Volt Asks Temps To 'Vote" For Microsoft Pay Cut 412
theodp writes "In an email sent Friday evening to its Microsoft temp workers, Volt Workforce Solutions asked the techies to 'vote' to agree to a 10% pay cut. From the email: 'We want to support you in continuing your assignment at Microsoft and respectfully ask that you respond by going to the upper left hand corner of this email under the "Vote" response option and select, "Accept'" by close of business Tuesday, March 3, 2009. By accepting you agree to the [-10%] pay adjustment in your pay rate.' Microsoft managed to keep the Feb. 20 email detailing plans to slash rates from leaking while it pitched its Elevate America initiative at the 2009 Winter Meeting of the National Governors Association, touting Microsoft skills as just the ticket to economic recovery."
My kind of democracy (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
wolves, chickens, and all that
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
The style's more like dogbert the evil HR director's, from http://dilbert.com/ [dilbert.com].
Only, he'd have labelled the vote button "Back to inbox"
purrr purrr
Re: (Score:2)
In Soviet Socialist Corporate America....
Or should that be "in Fascist Capitalist Corporate States of America" you are free to do as you are told.
Though with corporate bailouts and nationalization it's getting hard to tell them apart anymore.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The bottom line difference between Fascism and Communism is labels. Both are murderous tyrants. Bandits.
The historic clash between Communism and Fascists was about who would get credit for the creating a worldwide utopian society. Mostly it was over which set of elite get the power and money.
Contrast that to people like the Founding Fathers. George Washington could have been king, but gave up his power and wealth to create something greater. They never advocated a Utopian society. They just wanted a place where WHITE MALES were allowed to live a life without without tyranny.
There, fixed that for you.
Re:My kind of democracy (Score:5, Informative)
HP / EDS pulled the same stunt. Oh, except that the CEO's taking a 20% cut in his basic (but pulled a $40,000,000 bonus last year), and there's no vote involved.
http://go.theregister.com/feed/www.theregister.co.uk/2009/02/19/hp_pay_cuts/ [theregister.com]
Re:My kind of democracy (Score:5, Insightful)
FedEx did it too, about two months ago. CEO took a 20% cut, various levels of management took 7.5-10%, and everybody else (well, everybody salaried, aka me) took 5%. The bigger hurt was the suspension of the 401k match.
Still, honestly given the economy, I'd rather see this than layoffs. Not that there aren't people I'd like to see gone, but that needs to come as part of the normal, "You're a moron/sloth, go pursue other career opportunities" methods. Layoffs always seem to get 75% of those people, and another 25% that were invaluable but pissed off the wrong person.
The more layoffs we get, the further down the bottom of this thing is going to be. So, given that a company's options are lay some people off or just make everybody take a little pain for the collective good, I'll take the collective pain right now. I think it's better for the economy as a whole.
Re:My kind of democracy (Score:5, Insightful)
In this case it is far worse. This is a 10% cut in the rate to the employment agency, so they have to cut the employees wage even further, on costs, insurance, profit etc, employees themselves are likely to get around double that cut.
I see that you have some problem with economics. Reduced pay for employees results in reduced spending, which generates lay-offs. A lot of people base their debt payments upon the salary level with out much gap between them. A 20% pay cut will often result in bankruptcy, as the employees can not just whip up a quick letter telling their creditors they will now be paying them 20% less and if they don't like it, they wont pay them anything.
Now is the pay cut to enable M$ to survive or is it to allow M$ to maintain it's current profit margin or even increase them. M$ has a history of having a total disregard for the costs of it's actions upon other people and companies as long their own profits keep increasing.
Re:My kind of democracy (Score:5, Insightful)
If that's true, then a lot of people are complete idiots. It really doesn't seem logical that employers should factor in their employees' overspending when making these kinds of decisions.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
In this case it is far worse. This is a 10% cut in the rate to the employment agency, so they have to cut the employees wage even further, on costs, insurance, profit etc, employees themselves are likely to get around double that cut.
I see that you have some problem with economics. Reduced pay for employees results in reduced spending, which generates lay-offs. A lot of people base their debt payments upon the salary level with out much gap between them. A 20% pay cut will often result in bankruptcy, as the employees can not just whip up a quick letter telling their creditors they will now be paying them 20% less and if they don't like it, they wont pay them anything.
Now is the pay cut to enable M$ to survive or is it to allow M$ to maintain it's current profit margin or even increase them. M$ has a history of having a total disregard for the costs of it's actions upon other people and companies as long their own profits keep increasing.
You're right. This is what's going to happen. This is what most people do.
That said, what kinda idiots do this? Why do so many people believe they shouldn't have any contingency plans in life? Next month, I could be hit by a bus. If I do, I live in Canada, so medical costs will be okay, I have credit card insurance to cover a year of interest payments on that (it only costs me $5/month), and I save enough money that I'll be able to live, if miserably, for at least 6 months. Why don't more people do this? An
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:My kind of democracy (Score:5, Insightful)
Nope. The longer someone avoids paying off their debits, the bigger the debt becomes (thanks to the wonder of compound interest). Then, when their interest rate goes up (as it must, since rather than reduce debt, they've increased it and become a higher risk), you get a second whammy.
If nobody had debt, all earnings could be spent on direct consumption, without some (a lot, in many cases) being bled off by interest payments.
We've just come to the end of a very unnatural cycle - one where people not just continually rolled over debt, but also threw in additional debt with every roll-over, to the point where they were using new debt as their chief way of making debt payments (that's what average spending of 103% of income really means - people are using their credit cards to make payments on their cars and mortgages).
Deflation? After a decade of overinflated housing, we NEED a decade of housing deflation, just to get back to historic norms.
Bail-outs? Why bother - this just rewards the greedy, penalizes the prudent, and shows that nobody in government knows the meaning of "keep your powder dry". All the bailout money is not just a waste - it also carries the hidden cost of missed opportunities to both rationalize the car and banking industries, and to invest elsewhere. Every dollar spent out bailing crooks is a buck taken away from schools and infrastructure and retraining - money that could BUILD the economy.
For those who eschewed debt, delaying gratification, deflating prices back down to historic norms brings the reward of buying at proper value, not bubble prices. Call the bailouts what they are, a global "tax on stupdiity and greed."
everything is inflated.... (Score:4, Insightful)
The prices of ALOT of things jumped up after 9/11 on fear and during the gasoline crisis. They also take advantage of every weather crisis or flood to publish how it will cause a shortage and a price hike.
Ever notice -- when these things clear up, they don't go back down.
Everything needs to go through some deflation. The price of many things is just ridiculous.
Things going from 25-50 cents in the 70's to 6-10 bucks... That's a hell of alot of inflation -- alot more than the
supposed 2-4% reported by government figures each year. Over 3 decades, 4% would be a 324% price inflation.
Instead, I commonly see things more in line with 20x (2000%). It's not just housing.
$2.99 for a corrupted version of a song (a ringtone). vs. $4-6 for an album in the early 80's. The incremental cost
to produce that ringtone: 0. An album might have ~10 songs... so as ring tones, that'd be $30. That's 7.5-5x and those aren't for the real song. The incremental profit margins are nearly incalculable. Piracy has hurt music companies sooooo much.....
But contrary to what 'should' happen -- the government is just manufacturing more money backed by nothing. It's like stock dilution -- but on a massive scale -- dollar dilution. Soon street bums will be begging $20's for a cup of joe.
Theoretically, we are so screwed...but for what really will happen? Good luck guessing!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, part of the problem is the "magic of compounding" ,,, so our dollar has actually lost about 94% of its' value over 50 years. For examples, just look at comic books or paperbacks, a loaf of bread, a dozen eggs, a gallon of gas, or the minimum wage (50 years ago, it was a buck an hou [oregonstate.edu]r).
If everything stays "in sync", then everyone survives, and everyone has enough money to participate in the economy. The problem is that we have, as you pointed out, NOT kept wages in line with inflation for a decade (th
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's the kind of language that puts you on the same side as the employer, sounds like to me. "Do whatever you want as long as you're not going to take away my job!" No thanks.
Re:My kind of democracy (Score:5, Interesting)
>>>You can vote anyway you want, the only catch is that there is only one choice.
That's true. My company has not done this yet, but I've heard from a neighboring company that the temporary Contract workers were told they must take a $10 cut, otherwise next week would be their last. A few stubborn persons refused, and were asked to leave, but most are still working with a reduced pay.
This "Microsoft vote" is mere formality; if you don't take the cut you may as well pack-up your desk and take a long, unpaid vacation.
Re: (Score:2)
temporary Contract workers were told they must take a $10 cut
Ten dollars? How much are they getting paid that a $10 cut hurts?
Is that per-hour, per-week, or what?
Re:My kind of democracy (Score:5, Insightful)
Contract workers get paid by the hour.
So that would be from $50 to $40 for me. Which I'm okay with that, because I'd still be making double what anyone else in my family makes. I'm not greedy. I just want a decent job with air conditioning & a chair to sit on.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:My kind of democracy (Score:5, Interesting)
Something similar happened at my (now ex-)work, they ran out of funding and told people to go home until they could pay us. Then a couple of weeks ago they sent out an email saying "hi folks, we really need to get working again to keep the company viable, no we don't have any money but you'll start work again Monday right?". To which the answer was "um, no" for me, but a surprising number of people said "oh, uh, ok then".
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm starting to think the economy is just an excuse for pay cuts. Last I'd heard Microsoft was still making a very healthy profit.
I've been through the forced reductions myself, but it was while I was contracting for JPMC, and our cuts were based on the post-Y2K "economy." The only ones who should have been hit with the cuts were the mainframe COBOL programmers who no longer had Y2K work to do, but everyone got hit. A couple contractors quit rather than take the pay cut, but they were by far in the mi
Re:My kind of democracy (Score:5, Funny)
The choices should have been:
1) I do not accept a pay cut. I understand that Friday will be my last day of employment, however, I do not go out much and do not have many friends.
2) YES, please CUT MY PAY. Management at both Microsoft and Volt should be commended for their tough minded leadership during hard economic times. THANK YOU SIRS PLEASE GIVE ME ANOTHER!!!
Re:My kind of democracy (Score:5, Insightful)
If insufficient numbers of people vote for a pay-cut, they _will_ be in the position of having to do layoffs, and in all likelihood, the people who will get laid off in such a case are the people who the company best figures it can replace with a more cost efficient alternative (read as: new graduate willing to accept a lower rate of pay). They can get away with this quite legally as long as they pay adequate severance packages.
How a person votes would likely not affect whether or not they got laid off, should a mass layoff occur, and it would really bite for the individual who voted that they would take a pay cut to get laid off anyways because not enough people voted that way, but hey.... nobody ever said life was fair.
But by all rights, Microsoft _should_ be conducting this vote anonymously... so that they have no means of knowing which employees voted no and which voted yes, because if they don't and they only lay off people who voted "no", then they could be setting themselves up for a large number of constructive dismissal lawsuits... (and what's worse for them is that the employees would have an official paper trail to prove it!). Further, by conducting the vote anonymously, Microsoft would be publicly presenting the notion that they are genuinely trying to come up with methods of retaining their employees in hard economic times because they value them all, rather than simply terminating the ones who don't vote the way they want.
Re:My kind of democracy (Score:5, Insightful)
If insufficient numbers of people vote for a pay-cut, they _will_ be in the position of having to do layoffs,
Nowhere did I see that this was a binding vote. I'd say it's more of a straw poll for Volt to see if they can get away with this. For instance, where did they come up with 10%?
Hell, if enough people vote yes, why not increase the cut to 15%? From the other posters comments I'd guess Volt doesn't really care about their employees and will try to squeeze them as much as possible. The "vote" is merely a means to figure out how hard to squeeze.
So, that would mean (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
...and pay the saved 1% as a bonus to management?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Isn't this the real American way for the last 10 years? Cut employees or their salaries and give managers a big bonus?
If you don't think that it is true, look no farther than the republican party when comes to the financial bailouts. They insist that the auto-workers take cuts in benefits and salary. Then they turn around and complain that the government should not be involved in limiting salaries of failed bank executives to 500K. If that is not hypocrisy I don't know what is.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
what?
would you mind re-wording that a little; or at least using some punctuation?
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Jeez, have you ever even worked a job before?
Re:So, that would mean I smelled a rat when i read (Score:2, Funny)
"Microsoft, as a trailblazer in the information technology industry,"
"Whooat?" I thought... "trailblazer?" I thought most of what ms did was light the initial fire in some cases, buy and shut down in many cases, and FUD/run out of business in many more caes.
(cue the off-topic/flamebait/troll-markers against me...)
Re:So, that would mean (Score:5, Informative)
The big cost difference comes from GM paying people who aren't working (Job banks and retirees[460,000 vs 1,600]) as well as taking more man-hours (34.2 hrs vs 27.9) to build a vehicle than Toyota. Some Toyota plants actually pay more than some GM plants.
From listening to NPR (Score:5, Informative)
I've heard that benefits for employees are also vastly in big 3 workers favor.
I found one 'for example'
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/nov2008/pers-n13.shtml [wsws.org]
[i] Like Friedman, he writes indignantly of decades (now ended) during which Big Three workers received "gold-plated medical benefits that virtually no one else had," under which United Auto Workers members had "no deductibles, copays or other facts of life in these United States."[/i] opinions of the validity of the argument aside, such benefits add a lot to the bottom line....
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Any company would dance in the streets if they could get that kind of a cut out of their labor costs.
Labor cost compared to production is what really matters. GM workers are 22% less efficient. Increasing productivity would provide bigger gains that cutting wages.
When you factor productivity in with wages GM is obviously at a huge disadvantage. I think we are mostly agreeing. GMs costs don't provide as much return as Toyotas.
Re:So, that would mean (Score:5, Interesting)
Pay is irrelevant.
GM doesn't know how to build, sell, or market anything other than a truck or SUV.
The only division of GM with the potential to compete against Toyota, is Saturn. And they're going to shut that division down in 2012 because they've never managed to make money.
The decision makers have been spouting off bullshit about how they deserve to make that kind of money because of their vision and leadership. All they have proved is that they're nothing more the 2nd rate salesmen who's only talent is convincing other 2nd rate sales men of their own value.
The management have fucked themselves, the Corporate Officers, Board of Directors, and all former Officers and Board members withing the statue of limitations all deserve to be sued into bankruptcy by the shareholders and pensioners.
And after they have been bankrupted by civil litigation, and have no money left to pay even a second rate attorney, the FTC needs to go after them for fraud and conspiracy to commit fraud, and anything else they can come up with and throw them in Federal prison. Then its the state's turn to go after them and make sure they finish out the rest of their miserable lives in the state pen with the gang-bangers and giving blowjobs for drugs. Because that the only thing they think will make their miserable lives a little more bearable.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:So, that would mean (Score:4, Informative)
I also have a friend who's an ASC certified master mechanic who says he sees A LOT of Toyotas in the shop vs. GM vehicles for more than trivial matters.
Its a pity, because you get the American Built Toyotas. In Australia, we get the Japanese built Toyotas, and they are consistently the most reliable car by far. The Toyota's top all of the reliability surveys and have very low failure and problem rates.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
In point of fact the non-union auto-workers make more (counting benefits) than UAW workers.
So the UAW is working against the interests of auto workers?
Or is it that managers are non-union, and they tend to get paid more than assembly line workers?
Re:So, that would mean (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
You're right, except that the "skill" is actually a strange one: to disregard risk knowing that you won't bear the costs personally.
(And no, I don't believe any real sort of management would be posting on slashdot. I'm just playing along.)
Re:So, that would mean (Score:5, Insightful)
That's because management deserves it. We make the big decisions and take the risks that enable the company to succeed.
Probable AC troll, so I won't waste time on most of it.
It's a good opportunity however, to point out that the problem with capitalism in recent years has been that the management have *not* been exposed to risks despite having been paid accordingly. They've worked themselves into the ludicrous position where they get paid bonuses regardless of whether they succeed or not.
They're generally are the *last* people to be exposed to the results of their failure, assuming that they haven't been astute enough to move on before the results of their short-term, shareholder-pleasing actions become evident.
Even when they're kicked out due to extreme incompetence, they'll still end up with comfortable payoff or at worst what they managed to get out of the company beforehand.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Collectivism and Marxism already failed. We don't need to try that again.
Don't recall anyone advocating that. Put that straw man away before it falls apart!
Though expecting 100% free-market capitalism to work without people taking advantage and/or subverting it for their own ends (even through the "legitimate" use of markets to- e.g.- get a monopoly) is just as flawed and dependent on a grossly over-idealised view of human nature as communism is.
Remember that though many will proclaim the merits of a free market, they really want it to be free for themselves... and will cert
Re:So, that would mean (Score:5, Insightful)
While I'll agree few people could do the job of an executive well, I'd argue that very few executives manage to do a good job. Companies are failing left and right, most of the ones that aren't in distress exist on pure inertia. Nor is there any real effort to find good executives by most businesses. Instead they hire people who failed at a previous executive level job (see the guy who drove AMD into the ground, after trashing another company right before being hired), or who have the right networks to get the attention of the existing executives.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
employee pay (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, for starters, autoworkers union != bank executives. The two situations aren't even similar. On one hand, you have a union that's doing nothing more than bleeding a corporation dry. On the other, you have a situation where the free market should really be determining things like salaries and bonuses*.
The auto workers negotiated in just as much a free market as those bank executives did. SO they are the same in that regard.
Truth be told, it would be better for the US Automakers if they went bankrupt. T
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:So, that would mean (Score:4, Informative)
Companies are being forced into it by Microsoft saying sign the paperwork for this change in contract or we will not hire from you when your current contracts are up. Contracting companies can then push the decrease by telling the employee to sign the agreement or you are fired. Most employees are probably hired under the standard right to work so they can be fired for any reason, however most companies have an employee handbook which prevent firing for any reason, so could be a legal fight.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:So, that would mean (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Vote (Score:4, Insightful)
"Voting" is a rather hilarious newspeak term for acceptance of a pay cut.
Not that I see anything particularly wrong with this approach. I find it pretty absurd that a company should be "stuck" with the contract rates it offers. And considering how big salaries in USA are, it's a small miracle that they still manage to make a profit.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I find it pretty absurd that a company should be "stuck" with the contract rates it offers.
A contract is a contract ... I'm not sure why not being able to back out afterwards if you change your mind is "absurd" - the whole point of a contract is that you stick with it.
(Now yes, in this case I suspect that temporary workers have zero rights, so they could easily fire them if they don't accept, but in general, I don't see how it's absurd that people are stuck with contracts that they enter.)
And considering ho
Re:Vote (Score:5, Insightful)
"I find it pretty absurd that a company should be "stuck" with the contract rates it offers."
Slow down, cowboy! If you engage me, and then decide to stiff me on a contract, I WILL SUE YOU. And I will win. It doesn't matter how long it takes, or even how much it costs me -- it's just business.
As soon as you announce "You won't be paid", I put down my tools, and walk. Again, it doesn't matter how much I may need the work.
Why? What other leverage do I have? And, trust me, companies understand. If I didn't stick to my guns, I am afraid that others would start to take advantage of me. This is my protection, ok?
About the only way I would take less is if mandated by a bankruptcy court.
Wrong Options (Score:3, Funny)
volt's cut (Score:5, Interesting)
I worked for Volt at MS for a year. They offer a 401k plan and match a small percentage which is vested after a year. My year ended (MS only lets you stay a year due to the perma-temp settlement, then you have to take a 100-day break), but the Volt match never materialized in my 401k. Volt explained that to get the match I had to work 12 complete months. Sounds like a year, right? No. Since I started in the middle of the month, my first month wasn't a "complete" month, and it didn't count towards matching.
I told them their policy was BS, since 1 in 30 employees must start on the first day of the month, assuming people's contracts are as likley to start on day 1 as any other day. They didn't respond.
But the really nice part is today, when everybody on Slashdot gets to read about it.
Re:volt's cut (Score:5, Insightful)
I'll bet Volt isn't taking a cut on their obscene margin.
Re:volt's cut (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Thing was that company only hired people for another company, MCI, and I knew that MCI once a year, right after Christmas, would fire 10% of the work force and that MCI would only allow contracted employees to work between 6-12 months before they h
so they want to work for 1 year with no health or (Score:2)
so they want to work for 1 year with no health or time off?
Re:volt's cut (Score:4, Insightful)
> since 1 in 30 employees must start on the first day of the month, assuming people's
> contracts are as likley to start on day 1 as any other day
Considering your explanation above, I doubt any contract starts on day 1, because clearly they don't want to pay, and not starting contracts on day 1 is a way for them to not pay.
How about (Score:5, Insightful)
And since when is something that's compulsory also voluntary?
Re:How about (Score:5, Funny)
Can't do that. You need to pay top dollar for the best talent. Without the best talent you wouldn't get such market winners such as the Zune or the highly profitable X-box, soon to drive Apple, Sony and Nintendo out of the market.
Just think of where we'd be today without Microsoft Bob or Windows ME. Or Vista.
Top pay=top talent=best leadership=best products ever. :)
Vote No = Lose Job (Score:5, Insightful)
The email stated "this is mandatory in order to continue your assignment at Microsoft ". So voting yes just means you want to keep your job.
Strange! (Score:2, Funny)
This is a farce (Score:4, Informative)
Wrong!! (Score:2, Insightful)
I wonder how many are H1B's? (Score:2)
Sort of poetic justice..
15 Minutes to establish a LLC (Score:2)
So in this day and age when it takes less than 15 minutes to establish a LLC and set yourself up as a private contractor, why would anyone work for one
of these employment agencies? I guess if the job pimp says you are going to take a 10% cut then you are going to have to do it if you want to work
on his street corner. Admit it, if you work for a contracting company you are nothing but a simple code whore.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Most big companies will not deal with individual LLCs. They have a "panel" of agencies (say between 3 and 10) that you have to go through.
Not just Volt (Score:5, Informative)
All "a-" (contract employes) were told to take a 10% pay cut. Those of us at Aquent weren't even asked to "vote".
We're trying to get the word out on this site: http://www.msratecuts.org/
There's no headcount for permanent hires now, and I don't think any Blue Badges are getting raises, but that's different than taking a 10% pay *cut*. However, at least on my team, they're still hiring contractors.
On the Aces (Flight Sim) team, they fired the whole team and then asked about 3/4 to come back as contractors, forgoing their severance.
IMHO: This is an excellent catalyst for unionizing.
Ultimately this is the answer. (Score:5, Interesting)
American workers take a 25% haircut and become competitive again.
During the great depression there were several major waves of pay cuts.
This service economy fantasy is not sustainable.
What's missing is the 75% pay cut for the executive class back to 1987 levels when they "only" made 50 times the average worker (instead of over 400 times today) AND raising taxes on dividends and capital gains from 15% back to normal income levels ( these extremely low tax rates on div and capital gains are why warren buffet averages 17% income tax rate while his secretary averages about 30%)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
American workers take a 25% haircut and become competitive again.
I chopped off my hair to 3/4th of its length, but that didn't help me be competitive.
Do you have a newsletter I can subscribe to?
Re:Ultimately this is the answer. (Score:5, Insightful)
I agree, but the cap gains tax should only be on real profits over $500 per year taken as income and not reinvested. Now you pay on purely nominal gains caused by inflation, fill out onerous paperwork over tiny amounts of savings account interest, usually can't deduct all investment losses from profits, and usually take a tax penalty for rebalancing your portfolio. Investment companies don't have most of these burdens, but individuals do. Getting around the ridiculous rules is a big part of why the market is dominated by mutual funds, hedge funds, IRA money-jailers and other parasites.
Inflation-adjusting nominal capital gains using the government's numbers isn't good enough. The have been fiddled with so much over the years that they are 3 to 6 percentage points lower than they would be when calculated using the methods of 15 to 30 years ago. This fiddling has also inflated GDP growth and screwed Social Security recipients by a similar percentage compounded over many years. [slashdot.org]
Also, capital gains shouldn't be taxed if the underlying capital is intellectual property. Ireland got that right; it really paid off for them. (I know this is Slashdot, but individual authors and inventors would be more viable if their product weren't taxed out of existence.)
What will this really accomplish? (Score:5, Insightful)
I am a contractor at Microsoft right now subject to this pay rate decrease. Although I have my opinions about why it is happening, and what should be happening instead, I think more interesting is what the immediate effect of this will be. In my case, I cancelled several services I pay for in order to absorb the hit to my income and will be increasing my W-4 deductions to maximize my current income (up to my allowed amount) in favor of decreasing my tax return next year (here's to hope).
But, I cancelled Netflix who licenses Microsoft's streaming video technology. I cancelled Gamefly who previously rented me Xbox 360 games. I will be providing less revenue through withholding to the federal government. There will be less discretionary spending and less revenue provided to my local and state government, all of whom need it just as bad as we do right now. All of those organizations rely on Microsoft products for their dwindling operations. In a very real way (since I live in northwest Washington) there will be less money for police to protect Microsoft's physical assets.
Don't these circular relationships represent the defintion of a "downward spiral"? Are we sure we understand the impact of these actions?
In the meantime I will buckle under and keep working my ass off. My kid's doctor doesn't accept righteousness as a form of payment.
Re:What will this really accomplish? (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't these circular relationships represent the defintion of a "downward spiral"?
Absolutely. This is why economists get spooked when they hear the word deflation. Even now they can't bear to say it, and resort to euphemisms.
Are we sure we understand the impact of these actions?
We understand the economy in almost exactly the same sense as we understand the weather.
In the meantime I will buckle under and keep working my ass off.
That's probably the only thing anyone can do. Good luck, this year is going to be a brutal adjustment for a lot of people.
Volt is a TEMP agency (Score:3, Insightful)
These are CONTRACTORS not employees. The whole reason a company uses contract labor is so they can adjust the number of bodies to the workload without having to later layoff their own employees. In other works these a TEMPORARY jobs. Everyone understood they were temporary and would not last. I don't even count not renewing a contract with a layoff
I was a contractor once too. And sure enough we were the first to go. With all of about 20 minutes notice at that. Cutting your pay is just a very nice way to say "Find another job, soon." The more normal way to say that to a contractors is "Find another job."
Read the story "Volt" is a "temp agency". Our company uses Volt too. For thing like when a normal emplyee is on extended sick leave, they might hire someone on a 6 month contract.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:This is happening in plenty of places (Score:5, Insightful)
I agree. There's plenty of companies negotiating concessions with unions and regularly staffed employees for pay or incentive cuts. Slashdot villify's Microsoft enough that they don't need to post the common business practices of third parties in the employ of Microsoft. Give us a break kdawson, enough with the sensationalist anti-Microsoft vendetta.
How many of them made $17 billion in profits over the last year?
It's one thing to cut salaries when you're hemorrhaging. It's another to cut salaries when everyone else is hemorrhaging, and you have a stable, monopoly-protected revenue base, just because your workers have no alternative.
Re:This is happening in plenty of places (Score:5, Insightful)
It's one thing to cut salaries when you're hemorrhaging. It's another to cut salaries when everyone else is hemorrhaging, and you have a stable, monopoly-protected revenue base, just because your workers have no alternative.
Hate to say it, but that's exactly why. The cost of labor is dropping, because there's a massive pool of it willing to work for less right now. Market forces and all - more supply, less demand, price drops.
Sure, it was awesome for us all during the .com boom because it was the other way around (demand outstripping supply, causing outrageous salaries, etc.), but the point is stop your bitching when it goes the other way. That's just the way an open market works.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Unfortunately, they're publicly-owned, which means they have to at the very least pretend they're coping with the economic downturn in a very visible way. Even if they really don't need to. Otherwise their stockholders will revolt, sell of their shares, and they'd be in much worse state. It also doesn't help that the other layoffs rates in Washington State have lowered the price of tech labor.
Low Volt-age geek (Score:3, Insightful)
It's one thing to cut salaries when you're hemorrhaging. It's another to cut salaries when everyone else is hemorrhaging, and you have a stable, monopoly-protected revenue base, just because your workers have no alternative.
The temp's employer is Volt Workforce Solutions.
Volt joins most but not all firms in deciding to pass some or all of the impact of the [Microsoft] cuts on to their workers. Temp giant Volt informs workers it will make Micr [techflash.com]
Re:This is happening in plenty of places (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm sure much worse is going on elsewhere. It's just that this is such a bizarre way to do it. Do the temps really have a choice?
There's the door, you know how to use it.
Re:This is happening in plenty of places (Score:4, Interesting)
Is there an alternative to slashdot? (Honest question)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
There are alternatives, but not on one of them will you get +5 Insightful for bitching about the story and calling the readers 'fucktards'.
The OP indicates to me that Slashdot is working very well.
Re:This is happening in plenty of places (Score:5, Funny)
Well, you could try life.
Disclaimer:
Life might have (severe) emotional impact and can harm your health including but not limited to depression, skin tissue damage, loss of hair, loss of bodily functions and death.
Re: (Score:2)
Also it's hard to find the original product. Most people just settle for the generic version.
Re: (Score:2)
We have evaluated all pay rates for our Microsoft agency temporary workers and have concluded that we will be asking each of you to share in these measures by accepting a 10% reduction in your pay rate. These reductions are very difficult for Volt to implement since we value each and every one of you; however this is mandatory in order to continue your assignment at Microsoft and to respond to this economic environment.
Re: (Score:3)
Especially since the story isn't even about Microsoft! Microsoft negotiates a new contract with Volt in which they pay 10% less for each consultancy hour bought. Which is not unreasonable since it costs them 2-3 times as much for consultants as for full-time employees. Volt chooses to put the lost income on each individual consultant as 10% lower salary.
Which is reasonable if their salaries are proportional to their hourly fee. Except it usually isn't, in good times consultant companies can charge exorbitan
Re:This is happening in plenty of places (Score:4, Interesting)
So what's wrong with singling out #1? Oh, that's right, because there are other companies out there doing the same thing, which means no one should call foul. People should be forced not to take advantage of the spotlight to rally for their cause. #1 would never do that... I'm sure. So, why can't these fucktards protect their own interests? Contract firms and temp agencies are in a powerful position. People should keep a close eye on the relationship they keep with the Corporations. They provide a service, but reap profits largely disproportionate to the gains they receive.
I was working as a Temp once for Adecco and was put into a position that required I see how much I was being billed out for. It was about 40% of my pay. I had been in this position for a few years without a raise. At this point the Temp agency was making 40% of my hourly pay for doing nothing but send me the check. I did not get enough hours to qualify for benefits. I had well compensated them fairly for finding this position. Now it's just a milking scheme.
So, sorry to say, but you're right. Everyone should protect their interests. Even these "fucktards"
It's easy to stand on a soap box anonymously.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think it's more likely that people don't even know where the voting buttons are in Outlook.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Not with insane copyright laws... (Score:5, Insightful)
Will the US nationalists make up their collective mind? If capitalism and competition are good, then Microsoft can only be bad for stifling competition.
Successful companies are a good thing, they can help improve the industry's efficiency through reduced prices and increased quality. But monopolistic companies like Microsoft rarely do either.
If it wasn't for the monopoly, Microsoft would have been dead between XP and Vista. Six years between incremental product releases? Instant death in any *normal* industry. Fast-paced competitors like Apple and Linux would have eaten it for breakfast. And the economy would benefit. So does the US still need more Microsofts?