldn't figure out a single valuable thing to do with those assets is just sad.
And let's suppose for a second that HP is somehow right. How did they just notice that 10% of their employees are doing something totally worthless? On top of the 55,000 employees that they laid off in 2012? I don't understand how this isn't an admission of total management incompetence.
There's also the classic MBA mistake of seeing employees as expenses rather than assets. HP has been investing in these people for years. What a waste to just fire them all. And this is surely damaging another valuable asset, organizational morale. That they couldn't figure out a single valuable thing to do with those assets is just sad.
The uncomfortable truth at this scale is that some employees are absolutely essential and some are just phoning it in collecting a paycheck. Ideally management would have visibility into where the performers were, but with this many layers of management it's very very difficult to see the forest for the trees.
It's one thing to repurpose people when the trend lines are positive or at least flat, but in HP's case there is a real question mark about what growing sectors they can successfully move into. Certainly they still have the talent to do amazing things, but have the leadership with the deep visibility into the organization's inner workings and talent pool and the outward facing vision to actually pull off a reorg like that seems almost impossible.
It's one thing to repurpose people when the trend lines are positive or at least flat, but in HP's case there is a real question mark about what growing sectors they can successfully move into. Certainly they still have the talent to do amazing things, but have the leadership with the deep visibility into the organization's inner workings and talent pool and the outward facing vision to actually pull off a reorg like that seems almost impossible.
If some employees are phoning it in, I think it's worth asking why. It's been a long time since I felt that way at a job, but for me it came out of shitty, disempowering, unrewarding environments.
But even running with your argument, that the people laid off are slacking, I think it's an enormous failure that they let 30,000 of those people accumulate such that they were wasting $3 billion per year. Especially given their massive layoff a few years back. And if they've built an organization where it's difficult to tell where they're wasting $3 billion per year, I don't see how that's anything but an enormous indictment of the managers.
But even running with your argument, that the people laid off are slacking, I think it's an enormous failure that they let 30,000 of those people accumulate such that they were wasting $3 billion per year. Especially given their massive layoff a few years back. And if they've built an organization where it's difficult to tell where they're wasting $3 billion per year, I don't see how that's anything but an enormous indictment of the managers.
You work remotely, life is pretty low stress. Live in a cheap cost of living place, take care of the kids while the spouse is out working on their other job. Never get a raise in 6 years. That is why they phone it in.
I find it hard to believe a matured company, rife with middle management, wouldn't have held those people "mailing it in," so to speak, accountable years ago. Whether they work onsite or remotely, some work is turned in. A handful may fall through the cracks, but it's just that, a handful. Not 30,000, even in a company much bigger.
You find out that large companies start reflecting some of the 'evils of government' eventually. I've realized it comes more from large bureaucracies than something fundamental to government.
These people who phone it in still do their jobs, but they aren't hard workers, they are not active in the technical environment so much. They're static workers, working on projects that might be not so necessary any more, but ignored by the business because it's part of a profitable unit. Such as printers and so on.
These people who phone it in still do their jobs, but they aren't hard workers, they are not active in the technical environment so much. They're static workers, working on projects that might be not so necessary any more, but ignored by the business because it's part of a profitable unit. Such as printers and so on.
>The uncomfortable truth at this scale is that some employees are absolutely essential and some are just phoning it in collecting a paycheck. Ideally management would have visibility into where the performers were
Even if they could, they have no real incentive to be truthful about it.
Even if they could, they have no real incentive to be truthful about it.
many time this^.
Management in big companies cares only about benefits coming with position. Product? Fuck it, as long as they have power and cookies.
Management in big companies cares only about benefits coming with position. Product? Fuck it, as long as they have power and cookies.
And let's suppose for a second that HP is somehow right. How did they just notice that 10% of their employees are doing something totally worthless?
The keyword to search for in the economic literature is "labor hoarding". In short, companies tend to (by default) keep employees until well after they are no longer useful. Then some sort of a shock causes the company to shed the deadwood all at once.
This is management incompetence, but it's exceedingly common. If you ever see a company (e.g. Netflix) which sheds employees regularly, that's a very good sign.
The keyword to search for in the economic literature is "labor hoarding". In short, companies tend to (by default) keep employees until well after they are no longer useful. Then some sort of a shock causes the company to shed the deadwood all at once.
This is management incompetence, but it's exceedingly common. If you ever see a company (e.g. Netflix) which sheds employees regularly, that's a very good sign.
Could you argue that in a broader sense this exact same thing happens not just on the company level, but on the level of entire economies? I recall reading a few articles on how recessions/depressions often have a way of shaking up industries to align (or rather, catch up) with new innovations/developments.
It's like a spring/mass dragging across a rough surface: it stays behind until the tension gets too much, and then skips forward. You can find this effect in a lot of places.
I imagine one could - certainly many companies which should die actually do die during a recession. Some structuralist theories are based on this.
But this is just theory. The empirical grounding for labor hoarding is pretty solid.
But this is just theory. The empirical grounding for labor hoarding is pretty solid.
But it's a weird idea. The assumption is that the activity of a company is limited to a static set of things and that when those things require less activity (because the market shrinks) then the people are not required.
In fact companies are constantly starting and changing business activities, and their people should be being moved onto those new activities, sometimes these activities fail, and I would argue that the shock is the result of a set of these transitions failing, resulting in a collapse of the organisms ability to adapt - and layoffs.
This is what seems to be happening at IBM and HP - their management (at all levels) has stopped being able to find new activities for their workforce, and this failure is creating the shocks. My belief is that this is due to a disruption - specifically Hadoop, which has torpedoed the market for differentiated servers and software in enterprise data. "The Machine" was an attempt by HP to ride this out and find an new set of activities (by redefining enterprise computing) maybe the 3D crosspoint announcements from Intel have convinced the HP Enterprise management that the gig is up for this and there is no point in continuing?
In fact companies are constantly starting and changing business activities, and their people should be being moved onto those new activities, sometimes these activities fail, and I would argue that the shock is the result of a set of these transitions failing, resulting in a collapse of the organisms ability to adapt - and layoffs.
This is what seems to be happening at IBM and HP - their management (at all levels) has stopped being able to find new activities for their workforce, and this failure is creating the shocks. My belief is that this is due to a disruption - specifically Hadoop, which has torpedoed the market for differentiated servers and software in enterprise data. "The Machine" was an attempt by HP to ride this out and find an new set of activities (by redefining enterprise computing) maybe the 3D crosspoint announcements from Intel have convinced the HP Enterprise management that the gig is up for this and there is no point in continuing?
I think the failure of memristors played a bigger role. I think Intel was beating HP in R&D probably long before that. I wonder if HP should have been taken private back in 2000 or so.
Not to mention politics. Its ugly to lose this many people and job creation and protection is often encouraged by the government via incentive programs. If HP opened an office in some state and got a shit-ton of tax incentive and federal job creation credits, well, those pay off for a while. After those expire then its safe to cut these people. Or use the threat of cuts to get more credits. If these negotiations fail, then a big cut happens.
Big companies don't really operate by simple supply vs demand laws. They play a much more complex game and many large businesses have long figured that gaming the system is just as profitable as actually shipping product.
Big companies don't really operate by simple supply vs demand laws. They play a much more complex game and many large businesses have long figured that gaming the system is just as profitable as actually shipping product.
There's many reasons for layoffs besides the belief that employees are negative / insufficient value. For example, companies do lay-offs in smaller quantities simply because a high level business objective wasn't met and a division is going to be disbanded as a strategic decision. In HP's case, I'm pretty sure that HP management feels that these targeted employees work for divisions that management can't foresee sufficient profit to keep operating which has increasingly become based around service and support for the old Compaq lines of business. HP has tried desperately to break into higher margin enterprise software and services for at least two decades now with mixed results and after failing to increase their brand value on the hardware side to approach something like Apple (I looked at HP's on the book assets compared to their market cap a few years ago and they were worth less than if they liquidated according to their market cap). Buying VoodooPC a while ago is an example of trying to increase brand value by associating themselves with "high end" stuff with corresponding mark-ups.
Organizational morale at HP has been pretty dire for at least a decade by now with few bright spots of news and a revolving door of leadership. I left HP in very early 2010 after a few years there when I was acquired in, but in hindsight I should have left probably the second I heard of the acquisition and cashed out what I could of my NQSOs / ISOs. I've been calling them the Walmart of tech years ago before these recent stories about Amazon showed up because unlike Amazon, the stories of poor pay, long hours, and consistently below-market compensation are very, very common at HP.
Organizational morale at HP has been pretty dire for at least a decade by now with few bright spots of news and a revolving door of leadership. I left HP in very early 2010 after a few years there when I was acquired in, but in hindsight I should have left probably the second I heard of the acquisition and cashed out what I could of my NQSOs / ISOs. I've been calling them the Walmart of tech years ago before these recent stories about Amazon showed up because unlike Amazon, the stories of poor pay, long hours, and consistently below-market compensation are very, very common at HP.
> There's also the classic MBA mistake of seeing employees as expenses rather than assets.
Not to mention that more critical people will leave once they sniff layoffs coming.
Not to mention that more critical people will leave once they sniff layoffs coming.
This is not exactly HPs first layoff. Its been a dying company for quite some time. There is no hope of a turnaround and has not been for some time.
Everyone in the Venn diagram of willing to jump ship and able to jump ship, has already jumped. All you've got left is people unwilling to jump, unable to jump, or both. Those unwilling will continue to be unwilling for whatever reasons, if the last layoff round didn't snap them out, then this will also fail. Those unable to jump will continue to be unable.
Everyone in the Venn diagram of willing to jump ship and able to jump ship, has already jumped. All you've got left is people unwilling to jump, unable to jump, or both. Those unwilling will continue to be unwilling for whatever reasons, if the last layoff round didn't snap them out, then this will also fail. Those unable to jump will continue to be unable.
How does a company like this die anyways? Does headcount just dwindle until they're nothing but a holding company or what?
That was basically the same plan Sam Palmisano put into place at IBM. I call it "cut your way to prosperity". Basically cutting cost and not growing revenue with a focus on manipulating earnings per share. It seems very short sighted to me but I'm no multi millionaire CEO shrugs. At least Rometty seems to have abandoned it.
>buy back stock using proceeds
it worked for radioshack!
it worked for radioshack!
> for the last 2 years
Still solid gains over the last 2 years, but the chart forms a classic "head and shoulders" bearish pattern centered at the beginning of this year. I'd say there's a 50% chance that it will continue to fall.
Still solid gains over the last 2 years, but the chart forms a classic "head and shoulders" bearish pattern centered at the beginning of this year. I'd say there's a 50% chance that it will continue to fall.
HP Enterprise are aiming to be operating out of a suburban Palo Alto garage by the end of next year.
Wow this is a pretty huge cut. However, I won't lie/sugar coat it -- I think of HP as one of the most stereotypically bad big companies (where you can go in get a job, and almost never get fired, despite not doing very much work), so this is probably a great move for them. I can't imagine it really takes 300,000 people to do what HP does.
I'm sure there are departments that do cutting edge hardware/software work at HP, and I just haven't seen them yet
I'm sure there are departments that do cutting edge hardware/software work at HP, and I just haven't seen them yet
The problem is they tend to cut the wrong people. The bloat is usually in middle management (people "fail upwards" to where they can do no harm), but the people who get cut are on the bottom.
After they bought VoodooPC they turned that org into their Envy line which put out industry-leading PC's for a minute. Now it just makes low-end Mac knock-offs :(
It's not really a great move, because anyone left who is decent is probably going to jump ship due to uncertainty in how the company is going. Simply keeping tabs on the people in the first place, and firing the non-performing ones is a much better way to go.
Not to mention that, when it comes to layoffs like this, it's not always performance that gets looked at. It's just as likely that people making a lot of money, deserved or not, will be laid off, and someone who is less talented or hard working, but cheaper to the company, will be kept.
Not to mention that, when it comes to layoffs like this, it's not always performance that gets looked at. It's just as likely that people making a lot of money, deserved or not, will be laid off, and someone who is less talented or hard working, but cheaper to the company, will be kept.
> The tech company has struggled over the last decade to keep up with changing demands as customers move away from desktop computers.
Maybe, but laptop or desktop, HP has been always synonymous with crappy quality and design - among the worst I have ever seen. I just can't wait for them to stop making PCs so that we can get at least half-decent laptops from other manufacturers.
Maybe, but laptop or desktop, HP has been always synonymous with crappy quality and design - among the worst I have ever seen. I just can't wait for them to stop making PCs so that we can get at least half-decent laptops from other manufacturers.
I have an HP11C calculator I bought in 1989 I still use. It cost almost $100 back then. The first HP printer I bought was a DeskJet 550c. Made a beautiful whooshing and humming noises. Kept it for more than 10 years. When they discovered a tendency for premature wear on the pickup rollers, HP sent me a maintenance kit: one day it just showed up with instructions. I had a zd7000 laptop in the early oughts. It was pretty badass for it's day. Lasted until my boy closed the top with a pen on the keyboard and cracked the screen.
HP was a different company that made good stuff.
HP was a different company that made good stuff.
I have an HP11C too, and a LaserJet 5L printer. Both are over 15 years old, in regular use, and work fine. The printer has had two roller replacements, though.
That's HP's problem. Great gear, got the job done, didn't have an addictive replacement revenue model like Apple. People ran HP minicomputers for decades because they Just Worked.
That's HP's problem. Great gear, got the job done, didn't have an addictive replacement revenue model like Apple. People ran HP minicomputers for decades because they Just Worked.
Nah, that could've been a solution had they developed a good business model around it. Mainframes come to mind: leased instead of sold. Great margins. HP might have made a really good leasing model that got users continuous improvements on regular refresh cycles with same quality to justify profit margin. Just a thought.
Can't sell heirlooms for commodity prices in a commodity market and do good long-term business. ;)
Can't sell heirlooms for commodity prices in a commodity market and do good long-term business. ;)
I still regularly use my HP 48GX.
Alas, nowadays I use it for the equivalent of using a Mack truck to drive 300 metres down the road to buy a pack of cigarettes.
Nevertheless it's a fantastic product, which never fails me.
Alas, nowadays I use it for the equivalent of using a Mack truck to drive 300 metres down the road to buy a pack of cigarettes.
Nevertheless it's a fantastic product, which never fails me.
LaserJets were always good, but their inkjets (DerpJets, all of them :-)) were always horrible in my experience. Then again, I've never worked with other printers for a long period of time (my employer used all HP), so I can't compare...
The original Deskjets were good. I had a 500 that lasted years - until I decided I wanted color. But the new generation of their inkjets are horrible. Bloated drivers, mountains of dried ink inside them from the constant cleaning cycles, ink that is overpriced, flaky electronics, cheap plastics. I gave up on them and bought a Brother laser printer, and it's just what I want in a printer - reliable and available.
I had had my 550c for five years. Based on that experience I recommended the purchase of 3 Deskjets for all of us in the office. They were 600 series. Noisy as hell, crappy paper feeds, and without any aesthetic redemption. Between 1992 and 1997, HP became a different company.
FWIW, I was using Brother products for years but they finally pissed me off enough that I'm on Epson.
FWIW, I was using Brother products for years but they finally pissed me off enough that I'm on Epson.
Back in the 90's, we had a LaserJet 4 we loaded with max memory and the PostScript card. It was an absolute workhorse for 4 years. The only problem we had was the 100 year old building we were in had high humidity in the summer so we switch from 20lb paper to 28lb so it wouldn't crinkle up in the printer.
I remember that maintenance kit. Big solid metal thing that fitted into the paper feed and a ROM cartridge to go with it. Must have cost them serious money to design, build and ship that.
It was the sort of thing an engineer would say a customer deserved. Then again my 550c was a $500 printer...I found the receipt in an file folder a few months ago while pitching old records.
The layoffs here are in their enterprise division, where I don't think quality is the main problem. Two problems instead: the market is generally moving away from high-end enterprise servers towards commodity x86 servers, and, possibly worse, they bet on Itanium as their flagship non-x86 architecture, succeeding PA-RISC. Even when you remove x86 from the picture and just stack it up against competitors like Oracle SPARC and IBM POWER8, HP's Itanium-based Integrity line is not doing well. To be fair, a lot of smart people at Intel bet big on Itanium too, so this wasn't simply a case of bad HP management.
Many of us thought it was good for the security market. Fast, reliable, cleaner than x86, and features that boosted security. Market just went with x86. I wonder if that would've been the case even without Itanium's weird VLIW features. If so, should never try something like that again in that market. If not, then maybe a new RISC processor might work. I vote they bring back their i960 in multi-core or team up on SPARC designs given it's open.
Certainly not always. Your memory (or experience) must be short. HP workstations (and servers) were excellent up until at least the late '90's. I was doing 3-D work during the '90's and lusted after an HP workstation to run Softimage on.
Not to mention the legendary HP laser printers. Those things were built like tanks!
Not to mention the legendary HP laser printers. Those things were built like tanks!
They're the cost leader, along with Dell. The modern equivalent is Samsung with a lot of its cheaper hardware.
Sure, Samsung has it's high end flagships, but so does HP (elitebooks). Just because they've filled one shitty niche doesn't mean they're all bad.
Sure, Samsung has it's high end flagships, but so does HP (elitebooks). Just because they've filled one shitty niche doesn't mean they're all bad.
By making the shitty products, you diminish the perceived quality of everything you make. On the other hand, having high standards even for your budget range (e.g. Motorola phones currently) shows that all your products can be trusted and that your badge or brand actually means something.
You diminish the value of your brand as a quality leader, but the saying the HP Pavillion affects the quality of the HP Elitebook is absurd.
Well, if you buy their cheapest shit, you get the cheapest shit :-)
Their business workstations are second to none in terms of internal design (with seemingly minor stuff like automatic shutoff if a short circuit or ground leakage is detected anywhere) and reliability (laptops that can operate 24/7 under 100% load for months at end), at least in my experience...
Their business workstations are second to none in terms of internal design (with seemingly minor stuff like automatic shutoff if a short circuit or ground leakage is detected anywhere) and reliability (laptops that can operate 24/7 under 100% load for months at end), at least in my experience...
Not really. I had several HP Kayak workstations; they were rock solid and built like tanks. A bunch of our servers were HP, and they were also quite solid. This was in the early 2000's, though.
I haven't seen a decent HP product in a long, long time. Their printers are simply average, and nothing like they used to be.
I haven't seen a decent HP product in a long, long time. Their printers are simply average, and nothing like they used to be.
I have had to live with HP laptops for... close to 13 years now. No matter how far I look back, they were always horrible.
This is just one data point, but I bought an HP Stream 11 this year and run the latest Ubuntu on it. For a $199 computer the build is good and it makes for a good light weight spare laptop. I used it for some Haskell hacking tonight, and it is also OK for Java and Ruby dev using IntelliJ or Atom.
Well they make relatively decent "consumer" laptops, but their "corporate" ones are utter crap, made with cheap parts everywhere and breaking all the time.
Curiously, they make decent servers with a decent build quality (or used to, at least)
It's sad that HP+Compaq turned into this zombie company
HP/Compaq had the trained staff to do what apple and google have done. But management has been busy busy cutting their way to profitability. Cutting staff to make next years numbers look good is opiate of the MBA.
The trained staff probably needed some direction to be an Apple or Google. Or at least motivation. They probably played second fiddle to the sales people.
Seemed like leadership was missing. Fiorina and Whitman never seemed interested in tech. They just liked being the boss of something big. Boss of California, boss of US.
Seemed like leadership was missing. Fiorina and Whitman never seemed interested in tech. They just liked being the boss of something big. Boss of California, boss of US.
HP/Compaq at one point many years ago could have done what Apple and Google n years ago would have done. Today, the brain drain and demoralization at HP is far too much to overcome unless unprecedented leadership and vision on the caliber of the late Steve Jobs could possibly turn this company around. HP is a good example of why we pay great leaders what they do and... oh wait, the execs at HP are paid pretty fine for such low "performance" at doing anything besides going by the book. But for a long time I've only known HP to focus upon the bottom line rather than the top line.
[deleted]
I'm really sorry for all those people. Nothing worse than losing your job. I hope they at least get a good severance. It's a pretty mis-run company that is now having a lot of human collateral damage. Really sad.
Many things worse than losing your job. Health issues, incarceration, serious problems with your kids, and betraying an old friend by luring him to Cloud City and turning him over to Boba Fett all come to mind...
"the need for any future corporate restructuring."
Ever.
Always funny when CEO talk about the future and think about the next quarter.
Ever.
Always funny when CEO talk about the future and think about the next quarter.
Heh, it used to be a joke that HP was basically an ink company. Seems to become more true every day.
It's really sad. When I graduated from college HP was where you really wanted to work. They had all kinds of cool high tech test equipment and parts. And they had a policy of never laying off people - during industry downturns they'd hang on to everybody and tough it out until the economy recovered.
For whatever reason they spun off the high tech bits (as Agilent) and became a PC/printer company. I'll never understand that decision.
For whatever reason they spun off the high tech bits (as Agilent) and became a PC/printer company. I'll never understand that decision.
Ha! Anyone remember PrintPaks [1]? A Portland OR company that HP invested in. The model was to churn out "Create a <foo>" kits that were all about using ink. Disclaimer: I worked at a PDX company (ImageBuilder Software) in the 90's that created a number of those kits for PrintPaks, although I never worked on a team that was doing those products.
[1]: http://www.abebooks.com/Home-Project-Kit-Includes-Disney-Int...
[1]: http://www.abebooks.com/Home-Project-Kit-Includes-Disney-Int...
Most of US big companies are like that if they have more than 200000 people you seriously can cut 30000 jobs any time.
I only wish they cut from the pool of useless middle managers (god knows there's an overabundance of them in HPE, and their number seems to increase every day), and not from among people who do actual productive work.
Yesterday I picked up a rental car. I wanted Cheri listed as a driver. I emailed the photo I took of her driver license before I left the house to the person at the counter. All using my phone. I didn't need a scanner or a printer or ink.
I take documents with me using my phone. The printer business ain't like it was.
I take documents with me using my phone. The printer business ain't like it was.
Perhaps you missed this in the article, but these layoffs are in the Enterprise division. The printer business is separate.
HP is trying to save its printer business because in the short term that will be better for senior management's options than changing the the company's course. Wall Street will bump the price and HP management will claim success and see their bonuses rise. That's much more attractive than changing course.
If the printer business was flush, HP could afford to bet on a diversity of services and products. They would be in the business of making money rather than saving it. 25k redundant staff doesn't speak to a track record of sound management decision making of the sort that would inspire confidence in this decision being a great one. Layoffs aren't innovation.
If the printer business was flush, HP could afford to bet on a diversity of services and products. They would be in the business of making money rather than saving it. 25k redundant staff doesn't speak to a track record of sound management decision making of the sort that would inspire confidence in this decision being a great one. Layoffs aren't innovation.
What do you all think a company like HP should do when they (finally) realize that they're overstaffed by a big number like 20%, 30% or 50%?
One thing I realized working for a huge company and comparing that with my time at their much smaller competitor was that organizations in huge companies become hyperspecialized. This is great during the good times, because everyone is able to squeeze out that last 5% of performance (or whatever other metric they're optimizing for), and this combined effort allows them to keep their lead over the competitor.
But it's terrible during bad times because of the overstaffing. And firing people just makes things worse because the company loses important parts of its organizational memory. Because of the hyperspecialization, no single person/organization knows how to do all the things that need to be done to get the product out the door. And if you fire 10% of your workforce, you're going to forget 10% of the stuff you needed to know to build your products. In fact, you probably lose much more than 10% because people who are actually good see the writing on the wall and leave, taking a disproportional amount of the organizational knowhow with them.
I feel like these companies get caught in a death spiral. They can't do things the old way because they don't know how to any more, and they can't do it the way their competitors are doing it either because they never knew how to do that! So they just flounder along for many years slowly becoming less and less relevant. They solution is to luck into a completely different business model that somehow ends up working a la IBM in the 90s. But how realistic is that?
One thing I realized working for a huge company and comparing that with my time at their much smaller competitor was that organizations in huge companies become hyperspecialized. This is great during the good times, because everyone is able to squeeze out that last 5% of performance (or whatever other metric they're optimizing for), and this combined effort allows them to keep their lead over the competitor.
But it's terrible during bad times because of the overstaffing. And firing people just makes things worse because the company loses important parts of its organizational memory. Because of the hyperspecialization, no single person/organization knows how to do all the things that need to be done to get the product out the door. And if you fire 10% of your workforce, you're going to forget 10% of the stuff you needed to know to build your products. In fact, you probably lose much more than 10% because people who are actually good see the writing on the wall and leave, taking a disproportional amount of the organizational knowhow with them.
I feel like these companies get caught in a death spiral. They can't do things the old way because they don't know how to any more, and they can't do it the way their competitors are doing it either because they never knew how to do that! So they just flounder along for many years slowly becoming less and less relevant. They solution is to luck into a completely different business model that somehow ends up working a la IBM in the 90s. But how realistic is that?
> What do you all think a company like HP should do when they (finally) realize that they're overstaffed by a big number like 20%, 30% or 50%?
Fire the person(s) responsible for letting things get that bad.
Fire the person(s) responsible for letting things get that bad.
This was a good comment, and I'm sad that no one was able to chime in. =/
I think it tends to happen when big companies have too many mangers per employee but because of all the fiefdom battles cause of that excess the needed trimming never goes right.
The sad part is that it's Carly Fiorina's fault for turning HP into the mess it was. And now she touts that as the reason why she should be president. It's a sick joke that she thinks gutting one of Silicon Valley's preeminent companies makes her worthy of being president.
HP was the first company to pioneer Silicon Valley culture, ie. The HP Way. It was only after Fiorina's tenure that HP turned into a shadow of its former self. They were one of the first to aggressively lay people off in the US and hire in India, and under her, they lost "The HP Way".
Every CEO since Fiorina has been a complete joke. Now Whitman is coming in to finish the job.
HP was the first company to pioneer Silicon Valley culture, ie. The HP Way. It was only after Fiorina's tenure that HP turned into a shadow of its former self. They were one of the first to aggressively lay people off in the US and hire in India, and under her, they lost "The HP Way".
Every CEO since Fiorina has been a complete joke. Now Whitman is coming in to finish the job.
According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carly_Fiorina#Resignation, Fiorina made over $100M in her time at HP. So she makes out like a bandit and leaves the company in a ditch, rattled, and struggling to regain composure. Do these people have any conscience?
What about the board? There should be a "golden ass-kick" rather than a golden parachute when CEOs have such poor performance. Does anyone else remember Leo Apotheker? I believe they gave him like $25 million when he left a year later after he took the job.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%C3%A9o_Apotheker
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%C3%A9o_Apotheker
Yes, they have a conscience, and it's telling them they did nothing wrong...
There was an article in the Houston paper a few weeks ago whose main theme was trying to explain to confused readers how Fiorina could possibly be running for president using her record as HP CEO as an actual positive. In Houston, formerly Compaq headquarters until HP bought and immediately dismantled it, she's not getting a lot of primary votes...
What precisely did Carly Fiorina do weong, and what precisely should she have done instead?
Spending $25 billion on a PC company was a pretty dumb idea. Spending $25 billion on Compaq, which had spent almost $10 billion on DEC, was even dumber: either it duplicated the existing business (PCs) or complicated the existing business (severs) by adding duplicate products.
Trying to buy PriceWaterhouseCooper for $14 billion might have been a good move but it was a dumb price. IBM later bought it for $4 billion.
I did go and see her talk at Comdex. She was remarkably clueless about technology.
Trying to buy PriceWaterhouseCooper for $14 billion might have been a good move but it was a dumb price. IBM later bought it for $4 billion.
I did go and see her talk at Comdex. She was remarkably clueless about technology.
I think she kind of kill the HP Way read http://www.paloaltoonline.com/weekly/morgue/2002/2002_04_10....
Thanks, that article was very helpful.
That's a good question. I don't know why someone downvoted you. My best friend worked for HP and disliked her but I too would be interested in knowing the answers to your questions.
OTOH, HPQ has /8 netblocks, and they're adjacent, that's gotta be valuable!
It seems to me that she was engaged in org restructuring a la Perestroika under Gorbachev rule of the USSR i.e. the enemy within.
Are you suggesting Gorbachev was the USSR's enemy? He brought Russia out of the dark ages of government run socialism i.e. communism. He and Reagan gave Russia the new found joys of capitalism it enjoys today and brings the world all those cool I Love Russia YouTube videos.
"Mrs. Fiorina, tear down this wall!"
Meg Whitman's 2014 compensation was 19.6 million, which is exactly 200 times your Dad's salary.
Is it the result of spending $10.3bn buying Autonomy and $1.2bn buying Palm?
Also this is why US should get better immigration policy and allow incoming people rather than outsourcing. My cousin was just hired in hp in India for he get about US$ 5000 per year or Rs 20000 per month(He is very happy as he was getting Rs,9000 with a indian company). whereas in US even for small company that job would be atleast $25000? so no way to compete for USA guys. Just ensure companies create healthy competition for people in the country.
You're being totally unrealistic. The salaries are higher because the cost of living is higher. They don't go down because of "competition". Nor should companies rule a country, most just act in their own self interest.
I know a guy who works for HP. He has been wanting to take redundancy for a while but has been turned down. The way he tells it, a lot of the guys he works with leave high priority tickets without looking them up, leave early, start late, surf the web all day, and generally don't work as you might expect. The manager in this situation doesn't seem to do anything about it, and this has been going on for years. I'm not surprised HP are in the predicament they are in, as they've totally mismanaged their business and assets over the past few years - and that business with Autonomy? Wow. Hopefully my friend will be getting his redundancy with this announcement.
HP has become terrible. My girlfriend does some IT procurement from time to time at her job, and that also involves having to buy stuff from HP (nothing big, just the usual).
She told me that HP's procurement interface for external entities (or whatever its official name is) is absolutely terrible. It blocks randomly, it's very slow, it takes a lot to fill in all the info, and when you finally give up and call some human from HP you're being told to go back using the interface. It's like they just don't want to take their clients' money.
She told me that HP's procurement interface for external entities (or whatever its official name is) is absolutely terrible. It blocks randomly, it's very slow, it takes a lot to fill in all the info, and when you finally give up and call some human from HP you're being told to go back using the interface. It's like they just don't want to take their clients' money.
This.
Two weeks to get two hard disks on an enterprise agreement. Bought the damn things off Misco and had them there the next morning.
Decided to buy supermicro from now on.
Plus Broadcom NICs in 2015. Kill me now.
Two weeks to get two hard disks on an enterprise agreement. Bought the damn things off Misco and had them there the next morning.
Decided to buy supermicro from now on.
Plus Broadcom NICs in 2015. Kill me now.
Automation was supposed to make us all work less, not get everyone fired from decent, safe jobs.
HP should have done something meaningful in the profitable consumer electronics space with Palm, rather than gutting it. That was an opportunity for some market growth squandered, where else is their growth going to come from? I have lots of sympathy for those losing their jobs, but none whatsoever for the senior management team or board.
They were dead that very day when they brought that consulting scam company (I forgot its name) because it was clear signal of internal corruption and disconnection from so-called reality. Now it all unwinds.
This is so sad - And HP has an Ad Targeted on the page. Quite a bad targeting decision.
http://imgur.com/GegYER0
Is HP one of the companies banging the drum of a tech job talent shortage? Because this is a pretty powerful message of just the opposite.
So in February HP announced it would fire 58,000 just so the company could spend even more billions on stock buybacks. Since then, buyback activity has gone down a bit and so they clearly needed to spend even more on buybacks.
But where get the money? Cutting 30k jobs is a start:
https://imgur.com/3MdRKqv
But where get the money? Cutting 30k jobs is a start:
https://imgur.com/3MdRKqv
My first job, when I finished college in 1992, was at HP.
They hesitated to offer me a job, because they said that when HP offers someone a position, they're basically offering them a job for life.
Sure, you can snicker at that comment, since almost no company would (or can, or should) make such a claim nowadays. But people told me that before I got there, in the mid-1980s, there were big problems at the company. Rather than have any layoffs, they reduced everyone's salary by 10%, and told people to only work 9 of every 10 business days. This included everyone, starting with the top managers.
I'm not sure if that was the right thing to do for the company. And I doubt many companies would do that today. And if they're talking about shedding 30k people, then HP is planning some drastic changes.
But it's sad for me to remember the HP that I worked for at the time, in which there was a strong sense of community, and of "we're all in this together" -- and to think of the people who joined when such an ethos existed, and who will be laid off now.
I'm not sure if there's a real alternative, and I'm a capitalist at heart... but it's still sad to see so many people laid off because it's now in style to break companies apart.
They hesitated to offer me a job, because they said that when HP offers someone a position, they're basically offering them a job for life.
Sure, you can snicker at that comment, since almost no company would (or can, or should) make such a claim nowadays. But people told me that before I got there, in the mid-1980s, there were big problems at the company. Rather than have any layoffs, they reduced everyone's salary by 10%, and told people to only work 9 of every 10 business days. This included everyone, starting with the top managers.
I'm not sure if that was the right thing to do for the company. And I doubt many companies would do that today. And if they're talking about shedding 30k people, then HP is planning some drastic changes.
But it's sad for me to remember the HP that I worked for at the time, in which there was a strong sense of community, and of "we're all in this together" -- and to think of the people who joined when such an ethos existed, and who will be laid off now.
I'm not sure if there's a real alternative, and I'm a capitalist at heart... but it's still sad to see so many people laid off because it's now in style to break companies apart.
I just think it's the wrong way to look at things. It's better to cut 30,000 to save the company, than to keep everyone hired and wait for every employee to be out of work.
Maybe. And I fully admit that given those two choices, it's better to save the company and lay of 30k people.
But I do have to wonder how the company grew to be so bloated and large. Perhaps it was unfair for HP to hire them to begin with.
I fully recognize that at the end of a day, an unprofitable company doesn't do anyone any good. It's just sad for me to think that the only way to make the company profitable is to lay off such a huge number of employees.
I also know how big-company layoffs often work; they often don't take someone's quality of work into consideration, but rather the project or division in which they worked. Thus, I'm sure some great people will be looking for jobs, through no fault of their own.
But I do have to wonder how the company grew to be so bloated and large. Perhaps it was unfair for HP to hire them to begin with.
I fully recognize that at the end of a day, an unprofitable company doesn't do anyone any good. It's just sad for me to think that the only way to make the company profitable is to lay off such a huge number of employees.
I also know how big-company layoffs often work; they often don't take someone's quality of work into consideration, but rather the project or division in which they worked. Thus, I'm sure some great people will be looking for jobs, through no fault of their own.
A lot goes back to the EDS acquisition, which seemed doomed almost from the start. A poorly planned acquisition + longstanding internal issues will almost inevitably get you to this kind of outcome.
Is it? I mean, even the people who survive the layoffs are going to know that the company doesn't give a shit about them, and as such, they're not gonna care about the company. People who don't care about the company aren't going to work as hard.
It depends. If you are pretty sure that this is temporary revenue issue, with identified reasons, and know that you will need all your employees in 12 months time, it may be worth to ask for salary cuts.
Actually ExxonMobile makes that claim still.
The most shocking part of this story is that HP still employs 300,000+ people...
IBM has a smaller turnover and employs even more....
IBM blacklists anyone who ever quits. Its emotional blackmail - "You'll never work in this industry again!" They're experts at giving the impression of career growth while underpaying.
[Citation Needed] - I've seen people who have worked at IBM multiple times, and certainly nobody has ever said that to me.
Not sure why you were downvoted. I've heard the exact same thing from people working there and have worked there.
Both versions of our IBM stories are obviously anecdotal, but just to show you're not 100% correct, they told me the door was always open if I ever wanted to go back. I also knew several people that had come and gone.
It's Carly Fiorina's legacy! And Meg Whitman carries her torch.
I guess the shortage of tech labor is over. :)
In an unrelated industry, Beechcraft (Hawker-Beech I believe it's called now) has a similar blow out. Too many managers and not enough actual workers making product. And to make it even worse, outsourcing integral parts of the aircraft to Mexico: fuel bladders, electrical components, and etc (and sadly they refused to properly train the Mexican workers in any of it). What are they doing now under Textron? Quietly returning those outsourced jobs to Arkansas instead of Salina (Kansas), focusing on making actual aircraft, and scuttling middle management and other other useless cruft from the company. Too bad no one with a similar attitude can just swoop in and buy out HP like how Beechcraft was bought out by Textron.
I work for a big company that uses HP software. It's horrible. If HP is anything like the company I work, HP is full of people getting free money for showing up and doing nothing.
My thing is, if you know you are getting free money you have to expect it to end at some point. Have a contingency plan.
My thing is, if you know you are getting free money you have to expect it to end at some point. Have a contingency plan.
He's feeling the heat.
He's made it through the absorption of Compaq, and when Compaq absorbed Digital. He's won a ton of awards with each company he's been at, frequently getting high marks for his professionalism, timeliness, availability, willingness to mentor the new guys, stuff like that. He also brought in more than $4MM in revenue for HP in one fiscal year, even though sales wasn't his job (I think it came out to 28 different contracts?) The next highest was $600k. It's been like that for 25 years.
Needless to say, he's pretty damn good at his job.
He's late 50s, but in amazing health. My mother, however, is in her 50s, and is in absolutely terrible health.
They cannot afford to lose healthcare coverage. My mom wouldn't make it, and my father would probably lose his mind. They just refinanced their 220k mortgage and put new siding on their suburban house, added new gutters, got the roof redone, stuff like that.
Please, don't make this about how shitty of an investment that might have been. That's beside the point.
He makes a good living — he filed $98k last year, but that's a _ton_ of overtime.
All he's known is hardware for the last 30 years. He's not a sysadmin and will never be. He's not some low-level nerd. He's the product of an unnotable tech school and he's worked his ass off to keep things afloat. I don't have the best relationship with him at all, but he's a human and I picked up my people skills (if you can call them that) from him.
Who would hire him at this age, with this kind of experience?