Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • ...one of the 500??
    • Dunno yet. We won't know until the end of the month. Odds are probably "no", but we'll see. I've been thinking of moving for a while, so this is as good a time as any to do it.

      We must also post an updated resume' somewhere and do some core competency testing if we want to stick around. Testing might be a good idea, if the test methodology wasn't so lame.

      Also, they're not taking volunteers for severance packages. Apparently, they're afraid that the employees they want to keep will leave and the ones

  • by ziggy (25) on 2002.03.01 9:47 (#5286) Journal
    From the company's side, I can see the argument. IT employees are some of the most variable and required commodities in a company. Once you hire a bad employee, it's difficult to get them to leave. And the good employees tend to last 18 months or less in the industry in general, so why take on the cost to make them employees (education, sending them to conferences) if they leave anyway?

    But it's also an Enronesque way to cook the books to make the company prettier. Sounds like it could be a violation of some labor laws too -- what happens to the employees that are being shortchanged out of stock options and other such benefits? IANAL, but if this bookeeping change does come to pass, I wouldn't be surprised to hear about a class action lawsuit in the next 18 months as a result.