Slashdot Mirror


Oracle to Layoff 2000 Jobs

Joey Benington writes "Oracle plans to cut 2,000 jobs across the Siebel and Oracle work forces after completing its merger with Siebel last week. 'We will retain 90 percent of Siebel's support, development engineers, sales and sales consultants,' said Oracle CEO Larry Ellison. 'Most of the Siebel cuts will be in the back office, and nontechnical staff. The majority of the cuts will be Oracle people, not Siebel.'"

178 comments

  1. And no doubt Oracle's stock will rise . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    . . . on the news. What a screwed up world we live in today.

    1. Re:And no doubt Oracle's stock will rise . . . by blair1q · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Correct, but it's screwed up by design, and it was designed centuries ago under a buttonwood tree.

      Stock = ownership.
      Jobs = cost.

      When you cut costs, you please ownership.

      Do not pretend that being allowed to buy and sell stock in public markets means you care for employees. It does the opposite. It makes you yell at CEOs to constantly improve production rates while reducing costs. In the end, this non-resident-owner system results in a totally amoral business climate. People do not matter, and tenths of a penny per share per quarter do.

      If the SEC required CEOs to measure and report employee happiness, and the shareholders considered that part of the value of their holdings, then it might be important to care. But none of that happens, so people are meaningless except as high-maintenance capital machines.

    2. Re:And no doubt Oracle's stock will rise . . . by cryfreedomlove · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Please consider that often times a lay off is the most ethical thing a CEO can do. If you have 10 workers but you can only afford to pay 8, then it is the ethical choice to lay off the 2 before the finances of the business become so unsound that you have to lay off all 10.

      Besides, there's a collective hiring binge in the Bay Area right now. Most of the layed off folks will probably end up at Google with more pay real soon.

    3. Re:And no doubt Oracle's stock will rise . . . by PinkyDead · · Score: 2, Informative

      There's absolutely nothing screwed up about that.

      Oracle and Siebel will have common administrative services - of which the new company does not need two. I'm sure they won't have two CEOs, so shouldn't that propagate the whole way down the company.

      Laying those people off - while bad for the individuals - makes the company stronger and more secure. And what's the external measure of strength/security - stock price.

      2000 jobs out of 55000 is, say, about 1 in 30. I work with a group of about 30 people - and on average 1 person leaves every month. I don't see why anyone would be shocked at the appalling tragedy of that.

      You need to take a perspective view on this.

      --
      Genesis 1:32 And God typed :wq!
    4. Re:And no doubt Oracle's stock will rise . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yet another disaffected communist. Tell me, comrade, what would you propose the system to be instead?

    5. Re:And no doubt Oracle's stock will rise . . . by jmilezy · · Score: 0

      I think the fat should be cut from the top. We have the largest CEO to entry level worker wage ratio. It's pretty ridiculous compared to other industrialized countries that are doing just fine.

      http://management.about.com/cs/generalmanagement/a /CEOsOverpaid.htm

    6. Re:And no doubt Oracle's stock will rise . . . by Mistshadow2k4 · · Score: 1

      One thing that could be done is to reduce the ridicuoulsy large salaries the upper executives receive. Not only could they afford to keep more workers but they'd show more profit for the stockholders as well. But that never happens, of course. It's a mortal sin if an executive can't afford a new boat and fancy car whenever the whim hits him.

      --
      I dream of a better world... one in which chickens can cross roads without their motives being questioned.
    7. Re:And no doubt Oracle's stock will rise . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This company is notorious for overpaid CEOs while their people don't get raises for several years. They finally got one this year; enough to buy a case of beer ($30) every two weeks. While the CEO makes over $1,000,000 and gives himself bonuses. This is noticable enough that he has even been asked in interviews about it.

    8. Re:And no doubt Oracle's stock will rise . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure, but I'm thinking it would start with people like you against the wall.

    9. Re:And no doubt Oracle's stock will rise . . . by Daytona955i · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But what about when you can afford to pay 10 employees but you want a raise. You then lay off 2, put one of their salaries back into the company, and the other to your paycheck. Is that still ethical?

    10. Re:And no doubt Oracle's stock will rise . . . by pete6677 · · Score: 1

      It's about as ethical as buying something at a 50% off sale when you could afford to pay full price somewhere else. What about the workers' jobs at the more expensive store?

    11. Re:And no doubt Oracle's stock will rise . . . by blair1q · · Score: 1

      you can usually pay a couple of hundred workers out of the CEO's pay alone

      so if the company is running so poorly that it can't afford to pay 20% of its workers, why not just tell the CEO to take the same pay as one of them, and pay the rest?

      because your analogy is a strawman, just like mine, that's why

  2. Only 2,000 jobs lost by JohnCC · · Score: 1

    "The majority of the cuts will be Oracle people, not Siebel."

    Oh thats OK then. 2,000 people is still a lot of people...

    1. Re:Only 2,000 jobs lost by biglig2 · · Score: 1

      I think he's trying to emphasise that the cuts are needed by the business, since if they were just random the tendency would be to cut people you don't know.

      Let's see, the article says they'll be left with 55000, that means they're cutting almost 4% of the combined workforce. woo.

      --
      ~~~~~ BigLig2? You mean there's another one of me?
    2. Re:Only 2,000 jobs lost by Mostly+a+lurker · · Score: 1

      2,000 is indeed a lot of jobs. However, this needs to be seen in perspective. Following the acquisition, Oracle has about 40,000 employees worldwide and rationalization of backoffice operations, at least, was inevitable. A 5% reduction is reasonable. Just hope the integration of the Siebel business into Oracle goes smoothly, else we might be seeing worse layoffs this time next year.

    3. Re:Only 2,000 jobs lost by dsginter · · Score: 2, Funny

      These cuts are so that Larry can maintain his 450 foot personal cruise ship.

      --
      More
  3. Its People! by jamesl · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Oracle to layoff 2000 jobs

    It should read, "Oracle to layoff 2000 people" Not jobs, people. People are losing their jobs. Its a sad thing.

    1. Re:Its People! by elfin_spectre · · Score: 1

      I wonder how much help these people are going to get from Oracle in finding another job. Maybe they will get some retraining. A course on how to say "Do you want fries with that?"

    2. Re:Its People! by illtron · · Score: 1

      Glad I'm not the only one to notice that. But you have to admit, it's also sad when jobs lose their jobs. Or maybe they employ 2,000 clones of Steve Jobs. These are the big questions we should be asking.

      --
      Slashdot: 24 hours behind every other site or your money back!
    3. Re:Its People! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sad? Everyone in the tech industry should get laid off at least twice. Except me, but I'm really fucking good. (and I mean this in the least arrogant sense possible - most of you will never even glimpse my level, never mind achieve it.)

    4. Re:Its People! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It should read, "Oracle to layoff 2000 people" Not jobs, people. People are losing their jobs. Its a sad thing.

      No! They shall be retrained to spider the internet for the new United States police state. Surely they can help us develop an AI program to detect mentions of bombings and cartoons and so defend us against the terrists.

      Get your passport photos taken now, folks. Get out while you still can. It's only going to get worse.

    5. Re:Its People! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or it could read "Oracle to cut 2000 people and 6000 jobs" since who does just one job these days?

    6. Re:Its People! by Ryano · · Score: 1, Funny

      "It should read, "Oracle to layoff 2000 people" Not jobs, people. People are losing their jobs. Its a sad thing."

      Now that you've broken the ice on the pedantry thing, can I just say that it should be "Oracle to lay off 2,000 people"?

    7. Re:Its People! by lucabrasi999 · · Score: 1, Interesting
      I believe the preferred term is "made redundant".

      That's too English. I can do so much better:

      "Workforce Re-allocation"
      "Re-Engineering"
      "Right-Sizing"
      and my personal favorite: "Resource Action"

    8. Re:Its People! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can't you read? It's "Jobs", with a capital "J". As in "Steve Jobs". And since it's Larry Ellison who's running the show at Oracle, no wonder he wants to get rid of all the Jobs at his company. Duh.

    9. Re:Its People! by palad1 · · Score: 1

      No, Solient green is people. Jobs is some kind of urban guru.

    10. Re:Its People! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No compete is only valid in select places. In others, Oracle would be powerless to do anything. Even if the employee signed an agreement, if the law prevents it, the contract would have been null and void from the beginning.

    11. Re:Its People! by Richard+Steiner · · Score: 1

      Unisys just called them RIFs.

      --
      Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
      The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
    12. Re:Its People! by object88 · · Score: 1

      It should read, "Oracle to layoff 2000 people"

      Not just "to layoff", as in to happen in the future, either. Just yesterday, Oracle layed off a slew of people from their Pleasanton office. I don't have any numbers, just word from a friend who was among the "let go".

    13. Re:Its People! by DeafByBeheading · · Score: 1
      Actually, it should read "Oracle to lay off 2000 people". 'layoff' is a noun (from Webster's):

      "Main Entry: layoff
      Pronunciation: 'lA-"of
      Function: noun
      1 : a period of inactivity or idleness
      2 : the act of laying off an employee or a workforce; also : SHUTDOWN "

      'Lay off' is the verb. I know slashdot is not the place for English lessons, but if someone's correcting people, he or she should be doing it right.
      --
      Telltale Games: Bone, Sam and Max
    14. Re:Its People! by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Soylent green is people. Not the people writing crapfloodware for Oracle, though.

  4. I hope they paid their.. by IAAP · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Christmas CC bills!

    FTFA: Delivery of the layoff notices has already begun, and the bulk of the pink slips will be handed out in the next few weeks

    I think it's better to get canned before Christmas. That way, you don't rack up a shit load of credit card debt.

    1. Re:I hope they paid their.. by MaggieL · · Score: 1

      I think it's better to get canned before Christmas. That way, you don't rack up a shit load of credit card debt.

      As long as it's before you do your shopping. I (and ten others) were notified on 12/13 that my 6-month consulting engagement that began in August and was allegedly solid at least through the end of January would be ending Christmas eve.

      As for "we're laying off Oracle people, not Seibel people"...it makes one wonder whether the motivation was "Let's keep the folks whose attitude hasn't been ruined yet by working for a true monstercorp."

      It certainly sends the message "Work hard and make us successful so we can afford to buy your replacements."

      --
      -=Maggie Leber=-
    2. Re:I hope they paid their.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or you could be resonsible and not spend a shitload of money you don't have. How's that for a radical idea?

    3. Re:I hope they paid their.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Much the inverse. I'd rather deal with a reasonable debt even once laid off then be laid of before xmas and see the kids get almost nothing in terms of gifts...

      Besides, I was just laid off 3 days ago (now on disability insurance), and I've already turned down several job offers (good ones too) and I haven't even applied for anything yet, just word of mouth from people who know me (I'll be going back to school for a couple years instead). If you're one of the competent and qualified IT workers, it shouldn't be THAT hard finding a job - even if it's just something temporary to pay the bills until you find that dream job again.

      I've got my share of CC bills and I'm not worried one bit.

    4. Re:I hope they paid their.. by FireIron · · Score: 1

      Ever been laid off a few days before Christmas? I have. It sucks. You get to spend the holidays in a funk about losing your job, and you can't really start networking and interviewing seriously until everybody gets back to work after New Years Day.

    5. Re:I hope they paid their.. by marcomarrero · · Score: 1

      I just cannot believe my luck, on Monday I will begin a 4 month temp job at Oracle...

          I had a 9 month low-pay contract, so I am eating ramen, preparing homemade chicken, no dining out, no christmas gifts, checking trash bins, no cable TV, no phone, rusty car, using clothesline instead of dryer, and I'm curretly deciding cheapest internet possibility (nobody has wireless I can stea.. I mean use). I would not sleep at all if I don't save enough money to survive six months of unemployment or low paying jobs.

          I think the "we're laying Oracle people" is more like a diplomatic and marketing message.

          The corporate ideal is having the company financially strong regardless of employees. The problem is that usually management won't allow getting rid of other management. So it is acceptable to get rid of people, make the new job condition a living hell of the remaining ones, and blame the economy - not the management. If something breaks, they will hire consultants.

    6. Re:I hope they paid their.. by MaggieL · · Score: 1

      I think the "we're laying Oracle people" is more like a diplomatic and marketing message.

      Sounds more like a sexual harassment message to me.

      --
      -=Maggie Leber=-
    7. Re:I hope they paid their.. by Bloke+down+the+pub · · Score: 1

      If by "6-month consulting engagement" you meant a freelance gig, then frankly you're a bit naive believing any promise of how long it will go on.

      --
      It's true I tell you, feller at work's next door neighbour read it in the paper.
    8. Re:I hope they paid their.. by MaggieL · · Score: 1

      If by "6-month consulting engagement" you meant a freelance gig, then frankly you're a bit naive believing any promise of how long it will go on.

      Evidently. Of course, nothing's guaranteed anymore.

      Not exactly "freelance" as such; I was W2 to a contractor who was providing staff through another contractor to the client. Right up to the day the axe fell the offical word was that the gig was solid up to the end of six months and beyond, with a good chance of gettig hired as staff. The manager I was doing work for was not happy, as they'd been feeding him the same line; evidently the writing on the wall was clear to me a bit sooner than to him.

      Be that as it may, the story was that there were some "budgeting issues" (i.e. an accounting problem was uncovered; client ended up restating two years and the stock tanked), and it's over. Happy ending is that that manager liked my work enough to recommend me to a friend of his, and I'm now on staff permanently at another company with a decent salary and pretty spectacular benefits.

      But we all know what "permanently" is worth when the chips are down. :-)

      --
      -=Maggie Leber=-
    9. Re:I hope they paid their.. by Bloke+down+the+pub · · Score: 1

      Yeah, sorry if I came across as having a dig at you. Let's just say that I've been there and have the t-shirt - it hides the scars pretty well.

      --
      It's true I tell you, feller at work's next door neighbour read it in the paper.
  5. How do you layoff jobs? by Jivha · · Score: 5, Funny

    What in the hell does laying off *jobs* mean? I thought employees were laid off(or hired), and jobs were created or destroyed.

    Although this could be correct if it were at Apple. Imagine:

    "Apple lays off 1 Job(s)"

    1. Re:How do you layoff jobs? by humina · · Score: 1

      Oracle decided to hire and then subsequently fire steve jobs 2000 times. Geez RTFA.

      --
      check out the best blog ever:
      http://oehlberg.com
  6. It started yesterday by jerkychew · · Score: 3, Informative

    I have several friends at Oracle. I heard yesterday that they laid off over 20 people from just one floor at my friend's building. Some of them had been there for over seven years.

    1. Re:It started yesterday by object88 · · Score: 1

      I heard yesterday that they laid off over 20 people from just one floor at my friend's building.

      Confirmed. A friend of mine was one of the layed off. His severence included WARN, which means that in an office of 75+ people, when 50+ are laid off, they are given 60 days pay. (Or, that's the brief explanation I got.)

      Luckily, another friend there did make it through.

    2. Re:It started yesterday by javaexe · · Score: 1

      Well It started in siebel last week. In their tempe branch about 4 were let go from around 20 to 30 people. To make matters worse Siebel went on a hiring spree just before the merger and many of the new hires were let go after their training. I heard many in Siebel, San Mateo lost their jobs too

  7. Never understood this attitude by bigtallmofo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It should read, "Oracle to layoff 2000 people" Not jobs, people. People are losing their jobs. Its a sad thing.

    A person losing their job is a scary thing for that person and their family. It's not necessarily sad. What is your philosophy when it comes to this? Once someone is given a job, does that mean they have it for life regardless of performance of the person or the company that person has chosen to align themself with? I can understand this statement coming from a brief moment of idealism or naiveness, but people lose their jobs. That's a necessary and proper action to maintain the economy as a whole. The realistic viewpoint is that most of the people laid off (especially the good ones) will go on to even better jobs.

    That is not sad. Scary for them, but not sad.

    --
    I'm a big tall mofo.
    1. Re:Never understood this attitude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
      Once someone is given a job, does that mean they have it for life regardless of performance of the person or the company that person has chosen to align themself with?


      The person's performance? Of course not! If you're a slacker (or just plain stupid), you need to be shown the door, pronto.

      The company's performance? Well, obviously in the real world they don't, which is why it is sad (as well as, as you said, scary). They may have been sharp as a tack and working their butts off, but because of stupidity, mismanagement, greed and/or even outright dishonesty at the upper levels, they get put out in the cold--usually while those at the top keep their positions until/unless they sink the entire company.
    2. Re:Never understood this attitude by pipingguy · · Score: 1


      The realistic viewpoint is that most of the people laid off (especially the good ones) will go on to even better jobs.

      As each cycle of better software clangs itself onto clueless managers' brains, the managers start to realize that employing real people is a profit negative.

      This is NOT similar to the buggy whip analogy, THINKING people are being replaced now, not just assembly-line workers.

      If you recall, after WW2 many people went into office work. Your experience may be different from mine, but most office tasks are redundant and pointless "show up because we have to pay you"-type work.

      Anyone that has worked on priority projects knows that a smaller team works better and more efficiently. Well, that tends to be true until politics comes into the matrix. With multiple managers and vice-presidents (good signs of excess) comes delays, silly meetings, and time-wasting bureaucracy.

    3. Re:Never understood this attitude by GoofyBoy · · Score: 1

      >A person losing their job is a scary thing for that person and their family. It's not necessarily sad. What is your philosophy when it comes to this?

      Its the lack of control that makes it sad.

      You become reliant on the steady pay, the feeling of worth, the "something to do/place to go" because you belong.

      --
      The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
    4. Re:Never understood this attitude by D-Cypell · · Score: 1

      As each cycle of better software clangs itself onto clueless managers' brains, the managers start to realize that employing real people is a profit negative. ...and as they steam faster and faster into 'streamlining' and 'outsourcing' they will find that the consumers who are on the bottom end of their supply chain have no money to spend on their products or the products of their customers. Not to worry though, the current CEO's will probably have retired by that point!

      Want to solve all of the world's problems in one go? Supress the instant gratification gene!

    5. Re:Never understood this attitude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then you should be happy you lost your job, because being reliant on your job for a feeling of worth is really sad.

    6. Re:Never understood this attitude by JerkBoB · · Score: 1

      ...and as they steam faster and faster into 'streamlining' and 'outsourcing' they will find that the consumers who are on the bottom end of their supply chain have no money to spend on their products or the products of their customers. Not to worry though, the current CEO's will probably have retired by that point!

      Here's the thing that people don't get... Most big corporations are multinationals. They may give the appearance of being US-based, because that's what they were historically. Not anymore. As the US consumer base dries up and the middle-class hollows out, these corporations will simply move on to greener pastures. So, if you want to avoid being left behind, better start brushing up on your Cantonese or Hindi!

      The CEO of DuPont was quoted in the latest Time (proxy):

      "If the U.S. doesn't get its act together, Du Pont is going to go to the countries that do, and so are IBM and Intel. We'd much rather be here, but we have an obligation to our employees and shareholders to bring value where we can."

      The context of the quote is in an article about how the US has been slowly losing its edge in Math and Science. Take a look at the rest of the article, it's pretty interesting (if depressing).

      Bleah.

      --
      A host is a host from coast to coast...
      Unless it's down, or slow, or fails to POST!
    7. Re:Never understood this attitude by D-Cypell · · Score: 1

      I see what you are saying but it seems to me that international corporations mostly make their profits by producing goods in a cheap labour market and selling them in expensive ones. They make their products in places where they can pay cents an hour and sell them to people who make tens, even hundreds of dollars and hour. They need both markets to be successful. They have the power to reverse the market but this doesnt get them anywhere. I still maintain that they are choking themselves.

    8. Re:Never understood this attitude by JerkBoB · · Score: 1

      I see what you are saying but it seems to me that international corporations mostly make their profits by producing goods in a cheap labour market and selling them in expensive ones.

      Do you think that all Asian economies will always remain sources of cheap labor? It's still somewhat alarmist hand-waving to predict that China/India will suddenly become economic superpowers on a par with the US/Europe, but that does seem to be the trend. They are cranking out huge numbers of PhDs over there, and China especially is pouring TONS of government money into research. The way the US used to pour money into research when it was trying to win the space race and cold war. Now the US is distracted by "The War on Terror", and "The War on Drugs", and "The War on Teen Sex." US Congresscritters live and die by how much pork they bring home for their constituents (who aren't necessarily their electorate), which makes them pretty short-sighted.

      Sure, there will always be someone lower down on the ladder to provide the cheap labor (think Africa), but it's a mistake to think that the US will always be at the top of the consumer pile. Check out "The World Is Flat", by Thomas Friedman sometime.

      --
      A host is a host from coast to coast...
      Unless it's down, or slow, or fails to POST!
    9. Re:Never understood this attitude by TopShelf · · Score: 1

      This layoff is the result of a merger that's been going on for some months now - I can't imagine that people were taken by surprise on this. Bottom line is that you can't work in a vaccuum, blissfully unaware of what's going on in your industry. As soon as the merger was announced, I would hope that Siebel and Oracle back-office workers would be polishing their resumes and looking out for their own best interests.

      --
      Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
    10. Re:Never understood this attitude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its the lack of control that makes it sad.

      That's precisely the reason I vowed never to work for a large (over 100 people) company -- unless you're a VP you end up being a line item on someone's budget. A line item that when push comes to shove tends to get cut.

      At least in a small company I'm making a larger impact and it won't be as easy to can a faceless member of a team that's hundreds of miles away.

      Course it comes with a price, one can barely coast in these jobs. But the same is said for ones with large companies. But at least I have some control, and usually know when (and where) the axe is coming from.

    11. Re:Never understood this attitude by maxume · · Score: 1

      I'm right there with you on the not giving a shit about the people, but pedantically, the headline 'Oracle to Layoff 2000 Jobs' doesn't make any sense, the jobs aren't being layed off, the people are.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    12. Re:Never understood this attitude by killjoe · · Score: 1

      "The realistic viewpoint is that most of the people laid off (especially the good ones) will go on to even better jobs."

      Do you have any real scientific data that backs this point up? One would think most people get the same level or worse jobs because they are older and less employable.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    13. Re:Never understood this attitude by KenSeymour · · Score: 1

      It is not just congress but the American people that are, in agregate, short-sighted.
      If the American people were really concerned about the resources going into technical education and industrial research, but the congress wasn't, the situation would not last long.

      You imply that money, not votes is what drives members of congress. That is
      only the case because most people don't pay much attention to politics
      and are largely influenced by campaign ads.

      So members of congress go after the money to buy the ads. If having detailed,
      thought out positions and communicating them to the public was the
      way to get votes, they would do that instead.

      I have some optimism due to something I heard recently: the combination of
      9/11 and the actions of the Bush administration have increased
      the number of people who follow national politics.

      Meanwhile, poverty has decreased in China due to their trade with the U.S.

      Who do you have more in common with:

              1) A non-skilled, low-income, high-school gradute in the U. S., or
              2) A recent Chinese engineering-school graduate?

      --
      "We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them." -- Albert Einstein
    14. Re:Never understood this attitude by Noressa · · Score: 1

      I can honestly say when Oracle laid me off, I wasn't scared. But yes, I was sad... and frustrated. Sad that they didn't leave the jobs here. Sad that they thought more of cost savings then they did of keeping jobs local. Call me nievely idealistic if you want. For a global company (and believe me, they were pushing to be global in every aspect I heard about), it makes sense. You need cost savings (cheap labor, land costs, etc.), a world presence and to maximaze your value/dollar spent. So I was sad to see my job given to 3 people because they cost less. Yay for them, they were/are good people, but it didn't make me happy about the situation. Frustrated because through it all, we got the pleasure of training all the people who were our replacements. Isn't that a joy? By the way, we're letting you go in 8 months time and in that period you get to write up all your job descriptions (work this into the SOX program, whee!) and train. It's not a promise that those who are let go end up in better jobs. Maybe you think those that don't aren't trying hard enough. The last few years have not generally been good for the people in the tech industry. Many companies are simply not hiring, prefering to either outsource more or use staffing agencies to get the same labor at a cheaper rate then if they had to payroll benefits and social security costs. Thankfully at this time, as I understand it , the silicon valley currently has many job openings to take in those being fired so at least those being let go have some small bright spot. (Google alone has 547 openings as stated in a business magazine 2.0 article)

    15. Re:Never understood this attitude by syousef · · Score: 1

      A person losing their job is a scary thing for that person and their family. It's not necessarily sad.

      Tell that to their families, when hopefully temporary but unexpected cash flow problems may result in losing the family home, or having to change schools, or in the extreme case not having food to put on the table. It can take time to find a new job, even if you're good at what you do and you're doing your best to find it.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    16. Re:Never understood this attitude by jafac · · Score: 1

      What is your philosophy when it comes to this? Once someone is given a job, does that mean they have it for life regardless of performance of the person or the company that person has chosen to align themself with?

      My philosophy on this is:

      The American Economy is 2/3 driven by consumer spending. When good jobs are lost, it hurts the entire American Economy.

      And when a worker loses his or her job, it may be because that worker was not a good performer, and did not deserve the job. But more often than not, a worker loses his or her job, because of a failure of management to adequately plan or execute the company's business.

      So why are good workers punished for a manager or executive's failures? Because the manager or executive is better connected? This removes the concept of MERIT from our economy; that capitalism rewards merit.

      So yeah, I'd say that's a sad thing.
      It's a sad thing for the person who lost their job.
      It's a sad thing for the companies who used to sell that person stuff.
      It's a sad thing for the workers creditors who are now screwed because that worker has to file for bankruptcy protection.
      It's a sad thing for the customers of the company that laid off the worker, because the fuckup executive who made the bad decisions that led to the layoff, walks home with a fat bonus, and the worker who executed a flawed plan with skill and professionalism got laid off.
      It's a sad thing for the investors of that company, who may see short-term financial benefit, as a reduction in payroll expenses translates to a short-term gain in profit, but who will ultimately lose money long-term, because a layoff represents a contraction of that company's capacity to produce goods and services, and a loss of the original investment made when the worker was hired, equipped, and trained.
      It's a sad thing for the rest of the workforce who, while they were lucky enough to retain their jobs, now must take up the tax burden of supporting the laid-off worker, or at least his or her portion of financing government operations.
      It's a sad thing for the laid-off workers' kids, who stand less of a chance at being able to go to college, and have lost their future potential to be anything but a fry chef at McDonalds.
      It's a sad thing for our nation, because everyone's standard of living declines when another family is forced into poverty.

      But the saddest thing of all, is that so many people buy into the fallacious reasoning that if companies lay off their workers, that it's somehow good for the company, and good for America.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    17. Re:Never understood this attitude by jafac · · Score: 1

      Corporations aren't choking themsleves.

      Corporations are instruments of Executives and Boards of Directors.

      More accurately put:
      Corporations are being treated as disposible instruments of short-term gain by nearsighted and greedy Executives and Boards of Directors - enabled by ignorant or impotent minority shareholders, and workers, who will be fleeced in the process.

      Q: If you take the pawns off the board, (represented here, by the massive divestment in tech-stocks from mid-1999, continuing through to today) do you still have a chess game?
      A: Yes.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    18. Re:Never understood this attitude by underpope · · Score: 1

      That certainly depends. My father-in-law works for Oracle in their CRM unit. He survived Oracle's acquisition of PeopleSoft; prior to that, he survived PeopleSoft's acquisition of Vantive; prior to that, Vantive's acquisition of Systar; prior to that, Systar's acquisition of Scotch-Bonnett Intl; and prior to that, SBI's acquisition of Moebius. A true worker of the late 20th/early 21st centuries, he's worked at the same job for five different companies. He's worked that job since he retired from the Air Force. He's now close to sixty years old, and his health is starting to fail. He's certainly spry enough to endure the constant travel the job entails, but diabetes and depression are starting to take their toll. Because of all these factors, he will most likely to considered unemployable in his field, especially since he's so close to retirement anyway. Sure he's got savings and investments, but he will be ineligible for some of the benefits he and my mother-in-law have been hoping for from his actual retirement. So. Go ahead and tell him that a man like him who gets laid off from Oracle will go on to a better job. Go ahead. I dare you. I dare Larry Ellison too.

      --
      "A statesman is a dead politician. Lord knows we need more statesmen." Opus
    19. Re:Never understood this attitude by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      We'd much rather be here, but we have an obligation to our employees ...

      Let's stop right there, class. Get out your dictionarys and look up the word 'irony.'

    20. Re:Never understood this attitude by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      The recent H.S. grad, who is saving for college.

      The Chinese engineering school grad is a cookie-cutter clone. Believe me. I've worked in the tech industry long enough to know. The most valuable technical employees in any innovative company are the ones who 'drifted around' long enough in their earlier years to not be cubicle-bound clones. And stuff like that is verboten in China.

    21. Re:Never understood this attitude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Off topic, but, that website linked from your signature SUCKS. It even says it's not a scam when you enter the ZIP code 90210 (would you trust some one who calls himself "not a scam, really!"?). And if you enter the ZIP code 19406 (from insurancegenius.com's whois data ofcourse), it doesn't even compare prices, it links to sites that in turn link to sites that might give you a quote! And it doesn't even remember the ZIP code, so you have to enter 19406 three or four times!

      Of course, I'm no USian, but where I live, there are sites like independer.nl that will just give you a list of going rates at multiple (85) insurers, and if you want you can go on and request legally binding quotes off of the ones you like with a few clicks.

      Anyone who knows US equivalents of such sites, feel free to reply..

  8. Market forces by secretsockpuppet · · Score: 5, Interesting
    And Oracle India has been adding thousands of staff during past couple years.

    http://www.dqindia.com/dqtop20/2004/compdetails.as p?rank=19

    Good old market forces in action, folks. Nothing to see here, move along

    1. Re:Market forces by sunsrin · · Score: 1

      Oracle approximately wants to hire 10000 people in India. Its current strength is around 8600. Here is the 2006 data ..

    2. Re:Market forces by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      And Oracle India has been adding thousands of staff during past couple years.

      Maybe that is why the title says that the "jobs" were laid off.

      Simple solution: Make the 2,000 become B1H's and send them to India on work visas.

  9. Freudian slip by.. by IAAP · · Score: 1

    Larry Ellison.

  10. CFO says 100%, CEO says 90% by Jivha · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I don't know how many people noticed the subtle differences between what Safra Catz, Oracle CFO said and what Larry Ellison, its CEO said.

    "We will retain...Siebel's product development and product sales and marketing teams," said Catz.

    "We will retain 90 percent of Siebel's support, development engineers, sales and sales consultants," said Oracle CEO Larry Ellison. Obviously Catz is the one who must be lying because no one would be daft enough(no, not even Ellison) to say 90% if it were really 100%. Makes you wonder how much trust should be placed in corporate annoucements.

    1. Re:CFO says 100%, CEO says 90% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I work for Siebel. Last Friday they laid off a bunch of people, I heard it was around 300. So, that backs up Larry's statement. As for Safra's statement, she only said the teams would be retained... not all the employees in those teams.

    2. Re:CFO says 100%, CEO says 90% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They could save a lot of their workforce and expenses by dumping many the Siebel developers and support staff and replacing it with bugzilla for trouble tickets. My god, that Siebel trouble ticket system si terrible! The web interface is awful, the Windows client has no proper concept of a "commit these changes only after I hit this button", and the interface was designed in a room filled with an infinite number of monkeys monkeys trying to write Hamlet with a random assortment of Visual Basic commands.

      I've seen technical departments declare open revolts against companies that insist on using Siebel for "standardization" reasons and insist on using Bugzilla or RT for all bugs instead.

  11. Let me guess by bigtallmofo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Sad? Everyone in the tech industry should get laid off at least twice. Except me, but I'm really fucking good. (and I mean this in the least arrogant sense possible - most of you will never even glimpse my level, never mind achieve it.)

    Based on this rant, I'm going to guess you just got a job in IT working at the help desk and can't believe how stupid those idiot users are. You know a lot about Windows XP and still think you know everything. You're likely a few years away from realizing just how little you do know and attaining humility.

    It's OK. Many IT people go through this phase. Best of luck to you.

    --
    I'm a big tall mofo.
    1. Re:Let me guess by KarrottoP · · Score: 1

      Well said. I seem to remember a younger me that never knew how little I knew.

    2. Re:Let me guess by catch23 · · Score: 1

      The more you know, the dumber you feel. After attending all these talks/conferences, I feel like there's nothing good I can contribute to society anymore. The wheel has been reinvented thousands of times and I'm just another guy reinventing someone else's wheel. I really hope software moves into the commodity market.

    3. Re:Let me guess by Hosiah · · Score: 1
      It's OK. Many IT people go through this phase. Best of luck to you.

      Whoa! That was beyond insightful. How do you mod a comment "+5 Zen"?

    4. Re:Let me guess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Believe as you will. Your bitterness has no effect on my reality.

      When I say I am beyond your level, I only mean statistically. There are a few people out there who are as good as or better than me. Maybe 10,000 total.

    5. Re:Let me guess by PhraudulentOne · · Score: 1

      Better at what?

      I'm not saying your not absolutely amazing. You could be the best in the world at whatever it is you do.

      You just haven't mentioned what that is.

          I'm really good with networks and linux/unix systems. Not all UNIX systems, but some. Im also not good with each and every network device out there, but I'm pretty good with Foundry, Alcatel, Cisco, etc. I can program, but only in some languages, and I'm not an expert programmer. I'm a systems/network admin, and I rock at my job, but I'm not the best in North America, or Canada, or Ontario. Am I the best at what I do within 50mi of where I am? Probably. 100mi? Probably not, but I would be in the top few percent (or so I think). I wouldn't even know how to explain what I do in just a few sentences. Everyone thinks I'm an absolute genious, but that is because they don't fully understand what I'm doing day-to-day. I realize I am not a genious - I happen to know a lot of information that most of society doesn't know - that's it. I realize that I know a bunch of information, techniques, etc about the equipment and systems that I happen to work with. I can easily be stumped though. An issue could come up that a first year college student might be able to solve faster than me. I don't know what that issue would be, but it's entirely possible.

      What exactly do you do that your so good at? What is it specifically that most of us (save the 10,000 that you mentioned) will probably never glimpse, let alone reach? Honestly, I am interested.

      --
      You create your own reality - Leave mine to me.
    6. Re:Let me guess by CFrankBernard · · Score: 1

      I can't explain it in a few sentences because most people still won't grok it.

      Avoid this eniffable delemma and the non-groking-invincible-ignorance of most people and provide a link to your job description, or of a related field, or a paper that you wrote or one that is about this subcategory of physics you research and specialize in.

    7. Re:Let me guess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bullshit--I am at least as amazing as I claim. Just look at how many times I've managed to post and compare that with any other user!

    8. Re:Let me guess by Profound · · Score: 1

      Sounds like you need to get dumber until you can do something you believe is worthwhile.

  12. Job Cuts seem to be in vogue by masterpenguin · · Score: 1

    It seems like a popular move for companys lately to fire lots of people to make them seem 'leaner' and more 'competitive' however the us economy will never pick up if well paying jobs keep going the way of the ghost. if this continues eventually there won't be enough well paid employees to buy expencive products therefore reducing the jobmarket more. this is a bad trend imo.

    1. Re:Job Cuts seem to be in vogue by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

      Reminds me of an article I read yesterday on Yahoo Finance. It stated that stocks were rising on both Oracle cutting jobs AND that the US unemployment number fell. It seems like a lot of people say, "I want lots of people to have jobs, but not in companies that I invest in". Seems like a tradgedy of the commons to me...

    2. Re:Job Cuts seem to be in vogue by XMilkProject · · Score: 1

      Well, typically this is occuring becuase the company realized that 30% of their payroll was a bunch of Bozo's that weren't pulling their weight.

      Or in the case of the large US Car manufacturers doing this lately, becuase they realized 100% of their (Unionized) payroll was a bunch of Bozo's that weren't pulling their weight.

      Often in these situations the company will actually be more productive (i.e. get more work done) after all these people are gone.

      Of course in other situations the company is just completely out of money, and goes around firing all the highest paid people regardless of consideration for talent/worth. That just means the company won't be a company too much longer.

      I do feel bad for all these people, and hope most of them were given significant notice of this impending doom. But the sense of entitlement is uncalled for, the jobs were a privilege not a right. And besides, Oracle must look great on a resume, usually I put it in the 'Skills' section, but these people can put it under 'Work History' also! I bet if they are worth their weight in salt they'll find a new job real quick.

      --
      Big ones, small ones, some as big as yer 'ead!
      Give 'em a twist, a flick o' the wrist...
    3. Re:Job Cuts seem to be in vogue by RingDev · · Score: 2, Informative

      This isn't a trimming for appearance, the is the buy out. Oracle bought Siebel. Both companies have accounting departments, human resources, upper management, accounts recievable, etc... There is no need to have 2 seperate accounting departments when 1 can run it just fine.

      And beside, it's not like they are getting dumped into a saturated market. Silicon Valley has thousands of openings in other tech companies. Most of these people will get snatched up by Google (1000+ openings), Yahoo (500+ openings), and Sales Force (150+ openings). http://money.cnn.com/2006/02/09/technology/busines s2_orcllayoffs/index.htm

      -Rick

      --
      "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
    4. Re:Job Cuts seem to be in vogue by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This isn't always why layoffs happen. I've seen companies developing and releasing a good product, project market growth over the next few years that justify bringing some new staff, then have to cut back wildly as the market evaporates. It happened to a lot of good companies in the dotcom crash, and in the wake of 9/11, even if the companies were well run and actually doing good work.

      When people won't buy even good products, or stop traveling out of justified fear, you have to scale back your staff. The trick is to dump, without a big golden parachute, those "big idea" people who thought that all that expansion was a good idea and spent all the investor's money on office chairs for executives.

    5. Re:Job Cuts seem to be in vogue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have to be kidding.

      People who don't pull their weight get promoted, not fired.

    6. Re:Job Cuts seem to be in vogue by MKalus · · Score: 1

      And beside, it's not like they are getting dumped into a saturated market. Silicon Valley has thousands of openings in other tech companies. Most of these people will get snatched up by Google (1000+ openings), Yahoo (500+ openings), and Sales Force (150+ openings).


      Umm, transfer of skills?

      It is by far not that easy to jump in most jobs from one tech company to the next. Sure, if you're a DBA or C Programmer or SysAdmin it is no big problem, but if you are specialized on some of the CRM applications (which one would think being Oracle / Siebel etc.) then the market and air is a lot thinner.
      --
      If you want to e-mail me, use my PGP Key.
    7. Re:Job Cuts seem to be in vogue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You could do what UPS is doing.

      Decide to 'consolidate' your entire technical helpdesk staffing, then throw your field support and helpdesk support personnel into the same pool and hand out the remaining technical jobs to those that have length of service over technical aptitude to avoid the possible lawsuit over discrimination.

    8. Re:Job Cuts seem to be in vogue by RingDev · · Score: 1

      Most of the positions these people held (so far as I have heard) are not specilized technical, they are administrative support.

      -Rick

      --
      "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
  13. Saving some money for a shopping spree? by tanguyr · · Score: 3, Interesting
    --
    #!/usr/bin/english
  14. You forget... by IAAP · · Score: 2, Insightful
    that here in the US of A, spending beyond our means is a way of life. [Joke]Why, we have to. Without out us, the rest of world's economies couldn't grow. So it's a moral imperative that we run up huge amounts of debt! [/Joke]

    I, myself, ask that nobody give me anything for Christams. I don't need anymore stuff. I have too much stuff as it is. But, unfortunately, there seams to be this "law" somewhere that people have to buy "stuff" for others and spend waayyy too much money.

    I really wish Christmas was about friends and family. Getting together and having a nice meal, party, or whatever - no gifts! Sadly, that's not the way it is - at least here in the US of A.

  15. I guess they should not lay off those people by w.p.richardson · · Score: 1
    and let the business environment pass them by to a point where they go out of business or get absorbed into some other company who fires everyone. 100% job loss later is better than 10% now, right?

    It's too bad for the people who are losing their jobs, but there are always opportunities for talented, resilient individuals.

    --

    Curb CO2 emissions: Kill yourself today!

    1. Re:I guess they should not lay off those people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It's too bad for the people who are losing their jobs, but there are always opportunities for talented, resilient individuals.

      Yeah, but how long is it going to take for someone to get a job? Most of those people (we're talking Bay Area, folks!) are living paycheck to paycheck, barely making it on, say, $50K/year. Figure a month per 10K salary to find a comparable job. So for each month, you are losing 2 months pay. That's why financial advisors are always saying "keep 6 months liquid assets on hand in case of problems."

      Some hot-shit C guy could probably get another job right away. Do you really think those are the people getting laid off? No way, it's back-end admin staff. My personal experience as a hot-shot db person and dba has been, if you get another job while you are hot, you get it right away, but if you start from a dead stop after a layoff, the month/10K has been somewhat accurate, dead-on even if you call it losing 2 months pay for each month. The more bizzare thing IMO is that I've been both perm and contract, and that has made zero difference in how long jobs last (no matter what the nominal length of the contract was). People hire me, then realize what a great deal they've gotten, then new damagement come in and I'm boned. So, is an average of 2 or 3 years loyal or job-hopping? I would have thought not.

      VW is laying off 20000.

  16. This is NOT an Oracle thing -- it's an acquisition by PeeAitchPee · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Layoffs are inevitable when one company buys another one. It's not "sad," it's a part of working in high-tech. Redundant positions are eliminated while typically (most of) the best people in sales, marketing, PS and dev are kept. Legal, HR, finance etc. usually totally get wiped out. Get over it and use it as an opportunity to find a better job. As for the Larry-bashing crowd: say what you want about Oracle and / or Ellison, but the fact is that it didn't really matter who bought Siebel -- layoffs were inevitable. The same thing happens when Google buys a company. I've personally been through two of them already in my relatively young career and everyone knew that layoffs were part of the deal. Besides, do you really think people who had been working for Tom Siebel were worried about something like losing their jobs? ;-)

  17. Oracle == Soylent Green? by sczimme · · Score: 1


    Its [sic] People!

    I though Soylent Green was people?? Dang it.

    It should read, "Oracle to layoff 2000 people" Not jobs, people. People are losing their jobs. Its a sad thing.

    Yes, it is a sad thing (no sarcasm). However, I would like to point the grammar finger back at you and mention that "layoff" is a noun; the headline should read Oracle to Lay Off 2000 People

    --
    I want to drag this out as long as possible. Bring me my protractor.
  18. Here's how by aapold · · Score: 2, Funny
    Delete from payroll
    where salary > 150000
    and upper(lname) != 'ELLISON';

    commit;
    --
    "Waste not one watt!" - CZ
    1. Re:Here's how by NewKimAll · · Score: 1

      According to the article it would be:

      09:10:58> Update Employees SET UNEMPLOYED_TYPE = 'LAID OFF'
      WHERE UPPER(Employer) IN ('SIEBEL', 'ORACLE')
      AND UPPER(Skill_Set) Like '%NONTECHNICAL%'
      AND UPPER(Department_Type) Like '%BACK OFFICE%'
      AND Salary
      2000 rows deleted.

      09:11:02> commit;
      --
      Oh crap, I just accidentally laid off people from my company with this post. Rollback! ROLLBACK!!!!

    2. Re:Here's how by NewKimAll · · Score: 1

      *Sigh* Curses, foiled again by HTML. I used "<" instead of < Doh!

    3. Re:Here's how by nschubach · · Score: 1

      Update Employees SET UNEMPLOYED_TYPE = 'LAID OFF' WHERE Employer IN ('SIEBEL', 'ORACLE') AND Skill_Set Like '%NONTECHNICAL%' AND Department_Type Like '%BACK OFFICE%' ... You don't need UPPER in SQL when using LIKE comparisons...at least the MS versions of SQL. Functions acting upon the column names in the left of equal sign 'WHERE' clauses only force SQL to not search indexes as well, so your query saves precious time and money if you remove the upper function altogether. Think of the company!

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
  19. 2000 jobs = 2000 people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A loss of 2000 jobs can mean that a substantial larger amount of people lose their job. Think part time workers, for example.

  20. Oracle Sails vs Oracle Sales by digitaldc · · Score: 1, Funny

    Come on, how else is Oracle going to afford to keep sponsoring their elite yacht racing?

    --
    He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
  21. How to survive - long-term by IAAP · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Will be through ownership. I detest this treatment of people like cogs as much as anyone, but the way survive this globalization trend is to become one those owners.

    It's the owners who are receiving the benfits of this mentality who are going to win with globalization - not the workers. They're fucked. Labor, including smart people (90th percentile - .1*1 billion = 100 million very smart people in India alone!), is a commodity, now.

    Another avenue is creativity. Not just the artsy folks, but being creative with new products and services and try to create your own asset to own.

    Just what I've been hearing from folks who are making it in this new economy.

    1. Re:How to survive - long-term by blair1q · · Score: 1

      You can be eaten, burned as fuel, rendered for industrial grease and glue, and used to make lovely seatcovers.

      Do not ever mistake the sedentary state of the masses for an inability to take what is theirs by dint of number. When you become as dehumanized as your corporate interest makes them, it's not as sanitary.

  22. These layoffs were predicted by aviator · · Score: 1

    Two months ago the WSJ predicted that Oracle would layoff 2,000 people after the merger, so this news should not be a surprise.

  23. Lay off the Billionaire by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FUCK Larry Ellison! This guy has more money to spend than all of his workers put together, yet he is still greedy for more.

    It is a pity the IT industry is not more unionised, we could stand up to this sort of shit if we were.

    Is anyone here prepared to get out in the streets to support their fellow IT workers?

    1. Re:Lay off the Billionaire by jcnnghm · · Score: 0

      You should take some Econ courses.

      --
      You don't make the poor richer by making the rich poorer. - Winston Churchill
    2. Re:Lay off the Billionaire by MSenhanced · · Score: 1

      > FUCK Larry Ellison!

      Dude, do you know how I know you're gay?

      Yeah, it's a scary time and it might seem sad but I think it's the best decision for the both companies and the economy as a whole. If these good people have valuable skills, they should have no problem finding another position and learn from the experience.

      --
      I write sig's like I know what I'm talking about.
    3. Re:Lay off the Billionaire by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should quit blindly believing what econ profs teach.

  24. Realistic viewpoint? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most people will find better jobs? You're presuming that there happen to be other companies around that can better exploit these worker's skills. Better than Oracle anyway. That use of the term good is a tautology. The ones who could find jobs were good by definition and the ones who couldn't were bad by definition. My impression is that bad workers are better at finding work than good workers. They *have* to be.

  25. what is sad.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what is sad is the increasing centralization of corporate power which is going on.

  26. severance packages? by DeveloperAdvantage · · Score: 1

    Anyone out there know what kind of severance packages these employees will get?

    --
    FREE - Java, J2EE and Ajax Audiobooks for Software Developers - www.DeveloperAdvantage.com
    1. Re:severance packages? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Last year a special "retention plan" was put in place in Siebel that mandates larger severance packages in the event of layoffs after a company takeover. That plan is now in effect, and regular employees get around 3 months pay... Directors get more, and VP's get something like a year's pay. It's good to be the king!

    2. Re:severance packages? by bladesjester · · Score: 1

      Last year a special "retention plan" was put in place in Siebel that mandates larger severance packages in the event of layoffs after a company takeover.

      This explains why Oracle is talking about laying off primarily their own staff and not the staff from the acquired company...

      --
      Everything I need to know I learned by killing smart people and eating their brains.
    3. Re:severance packages? by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

      A friend of mine worked at Oracle until yesterday afternoon. He worked in a release group. He is getting a month of health insurance, four weeks pay, and a week's pay for every year he worked there.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
  27. Let me put it this way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is an unlimited supply of ordinary opportunities for ordinary people.

    Extraordinary people (Larry Ellison) have to make their own extraordinary opportunities.

    Don't worry about those 2,000 people. They'll bounce back in no time.

  28. Re:This is NOT an Oracle thing -- it's an acquisit by Mistshadow2k4 · · Score: 1

    Dude - it is sad. What's sadder is people like you who say it isn't sad, it's all about what's "good for the orporation" and actual human beings don't matter. Oh, by the way, chances are good a loved one of yours may die of cancer, heart disease, diabetes, etc. But it's not sad, it's just a fact of life. Get over it and find new loved ones.

    --
    I dream of a better world... one in which chickens can cross roads without their motives being questioned.
  29. VARCHAR2(4000) by shadymike · · Score: 1

    There went the last chance to have a text column larger that 4000 bytes!

    1. Re:VARCHAR2(4000) by Zerbs · · Score: 1

      As someone who's worked with Oracle databases for 8 years, if you really need something that big, it makes more sense to use a CLOB anyway instead of taking up so much of a data block with just one field. If the data starts small and grows up to 4000 bytes then it is even worse as will probably result in alot of chained rows across multiple blocks.

      --
      "22 astronauts were born in Ohio. What is it about your state that makes people want to flee the Earth?" Stephen Colbert
  30. Re:This is NOT an Oracle thing -- it's an acquisit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Besides, do you really think people who had been working for Tom Siebel were worried about something like losing their jobs?

    We sure as hell were. First due to the general direction of the company and business, and then after the surprise announcement that we were being bought out by the last company we ever thought would do so.

    As others have written, the cuts are primarily back office where there's job duplication such as with HR and IT. Siebel already went through two painful rounds of cuts over the past few years; whoever's still with us is top-notch, although a few people in crucial departments have been cut not due to competence but petty management behavior (we miss you, EK). We've cleaned our deadwood and it's Oracle's turn: four percent is pretty low for a merger of this size.

    And of course Oracle's CRM department is going to take a beating. Our software works (when configured properly) and theirs didn't which is why they bought us instead of just crushing us in the marketplace. Oracle almost took down a couple companies with their crappy CRM (I know, I know, but relatively speaking) and year-late implementation. Our software works and is pretty much just being rebranded.

    I wonder if we're going to change the color scheme.

  31. Huh? by mstefanus · · Score: 1

    2000!? I tought there was only 1 Jobs and he's working for Apple. Am I missing something? Pixar made clones?

    1. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think even a big company like Oracle is big enough for more than 1 Jobs.

  32. It's human nature. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When you're on top, the people below matter to you less.

    When you're at bottom, those above you matter more.

    We have a word for this, it's called Greed.

  33. Layoffs because of open source? by DogDude · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I know that this could never be measured in any kind of way, but I have to wonder... how many of these 2000 jobs lost are a result of open source competition? Are these jobs the direct result of Postgre SQL giving away their product? Is this the start of the decline of IT as we know it, because of Free software?

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
    1. Re:Layoffs because of open source? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, because free software really kills the big guys. I mean, look at Microsoft - it's nothing but a skeleton of a company.

      Open source is just another competitor in the marketplace. Layoffs come because CEOs want to make $210 million instead of just $200 million. They come because of the desire to assimilate the competitor through acquisitions: resulting in a monopoly.

      *GREED* causes layoffs.

    2. Re:Layoffs because of open source? by lowe0 · · Score: 1

      None. It's a corporate acquisition. If PostgreSQL were hurting Oracle's bottom line, would they be going on a shopping spree?

      Note: my opinions are not necessarily those of my employer.

  34. Corporate Announcements by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Makes you wonder how much trust should be placed in corporate annoucements.

    Always start out assuming a corporate announcement is a pile of stinking malicious lies until your research proves you wrong....

    Me?? A cynic!?!? Naaaaaah.....

  35. Scaring More Away by blueZhift · · Score: 1

    Granted, mergers and buyouts almost always mean big layoffs, but this is just another story that will scare people (in the U.S. at least) away from the tech professions. Next I suppose Ellison will make some speech about how it is so hard to find qualified workers in the U.S. because the public education system is so bad.

  36. And yet ... by SABME · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ... various government and tech leaders in the U.S. are waving their hands and bemoaning the shortage of tech workers. And wondering about the decline in students interested in engineering and computer science.

    HELLO!??! What kind of idiot works their butt off studing for four years to enter a career that is stressful, demands never-ending study, and calls for ever-increasing sacrifices of personal time in return for a job that offers middling pay and doubtful prospects for long-term employment?

    Oh wait ... I'm that kind of idiot ... Never mind.

  37. Try to speak English by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can layoff 2,000 people. You can cut 2,000 jobs. But you can't layoff 2,000 jobs.

  38. BS by Ramjet350 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Anyone who tries to justify what Larry did is a moron. I was laid off yesterday from Denver and everyone can tell you it was not about duplicate positions. My manager told me that they never even contacted him to ask his opinion on who to let go. It was all chosen by some executives in California who just wanted to reduce numbers.

    They even had the balls to tell us they might call us if they realized it was a mistake and wanted you back. Does that sound like the "ethical" way to do things for a company?

    1. Re:BS by MKalus · · Score: 1

      They even had the balls to tell us they might call us if they realized it was a mistake and wanted you back. Does that sound like the "ethical" way to do things for a company?


      The problem for the company is that if they start asking around people will find out before the fact and that could cause some bigger problems.

      Sure it is not "ethical" in that sense, but at least they are open enough to admit it. I was caught in a similar layoff once, I wasn't called back, but they ended up calling back an entire group of 50 people based on contracts because those who did the firing werne't aware of a project deadline taht couldn't be met anymore once they walked them all out of the door.

      The bigger the company, the harder it is to do a "fair" layoff I think.

      Not an exucse, just an observation.
      --
      If you want to e-mail me, use my PGP Key.
    2. Re:BS by Zerbs · · Score: 0, Troll

      See this? It's the world's tinyest violin playing just for you.

      --
      "22 astronauts were born in Ohio. What is it about your state that makes people want to flee the Earth?" Stephen Colbert
    3. Re:BS by object88 · · Score: 1

      The problem for the company is that if they start asking around people will find out before the fact and that could cause some bigger problems.

      Such as? When I was working at Avaya, I survived several rounds of layoffs before finally being let go. And yes, my managers were being very critical of who was being let go at what point. I saw that axe coming... I just started a project that had a lot of more expirienced engineers already onboard, so I wasn't critical. If they had randomly let me stay and some other people go, that project wouldn't have been as well off.

      Just being randomly let go is stupid.

  39. "Layoff" is a noun. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For heaven's sake, learn the basic rules of grammar.

  40. Future Acquisitions by MrZaius · · Score: 1

    Wonder what they'll do with the smaller companies they're lined up to acquire. Business Week says they'll be snapping up Zend (PHP), JBoss, and something called "Sleepycat".

    http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/feb 2006/tc20060209_810527.htm

    1. Re:Future Acquisitions by krumms · · Score: 1

      FYI; Sleepycat wrote Berkeley DB ("bdb" - the open source database engine behind most Subversion repositories)

  41. Re:This is NOT an Oracle thing -- it's an acquisit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's really sad is your lame-ass equation of the loss of a job with the death of a family member. Get a clue and either quit whining or go work for the government or in some unionized industry where you can continue to be another happy cog in the glacially-paced wheel, punch your 35 hour / week clock and get your 13 weeks of vacation a year. Some of us actually are willing to take on greater risk for greater potential reward and don't want you lightweights fucking it up for us. Got it?

  42. exactly - and more by BitterAndDrunk · · Score: 1
    Also - my guess is the developers and whatnot they'd be laying off are the ones developing Oracle's CRM product, which was/is a dog.
    The whole point of Oracle picking up Siebel was to get the best-of-breed CRM package and integrate it into the Oracle suite. Naturally this causes some redundancies (on the Oracle side) and people are going bye-bye.

    The only irony is anybody at Oracle who thought their job was safe when the acquisition began; if you're on the dog product you should be updating your resume as soon as you smell rumors of an acquisition.

    --
    You better watch out, there may be dogs about . . .
  43. none by BitterAndDrunk · · Score: 1

    This is trimming redundancies in 2 CRM packages that are soon to be one CRM package. AFAIK there's no such thing as an open-source CRM solution.
    Of course, AFAIK there's no such thing as a proprietary CRM solution but that's just the cynic in me.

    --
    You better watch out, there may be dogs about . . .
  44. Re:This is NOT an Oracle thing -- it's an acquisit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're stupid. Most young tech workers can only dream of getting laid off. You get severance pay at your original salary plus unemployment for two months. If you get another job during those two months (pretty easy right now in the bay area), it's like getting double salary.

  45. Two things are hitting Oracle here by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    First, they're outsourcing more work to India, according to printed reports in the Wall Street Journal (not free, so no link). Hence the reductions.

    Secondly, they're getting their hat handed to them by MySQL. I attended (via webcast) a MySQL introduction, and probably 90 percent of the online chat Q&A was from Oracle Developers and DBAs like me asking about migration from Oracle and tutorials on the same, as well as differences such as the more TSQL-based triggers (instead of the PL/SQL ones that I learned first).

    Thirdly, my guess is their CEO wants to buy a new boat to race in the America's Cup with ...

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    1. Re:Two things are hitting Oracle here by Zerbs · · Score: 1

      A better bet about Oracle loosing marketshare is not MySQL, but EnterPriseDB (based on PostgreSQL) http://www.enterprisedb.com/ There's also Oracle compatibility modules for Ingres and even Firebird. Those will take on alot of SMB clients and MS SQL Server 2005 actually becoming a more mature enterprise product also challenges Oracle in the mid-sized database field.

      --
      "22 astronauts were born in Ohio. What is it about your state that makes people want to flee the Earth?" Stephen Colbert
    2. Re:Two things are hitting Oracle here by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      you could be right that people are going to PostgreSQL as well.

      I can only speak from my experience, and there were a lot of Oracle devs and DBAs on the MySQL presentation, all of whom seemed fairly competent.

      So, my guess is open-source and other DBMS choices are eating away at Oracle's former dominance. Sure, there were a few people migrating from Microsoft's DBMS, but most who were on there were Oracle, or so it appeared.

      To be frank, the only reason I was good at PL/SQL triggers is that three of my first five computing languages were PL/1, PL/C and a variant of PL/C.

      I won't miss it.

      So long as I get my Triggers and at least row-level locks, I'll be fine. Field locks were never that useful. And getting an open-source free Migration Toolkit makes it that much easier to switch to MySQL.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  46. Re:This is NOT an Oracle thing -- it's an acquisit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    LOL what greater potential reward? Here's a clue: you're not a star and there is no reward. But, keep trotting towards that carrot, my friend.

  47. Overreacted... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I mean... I downloaded JBuilder, tried it, didn't like it, and removed it. Since I was using Netbeans all along I just kept on using it. No need to make a big fuss about it and start sacking people, sore lusers... IMO you're better off working for Sun.

  48. Not only were these layoffs predicted, but by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    Two months ago the WSJ predicted that Oracle would layoff 2,000 people after the merger, so this news should not be a surprise

    They also noted that Oracle was, coincidentally, outsourcing jobs to India.

    None of this is a coincidence.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  49. Severance by dalamar70 · · Score: 1

    On a positive note, getting laid off is (usually) better than having the whole company shut down. At my last company the people who got laid off also got a few weeks of severance pay, while those who stayed a few more weeks till the end didn't get anything. Hopefully the Oracle/Siebel folks will get a good severance package and also have a network for finding new jobs. Or maybe SAP will come calling. :)

  50. One monor problem with your argument: by Roadkills-R-Us · · Score: 1

    ``it didn't really matter who bought Siebel -- layoffs were inevitable.... do you really think people who had been working for Tom Siebel were worried about something like losing their jobs?

    That doesn't quite jive with this:

    ``The majority of the cuts will be Oracle people, not Siebel.''

  51. Its Soylent Green! by MS-06FZ · · Score: 1

    Yeah, I was like "Oracle's gonna lay off Steve Jobs? 2000 times?)

    --
    ---GEC
    I'm but the humble pupil, seeking to snatch the scratchbuilt pebble from the master's fully articulated hand
  52. No Problem landing another job. by WaterDamage · · Score: 1

    Most of the /. posts make it sound like these poor bastards are in really bad shape. Most Oracle DB admins, engineers, developers are in very high demand so the layoffs are nothing but a temporary vacation for them as they move into new $100,000k+ per year positions elsewhere.

    The company I work for looses a lot of Oracle DBAs to bigger fish elsewhere all the time. I guess the Oracle DBAs here must hate making the measly $120k they offer at this company.

    Nothing new to see here, move along...

  53. Building Closed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder if these layoffs have anything to do with the oracle building being closed yesterday at lunchtime.
    I work right down the street from the Oracle headquarters and I often go there for lunch in one of the main buildings restaurants. I went there yesterday only to find security guards turning everyone away. I asked what was the problem, he said there was a 'problem' that would be cleared up soon.

  54. Stop whining, start buying by christoofar · · Score: 1

    Instead of whining about the machinations of capitalism, join it. Go here, or here, or go through your bank, open an account, and start buying the shares these companies have out on the market.

    Way before Katrina came along, I bought $10,000 worth of VLO, back when this company was $10. My mouth was watering after they became the biggest oil refining company in the United States (they took over Diamond Shamrock not too long ago).

    After Katrina hit, I had well over 5x my original investment and dumped the stock. So, now I have almost a year's worth of wages I'm sitting on, and I can take this money and go put it somewhere else.

    These companies that layoff workers are only doing it for one single reason: to please Wall Street. Any Wall St. analyst would be shocked if a merger or acquisition did NOT involve layoffs, since that is primarily a driver for the merger in the first place (increase market share + lower costs == higher returns).

    So, if the company is doing the layoff is a sincere, sound manner... why not invest? Oracle and SAP have pretty-much shutout all the other accounting (er... "ERP") systems on the market... MAS-90/100, Solomon, J.D. Edwards, and a myriad of other big speciality systems... they are ALL going the way of the dodo.

    POS vendors are probably the next target to be consolidated after this (which I would breathe a HUGE sigh of relief if that happened... do you know how many different POS systems are out there???)

  55. In Similar News... by Chagatai · · Score: 1
    Larry Ellison also eats another puppy today.

    Seriously, just like the Pope looking like the Emperor from ROTJ, Ellison looks like Beelzebub.

    --
    --Chag
  56. Haha... let me take a wild guess... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  57. Tech workers? by PCM2 · · Score: 1

    I think you're not reading the right message from those government and tech leaders. I don't hear them saying the U.S. needs more "tech workers." I'm hearing them saying we need more scientists and mathematicians. Science is the font of innovation. That's where new ideas and new products come from, ultimately. As we transform into an "information economy" -- in other words, a society whose primary asset is intellectual capital -- we need people to generate new ideas or we won't have anything to sell.

    That doesn't mean we need our universities to churn out more middle managers at Oracle -- or more coders, for that matter. When I hear "tech worker" my brain translates that into "clock puncher." What does it mean to be able to "work tech"? At one time the automobile was revolutionary technology. But the only people who get hired for their ability to work an automobile these days are cabbies and truck drivers.

    --
    Breakfast served all day!
    1. Re:Tech workers? by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      I think you're not reading the right message from those government and tech leaders. I don't hear them saying the U.S. needs more "tech workers." I'm hearing them saying we need more scientists and mathematicians. Science is the font of innovation.

      Yes, but we have bigger lawyers to exploit them :-)

      Anyhow, people are not going to become scientists if the pay is relatively low and stability is non-existent. Science careers are becoming like Jury Duty: It is "good for the country", but pays shit.

      By the way, there has never been objective evidence of a general "tech shortage". Lobbyists claim it and congress conviently believes because cheap-labor lobbyists line their pockets with campign donations. It is Moneyocracy at work.

  58. Welcome to the club... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It appears that Oracle likes to lay off people in February. Larry likes to play game with the people in Oracle. I'm glad I'm out of it and never will go back to and place that loves back stabing and murderous play like that. I rather go to Iraq at least I have some weapsons to fight back.

  59. jesus that's silly by BitterAndDrunk · · Score: 1

    This is 2 CRM products in development, of which Siebel is the better of the two. So, you lay off the ppl on the dog. It has little to do with their outsourcing efforts, however you feel about them.

    --
    You better watch out, there may be dogs about . . .
  60. College Professor by Dareth · · Score: 1

    I had a college professor tell our computer organization class that, "You now know more than 99% of the world about how computers work." All because we wired some circuits on a bread board and talked a bit out binary arithmetic.

    --

    I only look human.
    My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
  61. Wow, that's amazing by Swisssushi · · Score: 1

    I had no idea that many of Steve's relatives worked at Oracle!

    --
    Swisssushi - When the going gets tough, get some tenderizer
    1. Re:Wow, that's amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you mean that lot Steve Munch's relatives are working in Oracle? If yes, nothing new in that, Oracle is a company where you can fill your family and friends and help your friends and family rise up in the hierarchy.

      If one don't have any friend or family then no luck.. You will never grow. How much ever good you are.. I am the person facing this.. It's high time and I guess I should start looking..

  62. Re: Jesus that's silly but Christ that's true by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    This is 2 CRM products in development, of which Siebel is the better of the two.

    I'm not disagreeing that, of the CRM products, Siebel might have a better version. But when we're talking Oracle layoffs, you should read the Wall Street Journal analysis of their cash flow, rather than focus solely on one product sector.

    And if we see x,000 jobs created in India within six months of x,000 jobs eliminated in the US ... well, you may not want to do the math, but most people will.

    Economics is the allocation of scarce resources amongst many choices - and if Larry wants to finance a new team or buy out some Open Source products, he may decide to renege on his word and deep six "extra" employees.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --