IT Employees At EmblemHealth Fight To Save Jobs (computerworld.com) 296
Reader dcblogs writes: IT employees at EmblemHealth have united to stop the New York-based employer from outsourcing their jobs to offshore provider Cognizant. Employees say the insurer is on the verge of signing a contract with Cognizant, an IT services firm and one of the largest users of H-1B workers. They say the contract may be signed as early as this week. They fear what a contract with an IT services offshore firm may mean: Humiliation as part of the "knowledge transfer" process, loss of their jobs or a "rebadging" to Cognizant, which they see as little more than temporary employment. Many of the workers, about 200 they estimate, are older, with 15-plus-year tenures. This means a hard job search for them. The IT employees have decided not go quietly. "We're organizing," said one IT employee, who requested anonymity. "We're communicating with one another. They need the knowledge that we have. They can't transition [to Cognizant] without the information that we have. That puts us in a position of strength — they can't fire us for organizing; we're protected by the law," she said.
Get Use To It (Score:5, Insightful)
Get use to it. Without H1-B reform (not going to happen under Trump / Clinton) , unless you want to walk out now without "parting gifts", you will be training your replacement. Again, without H1-B reform, this will continue to be the "norm".
Re:Get Use To It (Score:5, Informative)
First, H1-B reform isn't going to happen under Cruz (or Clinton). Last I heard, Trump was actually in favor of doing something about the H1-B problem, though he changes his mind so much it's hard to know what he'd really do.
Anyway, these IT employees might finally have gotten the right idea: unionizing. Yeah, right now, if you refuse to train your replacement, then you can just be terminated and not get that juicy severance package. That works just fine when you're eliminating only part of the workforce. When you're replacing them all, and then they decide to unionize and none of them will train their replacements, that strategy doesn't work: those IT employees have all the institutional knowledge, and the company is just going to fail without it being passed on. The company can certainly just terminate them all and have the replacements try to figure it out on their own, but good luck with that. It'd be funny as hell to see a big news report about a company like this doing just that, and then having to declare bankruptcy shortly after when the whole thing collapses.
Re:Get Use To It (Score:5, Insightful)
Back in the 1980's the US Air Traffic Controllers went on strike, and Reagan fired them all with a prevision that they could not be rehired for many, many years. Jets still flew.
Re:Get Use To It (Score:5, Informative)
And yeah no consequences from that at all:
"the FAA was faced with the task of hiring and training enough controllers to replace those that had been fired, a hard problem to fix as, at the time, it took three years in normal conditions to train a new controller.They were replaced initially with nonparticipating controllers, supervisors, staff personnel, some nonrated personnel, and in some cases by controllers transferred temporarily from other facilities. Some military controllers were also used until replacements could be trained. The FAA had initially claimed that staffing levels would be restored within two years; however, it would take closer to ten years before the overall staffing levels returned to normal."
Wrong about "banned for life" (Score:3)
A long time? No banned from federal service for life.
Incorrect. They may have been banned from becoming controllers again, but they were most definitely not banned from federal service for life. How do I know? I'm old enough to have worked in federal service IT with a fired former ATC. This would have been in the late 1980s. He had no problems getting a government clearance to do IT work as a federal employee at a US military base, but he could never be an ATC again. He didn't talk much about it except I do remember that he still thought he did the righ
Re:Get Use To It (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Get Use To It (Score:5, Insightful)
Two slight differences, though -
1) Reagan had a large pool of former military ATC folks who were able to practically jump into the job. PATCO didn't really expect that to happen.
2) Air traffic was a whole lot lighter back then.
Re: (Score:2)
Two slight differences, though -
1) Reagan had a large pool of former military ATC folks who were able to practically jump into the job. PATCO didn't really expect that to happen.
2) Air traffic was a whole lot lighter back then.
Ummm, of the 13,000 air traffic controllers who walked out on strike, only 900 were replaced by military ATC. While it is true that there were about half of today's domestic flights back in 1983, they also didn't have today's technology to deal with them. In addition there are more ATC staff today per flight than previously, so the workload per controller was significantly higher.
Re:Get Use To It (Score:5, Interesting)
The only reason that was possible was because
1) the public sentiment was favourable to empty the power of what was perceived to be very corrupt institutions (the unions)
2) the government could get away with things the private sector would never ever be allowed, like using non rated personnel or military air controllers or taking 10 years instead of 3 to normalise the situation and
3) because you, the american people, was there to pick up the tab so no expenses would be spared to break up not only that union but the whole concept of collective bargaining, striking and fighting in equal footing for workers right.
For reference see what happened in the U.K, about the same time.
The situation is not very similar to the workers mentioned in TFA although the only thing they would get by unionise would be to get the company to declare bankruptcy and to reemerge with another name in the same geographical area, same business plan and most likely same portfolio of customers (but without the workers).
Re: (Score:2)
While this is mostly correct, I have to question your conclusion about the company trying to re-make itself through bankruptcy. At the end of the day, a company's business which relies on IT operations actually happening needs IT workers to get those operations to happen. If all the workers are dumped through the bankruptcy-and-reemerging-with-a-new-name process, where are they going to get these workers? Hiring back the old ones who just unionized? Or just magically hiring a new bunch, or just outsourc
Re:Get Use To It (Score:5, Informative)
Back in the 1980's the US Air Traffic Controllers went on strike, and Reagan fired them all with a prevision that they could not be rehired for many, many years. Jets still flew.
Of course, none of the air traffic controllers walked off the job until all of the jets under their coverage were safely on the ground or transferred to other air traffic control zones. The public was never in danger from that strike any more than if pilots go on strike, the passengers in flight are in danger. Sure, something can go wrong, but the pilots still fulfill their obligation to the public until the plane is safely at the gate and the passengers disembark.
As for the jets still flying, the FAA grounded over 50% of all scheduled flights and 60% of smaller airports because of safety reasons. So, it would be more accurate to say that "some" jets still flew. Ironically, the price tag of what the air traffic controllers were asking for was around $770M. The government paid about 50% more than that, by the time everything was said and done and back to normal. So, while Reagan put the air traffic controllers in their place, it cost the taxpayer almost $400M more than if he had not done so.
Re: (Score:2)
Is that $770M the price tag for everything the ATCs were asking for, including everything on their wish list, or is that the price tag for what would have been a reasonable compromise that they probably would have agreed to? Unions (or any side in a negotiation really) always ask for the Moon and then compromise for less.
Re: (Score:2)
Is that $770M the price tag for everything the ATCs were asking for, including everything on their wish list, or is that the price tag for what would have been a reasonable compromise that they probably would have agreed to? Unions (or any side in a negotiation really) always ask for the Moon and then compromise for less.
That was the cost the FAA said the ATCs demands would cost.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Reagan also deregulated the banking system
No, Congress did that. All Reagan did was ask them to. Congress could have told him to go pound sand.
Put the blame where it belongs.
Re: Get Use To It (Score:5, Informative)
Are you talking about the repeal of Glass-Steagall [wikipedia.org]? That was under Clinton Administration [wikipedia.org], not Reagan.
Re: (Score:3)
He's most likely talking about Garn-St. Germain Depository Institution Act of 1982 that led to the S&L crisis. Clinton merely leveled the playing field by deregulating the banks like Reagan did for the S&L industry. It just took a bit longer for the consequences of such deregulation to be realized.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Reagan also deregulated the banking system which essentially has caused all the financial calamities that have followed, including the 2009 meltdown. What's your point?
BULLSHIT [nytimes.com]
''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''
And
Barney Frank: What Housing Bubble? [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Quality contribution there. Did you know that "subprime mortgage" is specifically defined as "mortgage not backed by Fannie or Freddie"? Fannie and Freddie insured ZERO subprime mortgages and had absolutely no financial problems at all until after the credit freeze when companies started shutting down and laying off hundreds of thousands of employees who had prime mortgages (and could afford them, until they lost their job?)
Even more BULLSHIT
Pressured to Take More Risk, Fannie Reached Tipping Point [nytimes.com]
Whenever competitors asked Congress to rein in the company, lawmakers were besieged with letters and phone calls from angry constituents, some orchestrated by Fannie itself. One automated phone call warned voters: “Your congressman is trying to make mortgages more expensive. Ask him why he opposes the American dream of home ownership.”
The ripple effect of Fannie’s plunge into riskier lending was profound. Fannie’s stamp of approval made shunned borrowers and complex loans more acceptable to other lenders, particularly small and less sophisticated banks.
Not only that, they lied about it:
SEC CHARGES FORMER FANNIE MAE AND FREDDIE MAC EXECUTIVES WITH SECURITIES FRAUD [sec.gov]
The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged six former top executives of the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) with securities fraud, alleging they knew and approved of misleading statements claiming the companies had minimal holdings of higher-risk mortgage loans, including subprime loans.
"Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac executives told the world that their subprime exposure was substantially smaller than it really was," said Robert Khuzami, Director of the SEC's Enforcement Division. "These material misstatements occurred during a time of acute investor interest in financial institutions' exposure to subprime loans, and misled the market about the amount of risk on the company's books. All individuals, regardless of their rank or position, will be held accountable for perpetuating half-truths or misrepresentations about matters materially important to the interest of our country's investors."
"Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac executives told the world that their subprime exposure was substantially smaller than it really was," said Robert Khuzami, Director of the SEC's Enforcement Division. "These material misstatements occurred during a time of acute investor interest in financial institutions' exposure to subprime loans, and misled the market about the amount of risk on the company's books. All individuals, regardless of their rank or position, will be held accountable for perpetuating half-truths or misrepresentations about matters materially important to the interest of our country's investors."
Fannie Mae's executives also knew and approved of the decision to underreport Fannie Mae's Alt-A loan exposure, the SEC alleged. Fannie Mae disclosed that its March 31, 2007 exposure to Alt-A loans was 11 percent of its portfolio of Single Family loans. In reality, Fannie Mae's Alt-A exposure at that time was approximately 18 percent of its Single Family loan holdings.
One in five of Fannie Mae's loans were sub-prime.
Who's the derp now, derp?
Re: (Score:3)
Riiiiiight. They went on strike over concerns of metal fatigue.
Every union lists tons of things, but only one is the real reason. The rest are negotiating gambits.
Re: (Score:2)
Riiiiiight. They went on strike over concerns of metal fatigue.
Every union lists tons of things, but only one is the real reason. The rest are negotiating gambits.
Actually, it is well documented that one of the primary concerns of the air traffic controllers was about mistakes being made because the job was high stress and long hours. They were pushing for a 32 hour work week without being required to do double shifts. Of course, they were also pushing for increased salaries and pensions.
The FAA agreed with the safety issues but would not implement the change because of the cost involved.
Re:Get Use To It (Score:4, Interesting)
I am no Trump fan, but who would he be a puppet to? The Republican establishment has alienated him, so if he wins, they won't be pulling the strings. He's predominately using his own funds, so the special interest groups won't be pulling the strings. He's a Washington outsider, so they won't be pulling the strings. So who, pray tell, would he be a puppet for?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:what Trump is, and isn't (Score:5, Funny)
Trump is a businessman, that means he steer clear of unprofitable ventures.
Four business bankruptcies later...
Re: (Score:2)
Trump is a businessman, that means he steer clear of unprofitable ventures.
Four business bankruptcies later...
I don't think Trump would make a good president, but as a businessman, why would you not use a government provided means to get out from under your creditors. To not declare bankruptcy when cash flows can't keep up would be the stupid move. As for the OP's position that he steers clear of unprofitable ventures is dead wrong. Trump, like every other venture capitalists throws money at numerous projects knowing that many are not going to pan out. No one project needs to pan out as long as those that do cove
Re: (Score:3)
4 out of all but 1. None of his businesses have been a great success, most of them have failed. The only one that's worked really well is his TV show.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So basically you've never voted in your entire live and never will? ;)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Trump is a businessman, that means he steer clear of unprofitable ventures. His actions are dictated by what is profitable, FOR HIMSELF.
That means his position shifts when it'll help him reach his goal. I don't see H1B reform being one that will net him profit.
So he is like any other politician, then.
Re: (Score:2)
No fan of Trump, but he certainly is not doing "what is profitable for himself". As a business decision running for president is a really stupid idea so he is obviously not making decisions based on what makes him the most money.
He does want to feed his ego, which is going to be a lot less predictable than "what makes Trump the most money".
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Get Use To It (Score:5, Insightful)
Get use to it. Without H1-B reform (not going to happen under Trump / Clinton) , unless you want to walk out now without "parting gifts", you will be training your replacement. Again, without H1-B reform, this will continue to be the "norm".
H1B reform MIGHT happen under Trump.
It WON'T happen under Clinton. You don't have $20 million to "donate" to the Clinton Foundation. Even if Hillary said she'd support H1B reform, would you believe her even for a millisecond? There's no money in it for her.
And all you Clinton apologists can wail, "SO'S EVERYONE ELSE!!!" And you'll be lying too. Please. Show us another national-level pol with the history of corruption that Hillary! has. Anyone who has anything like a $1000 investment with a trader that has dealings with the government somehow growing to $100,000 - go ahead, name 'em.
Re: (Score:2)
H1B reform MIGHT happen under Trump.
Err, no it won't happen under any politicians who talk about it. The probability that it will not happen goes up higher when a politician talks more and make a big deal about the reform. I can't believe that there are so many people who never learn about how politicians are...
Re: (Score:2)
Q: How can you tell if a politician is lying?
A: His/her lips are moving..
Re: (Score:2)
This is no joke. High level politicians all are experts, literally, at lying convincingly. They are a kind of sociopath in literally not caring what others think of them.
There was a recent study that showed outgoing people, far from being sensitive to others' feelings, were actually insensitive. It was the shy people who cared, too much, what others thought.
Politicians can lie convincingly because they don't care what you think. But they are awesome at telling you you and your feelings matter to them.
Re: (Score:3)
This doesn't have to even be about Hillary's personal corruption, really.
Any battle to try and stem the tide of H1-B has an uphill battle with the software and IT industry.
In some cases, H1-Bs are actually needed, although those individuals are actually paid identically to US citizens and don't really represent an issue.
But in other cases, they're abused to make large amounts of money in making citizens redundant. That is not something that business is just going to let anyone in office take away from them
Re: (Score:2)
Okay, let's look at the practical options:
Cruz - He's been a corporate lackey his entire political career. You probably don't even have to bribe him to side with big biz; he's automatic.
Trump - He admitted he bribed just about everyone on the stage during one debate. That's corruption from the other angle, but still corruption. Plus
Re: (Score:2)
This will continue to be the norm with and without H1-B "reform". The primary driver for outsourcing is that labor costs in other countries are lower. Prohibiting foreign labor to come to the US temporarily for training isn't going to change that. (And in this case, another driver is that we're trying to lower health care costs.)
Re: (Score:2)
"Get used to it" is the correct grammar.
http://www.learn-english-today.com/lessons/lesson_contents/verbs/to-be-used-to.html [learn-english-today.com]
who does knowledge belong to? (Score:2)
Re:who does knowledge belong to? (Score:5, Insightful)
You're dead wrong on that account. My employer pays for my time. I still own the knowledge and skill that I utilize in order to make that time worth anything. Just like when you hire a plumber, you don't own the tools that he brings to the job even though they are intrinsic to his employment.
Re: (Score:2)
You're dead wrong on that account. My employer pays for my time. I still own the knowledge and skill that I utilize in order to make that time worth anything. Just like when you hire a plumber, you don't own the tools that he brings to the job even though they are intrinsic to his employment.
It depends on your employment agreement. Google "work for hire" employee or contractor. There are some statutes and case law to protect employees, but they can be waived and most employment agreements will have you do just that. Word to the wise: Read every word of your employment agreement. And when a manager or someone in HR tells you "it's just a standard agreement" that means they have no idea what's in it, but the company paid an attorney to protect THE COMPANY as much as possible. That attorney w
Re: (Score:2)
Skills you own. Specific company knowledge belongs to the company. So long as you are still drawing a pay check the company has rights to that specific knowledge. Once you leave the company still owns that intellectual property, but you have no obligation to help them any more. Most states are At-Will, so you have every right to simply quit at any time. You don't have the right to leave behind booby traps, malicious scripts, or similar destructive schemes. However if the company has a system that is a
Re: (Score:2)
Also keep in mind that the world is a pretty small place. Word gets around. I expect that if these folks make it hard to get rid of them, they will find themselves black balled.
If they go far enough that popular sentiment shifts against them and they are viewed as asshats, then there are indeed negative repercussions. But in most cases the front line hiring managers are no more eager to be replaced by H1-B visa holders than anyone else, and will likely admire people who had the ability to make an effective change.
Of course, if they really manage to stop it, they won't be looking for work.
Re: (Score:2)
It sounds like... (Score:4, Funny)
Organising won't win this one (Score:2)
The power of a union comes in backing up the fight of the small people.
When you're talking about the wholesale disenfranchisement of a workforce then it is completely irrelevant if they are unionised or not.
Re: (Score:2)
Which is why not one union person should trust a fucking cop. Every state where they busted unions they gave the cops a pass so they would be the goons. The cops stood up and protected the politicians against their union brothers.
Cops are fucking scab goons, dont trust the fuckers, dont give them any respect, They are scum.
Re: (Score:2)
Change passwords (Score:2)
Re:Change passwords (Score:5, Insightful)
How did that work out for Terry Childs? Admittedly he did a more extreme thing than that, but the sentiment is roughly the same.
I applaud the sentiment these folks have, but I expect they will barely slow down the wood chipper as they pass through. They are a lot more expendable than they realize, and it will barely cause a hiccup in operations.
Re: (Score:2)
They are a lot more expendable than they realize, and it will barely cause a hiccup in operations.
Any one person is expendable, but not an entire IT department at once.
I've worked for places where it would only take a day or two of IT striking to run the place out of business. Another issue is that you can't easily bring in strike-breakers, because they won't have any access to the systems.
Re: (Score:2)
You typically don't have to go that far, there isn't much you can do on a windows based systems admin wise any more without somebody physically typing in passwords or clicking "allow" on-site. HIPPA is no joke and you can't have EOLed operating systems; so they have to put up with the new windows security measures.
Monkeywrench the replacement training (Score:5, Interesting)
Why not just monkeywrench the replacement training?
Train them wrong. Give them incomplete information. Be anti-social. Make a game and see how long you can go answering only yes or no. Basically make the training as empty and useless as possible. Waste time on useless details. Take long shits.
Obviously, no active sabotage, that would be a problem. But who says you have to be any good at the training?
Re:Monkeywrench the replacement training (Score:5, Funny)
How is this a change?
Re:Monkeywrench the replacement training (Score:5, Funny)
Julian?
I knew a dude who, whenever he started drinking, would preach the gospel of 'Always shit at work, take your time, last year my boss paid me $10k for shitting, I'm always holding it on the drive in...'
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Do you really think that will matter?
Let's say you train them perfectly.
They're still only the top quarter of the bottom quarter of the barrel, in terms of ability or skill. The company may luck out and get a couple who are competent, but in all likelihood these people will be "experts" in a dozen technologies which typically take years to gain familiarity with. This goes doubly so if they're Indian, due to the Indian culture of hopping jobs after 3 months for a managerial position at twice the pay.
It's lik
Re: (Score:2)
True, unless you've been hired to train people, you don't necessarily have that as a skill.
And depending on h
Re: (Score:2)
What about taking a long time to go over the basics even more so if the replacements don't even have a good working of that.
Re: (Score:2)
My vote is for active sabotage. Seriously. IT workers should get together and make an example of one of these companies. If enough of them did it, there would be no proof of who did what left to prosecute. Just like the guy who deleted all the websites the other day. One person "forgets" to unmount the backup directories, another makes a dangerous mod to a script. Maybe someone "accidentally" adds neodymium coin magnets to backup tapes. It would be a shame if that credit card database ended up on tor
right, but... (Score:4, Informative)
>> "they can't fire us for organizing; we're protected by the law," she said. ...but if its a "right to work" state they can legally fire you for any bullshit reason or even not give a reason.
Re: (Score:2)
And you can still get fired before your last day and miss out on severance. Without decent worker protections it is usually better to keep your head down and take whatever crumbs they feel like handing you on the way out.
Re: (Score:2)
Thats exactly why I put it in quotes. get it?
Good Luck to Them (Score:4, Insightful)
For at least the last decade, people have been half heartedly making the occasional comments about unionizing the IT workforce.
I hope that the EmblemHealth employees are successful. It is tough to compete in a global economy, but IT is one of the few professions where there is a serious shortage of qualified talent. If the qualified talent refuses to train their replacements, then those replacements are worthless.
Of course, over the next few years a good portion of the sysadmin skill set is going to be automated so this is very much too little, too late. When you have a team of half a dozen people who can manage thousands or tens of thousands of VMs in AWS or Azure, those 100+ person IT departments start looking bloated.
Also putting pressure on the traditional IT skill set is the continuing downward pressure on hardware costs, BYOD and VDI. There is no need to have a legion of desktop monkeys doing end user support when an organization can rapidly re-deploy hardware and shift applications in real time via virtualized desktops.
As more and more application vendors outsource their support functions and take on the support burden as part of the yearly maintenance cost, the need for in house IT staff will continue to shrink.
There is a lot of M&A activity in the healthcare field right now, and a couple of key vendors are bubbling up to the top of the pile. Within a decade I think we are going to see standardization around a couple of SaaS type platforms. Given all of the data breaches that are going on, individual hospitals and healthcare organizations cannot continue to eat the risk of storing all of that data in house.
Those 2% raises don't add up over time... (Score:5, Insightful)
Many of the workers, about 200 they estimate, are older, with 15-plus-year tenures. This means a hard job search for them.
As an IT support contractor who works one day to one year per assignment, I hate dealing with people who has been around forever in the IT department. They think that being a contractor is a novelty, joke about getting laid off and taking a six-month vacation on unemployment benefits, and have no clue what they're worth in the job market. The worst part is that all their knowledge is inside their heads and not documented anywhere else. I had two friends who ended up working at drug stores because they fell into this trap, took a six-month vacation and discovered that no wanted to hire them with obsolete job skills. Because they stopped learning after they got out of school, they couldn't change their circumstances and settled for less.
Re:Those 2% raises don't add up over time... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
If I have to spend all my personal time learning things for the next job then there isn't much point being in technology at all.
That's the decision my friends made and they're still working as drug store clerks 15 years later, throwing away a BS in Computer Science degree because investing in themselves and their future was too much work .
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Plus people should be able to live to work not work to live. If I have to spend all my personal time learning things for the next job then there isn't much point being in technology at all.
This exactly. LinkedIn has been bugging me for about two months trying to get me to go for a third round of interviewing. They gave me this giant (it is a 2 page list individual topics) study guide and expect me to regurgitate information from it for a 5 hour interview. I already have a job and a great boss. Why would I want to spend my free time studying information that I can look up in 5 seconds just so you can decide whether or not you want to hire me? I have more important things I would rather do
Re: (Score:2)
LinkedIn has been bugging me for about two months trying to get me to go for a third round of interviewing.
LinkedIn is spamming you and you can't ignore it? Turn in your geek cred and don't let the door hit your ass on the way out. :P
Re: (Score:2)
The thing is.. I'm not really clear on what IS a job skill that is in demand.. I could spend the next year learning everything about Java, but when my training is done if there are no Java jobs that are better than the job I had before then I have done myself a disservice. Plus people should be able to live to work not work to live. If I have to spend all my personal time learning things for the next job then there isn't much point being in technology at all.
My thought, on the IT infrastructure side, Cloud, WiFi, and IT project management...
No idea what's in demand on the programming side...
Re: (Score:2)
My thought, on the IT infrastructure side, Cloud, WiFi, and IT project management.
Computer security is a good option for a veteran IT worker.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not to mention the fact...how many instances have you ever seen in your IT career where someone was hired on the basis of some technology s/he picked up in their own spare time? I can't say it never happens, but in 20 years in IT I've never seen it happen even once.
Yet the mantra that we all should be spending every last waking non-working hour chasing after every fad-of-the-we
Re: (Score:2)
Ahh the wet behind the ears kiddies that cant do basic jobs thinking their Microsoft Cert is worth something.
If you're referring to me, I'm 20+ years into my career and MS Cert was 15 years ago.
Anonymity (Score:2)
Might as well give up now (Score:2)
Sorry guys but your goose is cooked. You can't win this one.
Emblem Health is horrible (Score:3)
Re:Refuse to transfer knowledge (Score:4, Informative)
Other companies have made the severance package dependent on helping with the transition. They probably only need a few key people to break ranks and it all falls apart.
Re:Refuse to transfer knowledge (Score:5, Interesting)
Depends on the scope... and all it takes is for one key group of people (*nix sysadmins, say) to refuse and stand firm on that refusal.
Personally, if I worked for EmblemHealth, I'd be doing a couple of things right now:
1) start looking for another job - like yesterday.
2) dutifully record every last transgression made by the organization against HIPAA, SOX, and any other authority the organization is subject to. Then start sending emails to the uppers stating those problems, and asking for $$$ to fix it. Word them as if it's no big deal, but it really is a big deal, so as to give yourself a big cushion. Carefully record the expected refusals and store them offsite if you can. After leaving, blow the whistle, because odds are perfect they haven't complied by then if they hadn't complied by the time you left.
(and now for some fun ones, made mostly in jest, you understand...)
3) "Wow - for some odd reason I can't seem to locate all the really critical documentation! Where did it all go?"
4) carefully scrutinize every last labor law for the state. Do your level best to find transgressions against it (especially when it comes to discrimination laws)
5) as an extension to #5, record every spoken conversation, on your phone if you can. save the bits that could be construed as discrimination or suchlike.
6) "Training is going to take a lot longer than I thought..."
7) "I just got hired on to XYZ corp, but I won't start for a month. I'll be happy to transfer my critical knowledge at consultancy fees of $400/hr..." (just be damned sure you have that critical knowledge, have a job waiting for you, and that said knowledge isn't already documented somewhere).
8) carefully study the BOFH archives... see what you can put to use. ;)
Re: (Score:3)
Yep. wield the "Report the fuckers" hammer like it's going out of style. if you have ANY information of wrongdoing you release it to press and feds and do it anonymously so they cant punish you.
Re:Refuse to transfer knowledge (Score:5, Insightful)
Depends on the scope... and all it takes is for one key group of people (*nix sysadmins, say) to refuse and stand firm on that refusal.
If your refusal to do knowledge transfer prevents someone from operating a system you maintain, then you are very bad at your job. If a bus hit me tomorrow, any of my coworkers could pick up the systems I maintain using the documentation. Worse case, if a bus took out the entire operations team, someone from outside of the company would be able to use the docs to come up to speed.
If you've left such sparse documentation that no one can figure out how to maintain your systems, the company is better off without you.
Re:Refuse to transfer knowledge (Score:5, Informative)
Then you work in a rare company where staff is doubled or tripled up. Many places hire exactly 2 fewer people than they should, and spread all of their jobs out pretty wide.
Almost every place that I've worked has been set up this way to save on costs. Generally people leaving under good terms will continue to get phone calls and emails for assistance for at least 2-3 months.
Re:Refuse to transfer knowledge (Score:4, Informative)
Usually it isn't the case that nobody can figure out how to maintain the systems (eventually). But often the cost of getting replacement workers up to speed, and suffering potential downtime while doing so, is more expensive than keeping the existing workers.
Re: (Score:3)
How about someone with 4 years, give or take, of specialized study exactly in what you do?
Four years of experience working with similar IT systems should be enough to maintain any system I create. You used the words "specialized study", which sounds like just reading books or classroom instruction, which would most likely not be enough. Education is an important part of working in IT, but it does not replace actual experience. Usually when I hand off a product for others to maintain, the highest ranking person responsible for the actual maintenance (aka not management) is in their late 20's, so
Re: (Score:2)
Depends on the scope... and all it takes is for one key group of people (*nix sysadmins, say) to refuse and stand firm on that refusal.
If your refusal to do knowledge transfer prevents someone from operating a system you maintain, then you are very bad at your job. If a bus hit me tomorrow, any of my coworkers could pick up the systems I maintain using the documentation. Worse case, if a bus took out the entire operations team, someone from outside of the company would be able to use the docs to come up to speed.
If you've left such sparse documentation that no one can figure out how to maintain your systems, the company is better off without you.
And who controls the documentation? If the entire IT department simply locked away the documentation, they'd be SOL.
Re: (Score:3)
Depends on the scope... and all it takes is for one key group of people (*nix sysadmins, say) to refuse and stand firm on that refusal.
If your refusal to do knowledge transfer prevents someone from operating a system you maintain, then you are very bad at your job. If a bus hit me tomorrow, any of my coworkers could pick up the systems I maintain using the documentation. Worse case, if a bus took out the entire operations team, someone from outside of the company would be able to use the docs to come up to speed.
If you've left such sparse documentation that no one can figure out how to maintain your systems, the company is better off without you.
And who controls the documentation? If the entire IT department simply locked away the documentation, they'd be SOL.
You can't legally lock up resources owned by the company. You have to divulge passwords when asked by someone in authority. Otherwise, you could end up in jail [boingboing.net].
Re:Refuse to transfer knowledge (Score:4, Insightful)
Other companies have made the severance package dependent on helping with the transition. They probably only need a few key people to break ranks and it all falls apart.
It's easy to measure whether an employee "transfers knowledge". It's very hard to measure whether they do it well. In every large system I've worked on, many inportant details about interacting with the system are "tribal knowledge", not written down, and not occurring very frequently, but hugely expensive for the first guy who figured it out. Simply not passing that along seems the minimum resistance to provide here, even if the labor action fails.
There's the stuff you document formally, that describes some ideal vision of the system, and that's certainly "knowledge transfer", then there's the sneaky details about how the system really works, the misleading error messages, the simple tricks that mysteriously work to fix complex issues and so on. I believe I'd run out of time before explaining those particular details. ... and it all falls apart.
Re: (Score:3)
Usually they offer a somewhat reasonable severance package that you only get if you agree to transfer the knowledge. That's about the only carrot they have, of course, but for many people it works.
Re:Refuse to transfer knowledge (Score:5, Insightful)
Usually they offer a somewhat reasonable severance package that you only get if you agree to transfer the knowledge. That's about the only carrot they have, of course, but for many people it works.
There is, however, a big difference between transferring information and knowledge. Information is "this is how you do X;" knowledge is 15 years of experience doing the job and knowing the pitfalls and how to negotiate them to keep things working. You can meet all the requirements of a severance package by transferring information without worrying about the knowledge. Besides, if Josephine is also losing her job does the newbie need to know to go to her if something bad happens, so she can get help from Bob, who is also now gone?
Re:good luck with that (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
This, right here... but only to a point.
Get too antagonistic and/or too loud in public, and you will suddenly find yourself rather blackballed when it comes to IT jobs in town...
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, the primary people who benefit when expensive workers are replaced by cheaper workers are customers. That should be of particular concern in health care, where costs are through the roof.
Re: (Score:2)
In Healthcare insurance, the people you think of as the customer, are actually the product. The only people who will benefit are the C levels getting bigger bonuses.
Re: (Score:2)
Whether I am "the product" or not is irrelevant; I pay for my healthcare, and if it gets more expensive, I pay more for it.
Yes, with my money. Because of low information voters like you.
Re: (Score:2)
True but if it gets cheaper, you will not see a dime; you can't even opt out without the government fining you.
Re: (Score:3)
they really think
It's more of a case where they're absolutely certain reacting cooperatively will not save their jobs.
Re:Take Your Vacation, Find A New Job (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is a bad IT Staff can still keep the company running. While a good staff if allowed can have the company expand and grow.
However the real question other than years of experience is their staff actually really good at their job?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
They already know they're being outsourced as soon as it happens; the official word is just never given until you're in the middle of training someone who'll be making a tenth your pay.
Now that they realize management has decided to get less expensive and more pliable employees, why wouldn't they gang up on management?
Why should they kowtow to someone for stabbing them in the back?
Re: (Score:2)
The multi-hatters are not paid as well, but seem less likely to be offshored or outsourced because they know the company in and out.
If you want make money as a multi-hatter IT worker, you need to do contract work. I often make 40% more money than someone who spent 5+ years collecting 2% raises for being a loyal worker. The downside is that my jobs are often last anywhere from one day to one year. The upside is that I can't adapt to any corporate environment.