Slashdot Mirror
Linuxgruven Deorbits
An Anonymous Coward writes: "There's a story at Newsforge about some of the weirdness happening at Linuxgruven. Several ex-employees and students are telling what happened to them. It's not pretty." Considering the skeptical reports for months from readers about Linuxgruven's employment practices (and that we had a short story about those as well as one about the recent layoffs), this doesn't come as a complete surprise -- it's still a shame that employees are stuck with empty bank accounts because of management, though.
Before condemning the management team of Linuxgruven, did anyone ever consider getting the facts? For example, they were in those roles less than two months!!!! The CFO was in his position for two hours!!! They inherited the "train-to-hire" program and wanted to discontinue it, but due to the founders (one of which still served as President- the only position with true legal power), they could not do such. If I remember correctly, one of the executives had his own expense check for $15000 bounce. This does not appear to be the fault of these guys. If anything, they were set-up to take a fall. The founders built that company and the executives hired tried to fix it. However, by that time, there was little that could be done.
Linuxgruven's business failure means:
Posted by HedgeCore:
It's sad that the open-source spirit doesn't remain when it comes to business. Expensive certifications that essentially mean nothing take precedence over experience and knowhow... Damn the man.
I replied to the 45K a year job offer about 2 months ago. Called and got an interview the next day. I knew something was fishy the second I saw the application. There was a line for "Fees".
Once I started talking to the guy and he asked me a few questions he started pushing all these classes and tests I have to take. Then gave me the stupid networking exam. "What does HTTP stand for?" and "What does FTP mean?"
What's really sad, the guy interviewing me didn't even know what slashdot.org was.
Well, after reading the article this is one of the few moments I feel good about the german system. There is a mandatory unempoyment insurance for every employee. If your company declares bankruptcy you
get all the money the company owns you, up to 3 salaries. If you get unemployed without fault you can get 60% of your last income for 6 months. And of course you will never lose your full health insurance (even if you live from welfare).
Very interesting thoughts. Almost as if they had come directly from the ex-CEO himself. Fortunately for the ex-CEO, he knew that he had no legal responsibility as CEO. Another interesting thing to note is that the CTO had no Linux experience. That would seem to make it difficult to make technology decisions regarding Linux.
The management claims that they were trying to change the train-to-hire program, yet I have emails of them defending the train-to-hire program as recently as February 28. Even after they realized the money was not available to pay the employees, it took them several days to resign. I'm very curious to find out why that is, but they have been silent on that issue. (They've been rather vocal on other issues.)
Software sucks. Open Source sucks less.
Interesting theory, except for the fact that the person who made the statement (Kara) was not conned into giving up money to get hired -- she was hired because she already knew Linux. She was instead conned into thinking that the company was a legitimate Linux services company.
I think the point she was making is that the owners were not intending to screw their employees, but were not terribly experienced at business, and have to suffer for their decisions, including the executive managers they chose.
Software sucks. Open Source sucks less.
The CFO was someone that the CEO had previously worked with. On Monday or Tuesday, he looked at the books and realized that there wasn't enough money to make payroll for the preceeding Friday.
The CEO apparently tried to solve the problem (not clear on this part) and on Wednesday or Thursday sent an email to all the employees saying that the owners were going to step back and that some people had been promoted. (No mention of financial difficulties.) Then on Thursday night the management all resigned. It is unclear what happened between the email and the resignations, and nobody's talking.
Software sucks. Open Source sucks less.
Well, there goes another warning about Linux certification. I've always Linux certifications were overrated.
The way I figure, if you want to learn Linux and networking, you can set up a 2 node network for under $200, if you look through the classifieds and garage sales. Another $100 for documentation and $20 for network cards and $50 for a printer, and you can learn more hands on with your small home network than you ever could in a classroom.
If I were a hiring manager, any wannabee Linux administrator that did not have a network at home would get a big strike against them. If you can't spend a few hundred and some time at home to polish your skills, how are you going to stay current in the office?
> Why can't employers just treat their employees fairly? Is there some built-in tendency of managers to be flaming a**holes? Must one be a flaming a**hole to
> become a manager?
>
> Seriously, I'd like to know. I'm interested in becoming management.
My two cents, based on the fact I've worked both for managers who were great & those who were fully toilet-paper compliant. And my impression is being an asshole is the easier way to do things.
Think about it: the good managers -- the ones who not only deliver to both their bosses & to their subordinates -- but also are available at a moment's notice to put out fires are also the ones who put in the hours. They know the company depends on their doing a job, & do it.
Meanwhile, the others feel that their job is nothing more than making sure that their subordinates do the work. And believe that failing to put their name on any successful project they are in the least connected with is a Career Limiting Move.
This latter course can be more successful over the short run -- or if the person runs their own small business -- than the former. (Or if the manager works in a call center.) But eventually that kind of manager has to jump ship one step ahead of her/his karma catching up with her/him. (Or, then again, when it does.) And eventually, unless the asshole comes into a windfall & can retire, even this strategy of cut-&-running will be a sign to future employers.
At least this is what I tell myself when I wonder what has become of former supervisors . . .
Geoff
I think I see a trend here. Maybe for them it really would be easier to muzzle the entire internet than to produce p
Heh! Why do non-managment folks always believe that managers are always assholes. I know a lot of managers that aren't assholes and are as productive as those that are assholes. I know a lot of employees that are assholes, and would be more of such is given a little power. I do all I can to run my department and whenever I reprimand someone for not showing up for a week it gets out that I'm a major fucking asshole.
Seriously, it comes with the territory. When you are in management, a lot of the assholish stuff suddenly makes complete sense. All I can say is be justified, have documentation and most importantly be consistant. Those are the keys to being a good manager.
blah
Please. Don't degrade computer science by saying these are 'computer science-related' certifications. They have nothing at all to do with computer science.
Certifications are, in some cases, reasonable to expect on a resume. You might expect your DBA to be certified on Oracle, if that's what he has to run.
It's doubtful that a serious company would ditch an applicant with several years of real experience simply because they don't have the certification. In fact, a serious company would actually say 'we'll hire you, but you have to agree to get your certification once hired. We'll pay for it'
Because CS isn't about networking, or the technology, it's about algorithms and programming.
CS has basically nothing to do with network admin. It's ignorance on the part of many cmopanies that they require CS degrees for every type of technical job.
Or to boot, most good adminst I've met with degrees have degrees in non-computer related fields. One had a masters in Archaeology, the other had a degree in pharmaceutical chemistry, and yet another had a degree in biology.
People have to take some blame for this. Not every employer can be trusted; not every business model is sound. Did anyone signing on with them ask about their funding? Stability? Did anyone check otu the qualifications of the managemetn? CFO?
It strikes nobody as odd that you should have to pay thousands of dollars to qualify to apply for the job?
And if it were me, I'd be out the door the second a single check bounced, based on past experience. With proper accounting, a company will NEVER, EVER bounce checks. I'd rather they didn't pay me on time than bounce a check.
For me, this sentence neatly sums up all of the inspired entertainment the entire ".com" phenomenon has provided over the past two years. Honestly: Linuxgruven comes up with a business model straight out of "The Carpetbaggers", innocent 20-somethings fall for it in droves, then the wounded themselves feel sorry for the con artists who started the whole thing because the poor babies had to suffer the consequences of their own decisions and actions. The indignity of it all! Friends, geeks, fellow cynics: this is an innocence to be cherished! This is a naievete to be wrapped in silk and put away for special occasions down the road! This is a Kodak moment! :)
Well, the fact that every IT stock is low right now isn't Linux's fault but there's a huge difference between the value crashes, to be fair. One year ago, IBM was at 115, now it is at 90. A year ago, Microsoft was at 100, now it is at 55. A year ago, Red Hat was at 60, now it is at under 6! VA Linux is down from 90 to 3! Clearly, the Linux / Open Source stocks have come down *WAY* more than the closed source IBM and Microsoft. Even Sun that has struggled is "only" down from 45 to 18 from one year ago. For some of the less known companies on the OTC list, there's Bluepoint Linux software down from 15 to 0.56 and Linux Wizardy Systems down from 2.5 to 0.06.
I think that this situation is pretty much the same as the fate of the dot-bombs. First some people start doing something useful and innovative (web, Linux). Then they start getting media attention, followed soon after by droves of worthless money-chasers who believe they can make a quick buck off the "new thing."
I saw one reference to "carpetbaggers." I think that is right on point. These folks are trying to turn Linux into a get-rich-quick scheme -- they are not part of the Linux community, and we should be careful not to describe them as such.
I don't have anything against companies making money from Free Software, but then I am not particularly for them either. Hopefully the whole shake-out (both in the dot-com sector, and the Linux sector) will soon be over. I don't think the shakeout is particularly important, since those who actually care about doing something new and useful are free to still spend their time doing it -- that is what Linux is about.
This does not hurt the Linux community, because these carpetbaggers have nothing to do with the Linux community (never mind what the media tells you). The Linux community is not about stock options.Steve
Democracy is a poor substitute for liberty.
When I passed my RHCE exam the other week I asked how many there were. I was number 2,406.
Good exam though...
If they're not going to be getting enough from your paycheque to cover the employee startup expenses, then chances are that you're not going to be getting much work.
I'd say much the same thing about their startup scheme. If they're not going to be getting enough work out of you to cover a $2,500 course, chances are that they're not getting work.
This thing smells of scam from day one. Had I seen that setup, I would have walked away on principle. The latest incident (new exec comes in, followed by mass resignations), sounds like a legal smokescreen (now who are you going to sue?).
My suggestion s to start talking to your favorite lawyer, and keep dibs on the executive (both old and new). I would expect that most of the money is traveling with the old exec.
As for the founder being a good meaning guy who just got blindsided by some nasty management, he was in on the design of the company and it's business plan, he whould have helped hire the initial exec and management. He had (or should have had) a general, or even a specific understanding of what was being promised to studends and how that coincided (didn't) with the 'real' contracts that they were getting.
Now, it's possible that the founders and exec were really well-meaning, and didn't have the slightest idea as to how bad things were and how their trainees were gonna get hosed -- if that was so, then I would talk about them being extremely stupid and/or culpably negligent. In either case, they should not only be left holding the bag, they should have it stuck over their heads before they're hung out to dry.
--
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
"We're currently taking inventory of our current resources, assets and equipment," they wrote.
Translation: We are running like hell for the Mexican border
"As soon as we get a clearer picture of what we have, we'll know when you can expect to get your money."
Translation: We are counting the cash as we go, you can expect to see your money when the Pope gets that sex change operation and shacks up with a black man named Fred.
"We are doing everything we can to get you your money as quickly as possible"
Translation: We are now spending your money as quickly as we can... my my, what $10 will get you with an underage girl in Tijuana!
Ceci n'est pas une sig.
If you received Federally-backed financial assistance funds to pay for private career school training, you also can call the Department of Education to report your problem. The toll-free number is (800) MIS-USED, or in the Washington, D.C. area, call 202-205-5770.
(from the FTC website)
I feel sorry for the people who aren't getting jobs, and for Linuxgruven for having to try and get something new going in an economic downturn, but that's the breaks.
Personally, it looks like they were offering to employ people who gave them cash...that's unconscienable, if not outright illegal.
Note on the webpage that several "exec types" are no longer employed by linuxgruven.
I really. really like Linux. I hope that Linux can succeed, and these people fess up if "bribes" were taken.
Treatment, not tyranny. End the drug war and free our American POWs.
See my user info for links.
This shows an important lesson I was taught while working with my university's career center. When you are applying/interviewing for a job, you should be sure to know as much as you can about the company. It is not only impressive during the interview, but it is important for deciding if you are a proper match for the company.
When you look to take a job at a company, you should understand their business model. A company that gets most of its revenue from prospective employees is much like a pyramid scheme. The growth and references continue to expand the employee base, and new employees fund existing employees salaries. But if there is no additional revenue stream, in this case, no clients EVER during the life of the company, then the pyramid will crash like a deck of cards under its own weight.
It is not easy to see that your job is going to last, provide promotions, etc. But it is easy to see the jobs that are near certain dead ends. And like many slashdot readers, I could see this one from months away.
And a college degree would have stopped this happening how? Or how does having a college degree automatically give you a broader range of skills than someone who has spent 3 or 4 years doing actual IT work? Not having a degree has never been a disadvantage to me, except that I can never work in the USA or Switzerland - something I don't particularly care about anyway.
"
I think the main problem with a lot of managers simply stems from the fact that they were promoted into that position from being a normal worker. This means they have no experience or education in the field of management.
"
...and the problem with the other half is they have no experience of being a normal worker.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. (Einstein)
I think the main problem with a lot of managers simply stems from the fact that they were promoted into that position from being a normal worker. This means they have no experience or education in the field of management.
I'm certainly not a professional in the field by any means, but I took a course in Organizational Behaviour myself, and I can tell you for certain that it is a complex subject that every manager (potential and current) should stay current on. It will stop a lot of this "he's an asshole -- wait, no he is" kind of bickering. That type of argument doesn't work, and you'll notice that if you apply Organizational Behaviour concepts well you should be able to use virtually anyone's skills in some job (most people who bother to apply for jobs do want to work, really, just some aren't being motivated properly / are misplaced in the current job).
This book seems like a good place to start (sorry, I don't remember the exact title of the book I used in College)...
If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
It think the whole affair was a scam.
Bibo Ergo Sum.
Could someone please post the names of the the CTO, COO and CFO of Linuxgruven? I'd like to see where they go next. It's been a little hobby of mine for about a decade or so. It seems to me that the public has a pretty short memory or else an awful lot of tolerance for screwups at the executive level. It seems that some executives destroy company after company after company. I don't know whether that's just coincidence or not -- most people don't live long enough to run enough companies to draw statistically valid conclusions without a *lot* of data, which I haven't gathered yet. Anyway -- this information doesn't seem to exist on their web site (not even in google's cache) and I can't find any mention of these people in newsgroups or on the web...
I know of a similar company here in the North East USA whose primary executives, including people like the Dean of the school are not programming types at all, but are sales executives. Literally, some are former used car salesmen.
It's a mess, or as one person described it, "a dog's breakfast".
In my opinion, it is very easy to see how this sort of thing happened at Linuxgruven. Speculation only, of course, but quite believable, and easy enough to connect the dots.
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
--SARCASM MODE ON--
Yes, the people in college study things that they have no interest in.
--SARCASM MODE OFF--
See, thats the major diference between college nerds, and real geeks. College kids learn stuff because they have to, to get through college. Geeks learn stuff because they want to. A geek will usually go much deeper into a subject than a college nerd, who will tend to do the bare minimum to get through the course.
That is quite a broad generalization. You're right that some people that go to college waste their time, and barely scrape by. Many people don't take advantage of the experience. But you are deluding yourself if you think that no one does.
Even so, it is true that many times a bacheloreate education does not provide the depth that individual study might provide, but that is the whole point of it. You are spread thinner because it makes your knowledge more complete, which makes you not only a better communicator, but also gives you the tools to learn things in depth with little trouble.
So in the time it's taken you to get through college, with your broad but limited "knowledge base" and no real world experience, I've taught myself C, C++, OS theory, Linux, software design, software development lifecycles, software testing, and plenty more besides, all because I wanted too, and with indepth knowledge. All that time i've been working and making money, and have a four year head start in the job market over you.
Well, I don't want to get into a pissing contest, because that is really not the point of my message. But lets compare just for the heck of it. In my 2 years of college so far, I've learned: advanced mathematics up to differential equations and graph theory, algorithm analysis, C, C++, Perl, Lisp, MATLAB, Electronic Circuits, Logic Design, Programming Language and compiler design, O/S theory, Artificial Intelligence methods (neural networks, decision trees, A* search, etc), Embedded Systems, and Philosophy of mathematics and epistemology.
I may be a rare exception, but I'd like to think that there are many people that get the same if not more out of their own education. Plus, I still have another 2 years. This summer, I am doing research and getting a part time job developing a front end in Perl for IBM. The following years, I am looking into doing some research at an engineering facility in the area.
If we both went for the same job, I have no doubt i would score over you on knowledge and experience. So remind me again why college is so important?
I hope that some of my message has reminded you of the value of a college education, but if not, I will go on.
A person with a college education has a piece of paper the proves that he is a person with broad knowledge. He has also proven that he can get through the thing, which means alot to an employer.
A person with a college education is typically eligible for higher paying positions within most companies. Companies like to see the formal education when the decide to promote people, and likewise when they cut people, people without college are typically the first to go. Whether this is fair or not, it is the way of the world.
Typically, a person with a college education is more effective at communicating than someone without.
All of this is nice, but its really not my main point. My point was that many people are lured out to the field because the IT field is (was?) dying for people to fill positions, regardless of their experience. If this slowdown continues, these 'emergency' people are going to go away. The job market sees people without college as manual, expendible labor, correct or not. This is why many of you tend to get dicked around by companies when you really don't deserve it.
I have a friend that is doing quite well now, without one, but he went through a pretty nasty legal battle with the company he worked for to get where he was today. They had him work for them for 2 years, building their network, and then fired him and hired the person he was training into the same position he was filling.
Apparently, he was too expensive. At any rate, this is how the business world works. They chew you up and spit you out, if you let them.. Today they will pay you 100k/year to code in Delphi, tomorrow, you are unemployed. The only defense to this is to have a broad knowledge base, which may be possible to get without going to college, but it sure helps.
And it was a risk, because there was no guarantee that once the training program was completed, the students would be able to pass the examinations that would qualify them for SAIR certification -- something Linuxgruven said candidates must have in order to get the $45k dream job. One particularly juicy carrot on Linuxgruven's stick was the contract clause that stated students would receive a full refund of course fees after one year of employment."
Sadly this is the commonest thing in Indian Training Institutes. And it is growing unabated even though more and more students are losing their parents hard earned money.
There's always sufficient, but not always at the right place nor for the right folks.
I knew nothing about Linuxgruven until the recent /. story about SAIR's disapproval of their training practices. At that time I posted that I thought that the people who thought that they could get a $45K job for just passing a test were setting themselves up, because a company that does that will never make it, and unfortunately, I was right. And you never do want to be right about something like that.
In my opinion, there needs to be a SWIFT and immediate criminal investigation of Linuxgruven's CEO Matthew Porter and their management. I believe that they were running a ponsi scheme, paying employees out of the money they were getting for "training" new people. Linuxgruven obviously never legitimately did the business they claimed to be doing. If it's not a ponsi scheme, it's close... The article suggests that new employees who jsut passed the tests were then given the job of training new victims... Which is why this smells of a ponsi scheme.
Now people who forked over a considerable amount of money for questionable education are left holding an empty bag. And employees are screwed amd left with bounced checks and bills.
Bouncing paychecks is a serious crime in some locales. I say that Linuxgruven's CEO and management need to see the inside of a jail cell.
In the Newsforge article, these bozos are planning to start a "competing" business. I'd advice everyone to stay the hell away from whatever business that is.
Unethical business practice should not go unpunished.
=== The price of freedom is eternal vigilance