Slashdot Mirror


Volt Asks Temps To 'Vote" For Microsoft Pay Cut

theodp writes "In an email sent Friday evening to its Microsoft temp workers, Volt Workforce Solutions asked the techies to 'vote' to agree to a 10% pay cut. From the email: 'We want to support you in continuing your assignment at Microsoft and respectfully ask that you respond by going to the upper left hand corner of this email under the "Vote" response option and select, "Accept'" by close of business Tuesday, March 3, 2009. By accepting you agree to the [-10%] pay adjustment in your pay rate.' Microsoft managed to keep the Feb. 20 email detailing plans to slash rates from leaking while it pitched its Elevate America initiative at the 2009 Winter Meeting of the National Governors Association, touting Microsoft skills as just the ticket to economic recovery."

86 of 412 comments (clear)

  1. My kind of democracy by mc1138 · · Score: 5, Funny

    You can vote anyway you want, the only catch is that there is only one choice.

    1. Re:My kind of democracy by pxlmusic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      wolves, chickens, and all that

      --
      "If for any reason you're not satisfied with our service, I hate you."
    2. Re:My kind of democracy by Cally · · Score: 4, Informative

      HP / EDS pulled the same stunt. Oh, except that the CEO's taking a 20% cut in his basic (but pulled a $40,000,000 bonus last year), and there's no vote involved.

      http://go.theregister.com/feed/www.theregister.co.uk/2009/02/19/hp_pay_cuts/

      --
      "None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." -- Goethe
    3. Re:My kind of democracy by commodore64_love · · Score: 5, Interesting

      >>>You can vote anyway you want, the only catch is that there is only one choice.

      That's true. My company has not done this yet, but I've heard from a neighboring company that the temporary Contract workers were told they must take a $10 cut, otherwise next week would be their last. A few stubborn persons refused, and were asked to leave, but most are still working with a reduced pay.

      This "Microsoft vote" is mere formality; if you don't take the cut you may as well pack-up your desk and take a long, unpaid vacation.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    4. Re:My kind of democracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      The choices should have been:

      1) I do not accept a pay cut. I understand that Friday will be my last day of employment, however, I do not go out much and do not have many friends.

      2) YES, please CUT MY PAY. Management at both Microsoft and Volt should be commended for their tough minded leadership during hard economic times. THANK YOU SIRS PLEASE GIVE ME ANOTHER!!!

    5. Re:My kind of democracy by commodore64_love · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Contract workers get paid by the hour.

      So that would be from $50 to $40 for me. Which I'm okay with that, because I'd still be making double what anyone else in my family makes. I'm not greedy. I just want a decent job with air conditioning & a chair to sit on.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    6. Re:My kind of democracy by msobkow · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm starting to think the economy is just an excuse for pay cuts. Last I'd heard Microsoft was still making a very healthy profit.

      I've been through the forced reductions myself, but it was while I was contracting for JPMC, and our cuts were based on the post-Y2K "economy." The only ones who should have been hit with the cuts were the mainframe COBOL programmers who no longer had Y2K work to do, but everyone got hit. A couple contractors quit rather than take the pay cut, but they were by far in the minority. (JPMC was a good gig -- worth taking a few bucks cut compared to hellhole client sites.)

      --
      I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    7. Re:My kind of democracy by QuasiEvil · · Score: 4, Insightful

      FedEx did it too, about two months ago. CEO took a 20% cut, various levels of management took 7.5-10%, and everybody else (well, everybody salaried, aka me) took 5%. The bigger hurt was the suspension of the 401k match.

      Still, honestly given the economy, I'd rather see this than layoffs. Not that there aren't people I'd like to see gone, but that needs to come as part of the normal, "You're a moron/sloth, go pursue other career opportunities" methods. Layoffs always seem to get 75% of those people, and another 25% that were invaluable but pissed off the wrong person.

      The more layoffs we get, the further down the bottom of this thing is going to be. So, given that a company's options are lay some people off or just make everybody take a little pain for the collective good, I'll take the collective pain right now. I think it's better for the economy as a whole.

    8. Re:My kind of democracy by mark-t · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Actually, it's probably slightly more than that.

      If insufficient numbers of people vote for a pay-cut, they _will_ be in the position of having to do layoffs, and in all likelihood, the people who will get laid off in such a case are the people who the company best figures it can replace with a more cost efficient alternative (read as: new graduate willing to accept a lower rate of pay). They can get away with this quite legally as long as they pay adequate severance packages.

      How a person votes would likely not affect whether or not they got laid off, should a mass layoff occur, and it would really bite for the individual who voted that they would take a pay cut to get laid off anyways because not enough people voted that way, but hey.... nobody ever said life was fair.

      But by all rights, Microsoft _should_ be conducting this vote anonymously... so that they have no means of knowing which employees voted no and which voted yes, because if they don't and they only lay off people who voted "no", then they could be setting themselves up for a large number of constructive dismissal lawsuits... (and what's worse for them is that the employees would have an official paper trail to prove it!). Further, by conducting the vote anonymously, Microsoft would be publicly presenting the notion that they are genuinely trying to come up with methods of retaining their employees in hard economic times because they value them all, rather than simply terminating the ones who don't vote the way they want.

    9. Re:My kind of democracy by rtb61 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In this case it is far worse. This is a 10% cut in the rate to the employment agency, so they have to cut the employees wage even further, on costs, insurance, profit etc, employees themselves are likely to get around double that cut.

      I see that you have some problem with economics. Reduced pay for employees results in reduced spending, which generates lay-offs. A lot of people base their debt payments upon the salary level with out much gap between them. A 20% pay cut will often result in bankruptcy, as the employees can not just whip up a quick letter telling their creditors they will now be paying them 20% less and if they don't like it, they wont pay them anything.

      Now is the pay cut to enable M$ to survive or is it to allow M$ to maintain it's current profit margin or even increase them. M$ has a history of having a total disregard for the costs of it's actions upon other people and companies as long their own profits keep increasing.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    10. Re:My kind of democracy by Vellmont · · Score: 4, Insightful


      If insufficient numbers of people vote for a pay-cut, they _will_ be in the position of having to do layoffs,

      Nowhere did I see that this was a binding vote. I'd say it's more of a straw poll for Volt to see if they can get away with this. For instance, where did they come up with 10%?

      Hell, if enough people vote yes, why not increase the cut to 15%? From the other posters comments I'd guess Volt doesn't really care about their employees and will try to squeeze them as much as possible. The "vote" is merely a means to figure out how hard to squeeze.

      --
      AccountKiller
    11. Re:My kind of democracy by glwtta · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A lot of people base their debt payments upon the salary level with out much gap between them.

      If that's true, then a lot of people are complete idiots. It really doesn't seem logical that employers should factor in their employees' overspending when making these kinds of decisions.

      --
      sic transit gloria mundi
    12. Re:My kind of democracy by marcello_dl · · Score: 2, Funny

      The style's more like dogbert the evil HR director's, from http://dilbert.com/.
      Only, he'd have labelled the vote button "Back to inbox"
      purrr purrr

      --
      ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
    13. Re:My kind of democracy by fractoid · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I always find it interesting when you have an ongoing agreement between a company and an employee, whereby the employee works X hours and gets paid $Y, and then the company decides it can simply ask the employee to work longer for less money. Usually it's couched as a temporary thing but frankly, once the employee has agreed to do more for less, why would the company ever go back to the original agreement?

      Something similar happened at my (now ex-)work, they ran out of funding and told people to go home until they could pay us. Then a couple of weeks ago they sent out an email saying "hi folks, we really need to get working again to keep the company viable, no we don't have any money but you'll start work again Monday right?". To which the answer was "um, no" for me, but a surprising number of people said "oh, uh, ok then".

      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
    14. Re:My kind of democracy by tomhudson · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This leads to the paradox that the more everyone tries to pay off their debts, the higher the debt becomes in real terms (eg in relation to inflation / deflation adjusted incomes).

      Nope. The longer someone avoids paying off their debits, the bigger the debt becomes (thanks to the wonder of compound interest). Then, when their interest rate goes up (as it must, since rather than reduce debt, they've increased it and become a higher risk), you get a second whammy.

      If nobody had debt, all earnings could be spent on direct consumption, without some (a lot, in many cases) being bled off by interest payments.

      We've just come to the end of a very unnatural cycle - one where people not just continually rolled over debt, but also threw in additional debt with every roll-over, to the point where they were using new debt as their chief way of making debt payments (that's what average spending of 103% of income really means - people are using their credit cards to make payments on their cars and mortgages).

      Deflation? After a decade of overinflated housing, we NEED a decade of housing deflation, just to get back to historic norms.

      Bail-outs? Why bother - this just rewards the greedy, penalizes the prudent, and shows that nobody in government knows the meaning of "keep your powder dry". All the bailout money is not just a waste - it also carries the hidden cost of missed opportunities to both rationalize the car and banking industries, and to invest elsewhere. Every dollar spent out bailing crooks is a buck taken away from schools and infrastructure and retraining - money that could BUILD the economy.

      For those who eschewed debt, delaying gratification, deflating prices back down to historic norms brings the reward of buying at proper value, not bubble prices. Call the bailouts what they are, a global "tax on stupdiity and greed."

    15. Re:My kind of democracy by xilmaril · · Score: 2, Informative

      In this case it is far worse. This is a 10% cut in the rate to the employment agency, so they have to cut the employees wage even further, on costs, insurance, profit etc, employees themselves are likely to get around double that cut.

      I see that you have some problem with economics. Reduced pay for employees results in reduced spending, which generates lay-offs. A lot of people base their debt payments upon the salary level with out much gap between them. A 20% pay cut will often result in bankruptcy, as the employees can not just whip up a quick letter telling their creditors they will now be paying them 20% less and if they don't like it, they wont pay them anything.

      Now is the pay cut to enable M$ to survive or is it to allow M$ to maintain it's current profit margin or even increase them. M$ has a history of having a total disregard for the costs of it's actions upon other people and companies as long their own profits keep increasing.

      You're right. This is what's going to happen. This is what most people do.

      That said, what kinda idiots do this? Why do so many people believe they shouldn't have any contingency plans in life? Next month, I could be hit by a bus. If I do, I live in Canada, so medical costs will be okay, I have credit card insurance to cover a year of interest payments on that (it only costs me $5/month), and I save enough money that I'll be able to live, if miserably, for at least 6 months. Why don't more people do this? And don't say they can't, because the people who are going to be missing their mortgages had enough money to buy a house, apparently, so they should have gotten a cheaper one or continued to rent until they could *actually* afford a house. gah!

    16. Re:My kind of democracy by RepelHistory · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This sort of thing is going on everywhere. That's why it's a recession. I think it's a little unfair to say that right now it's all Microsoft's fault that they have to cut wages because consumers can't afford their products (not that I'd shill out $150 for Office even in a good economy). It's not like companies can just say, "Wait a minute... if we don't lay people off and/or cut wages... this recession will end!" If that were possible we wouldn't have recessions at all.

    17. Re:My kind of democracy by BimotaGrrrl · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm a Volt employee working at MSFT. I never got a Friday email from Volt about this. All I received from them was an email this morning asking me for what I thought was a test on the version of Microsoft Outlook that I was running. Volt has been rolling out new timecard tools, so I thought this was an attempt to collect information on software versions to prepare for a future update/rollout. It wasn't until I checked /. this morning that I learned what was going on. Thank YOU! See my response to Volt this morning: From: [name wittheld] (Volt) Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 12:19 PM To: 'AskVolt'; [] (Volt) Subject: RE: Non-viewable Vote button Importance: High I thought the email below was simply a test to see if Volt employees were running the right version of Outlook for some future tool roll-out. However, I've since read from the web an article which implies that I should have received an email last Friday night. I never received such an email, nor since. I was never informed on what I was voting on. Now I know that this email is for Volt employees to vote to receive a 10% pay cut. I take BACK my "Accept" vote. I do NOT accept that at this time. Why? Because I don't know enough about it. I don't know if Volt, the company, is also reducing their profit margin to MSFT for my billing by 10%, and further, I don't know if the non-MSFT Volt employees and managers are also taking a 10% pay cut. Truly, if I hear that the answers to my questions are Yes, then I will be glad to join in and take a 10% reduction in pay; but not until then. If it's important enough for Volt staff to do it, then I'm willing to join in. On the surface, this seems like a sneaky thing for Volt to do; but I'm sure it's just an oversight. From: [] (Volt) Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 10:47 AM To: 'AskVolt' Subject: RE: Non-viewable Vote button Accept From: AskVolt Sent: Friday, February 27, 2009 9:41 PM To: AskVolt Subject: Non-viewable Vote button If your version of Outlook does not allow you to view the 'Vote' response option in the upper left hand corner, simply reply by stating "Accept."

      --
      Meat. It's what's for dinner.
    18. Re:My kind of democracy by deets101 · · Score: 2, Informative

      What pissed me off the most about the HP deal is the way they did it. They did not ask for a vote, they sent out an email (after business hours of course) informing all US employees. Then they scaled back the 401K matching to a floating scale. Then, to add insult to injury, the very next day HP sends out the financial report from the last quarter and they met their goals and barely missed their stretch objective. This has happened the last 5 quarters, but still they take away from the employees.

      This seems to be the HP way..... Two years ago, we had a record quarter (Q2, I think) for sales but at the end of the year we were told we would not get bonuses because the numbers were a little lower than expected in another quarter.

      --

      --
      My parents went to Slashdot and all I got was this lousy sig.
    19. Re:My kind of democracy by el_chicano · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The bottom line difference between Fascism and Communism is labels. Both are murderous tyrants. Bandits.

      The historic clash between Communism and Fascists was about who would get credit for the creating a worldwide utopian society. Mostly it was over which set of elite get the power and money.

      Contrast that to people like the Founding Fathers. George Washington could have been king, but gave up his power and wealth to create something greater. They never advocated a Utopian society. They just wanted a place where WHITE MALES were allowed to live a life without without tyranny.

      There, fixed that for you.

      --
      A man who wants nothing is invincible
    20. Re:My kind of democracy by ryanov · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's the kind of language that puts you on the same side as the employer, sounds like to me. "Do whatever you want as long as you're not going to take away my job!" No thanks.

    21. Re:My kind of democracy by ctonchev · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Funny how the statement falls apart when you replace personal with Bank and companies with Taxpayers

    22. Re:My kind of democracy by marcello_dl · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm not sure there are two sets of elite involved in communism and fascism. To govern sheep you need dogs on both sides.

      --
      ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
    23. Re:My kind of democracy by Perf · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sigh

      I realize the Founding Fathers were not perfect. The founding of America was a step in the right direction.

      Slavery existed in Africa long before slaves were sold in the Americas. People fought, bled and died to outlaw it in the U.S. It still exists in Africa and other parts of the world and I understand it is on the rise. (For the record, I believe it was and still is despicable.)

      Ever hear of a guy called John Adams? He was a founding father who didn't own slaves.

      William Penn?

      Japanese -- Wow! I did NOT know the founding fathers threw Japanese Americans in concentration camps. Tell me, which one of the Founding Fathers was still alive in 1942?

      BTW, racism is a universal human problem -- all humans are capable of it, not just one particular ethnic group or nationality. That is, people of all colors are capable of it.

      In the same way, both men and women are capable of being sexist.

      And then there is a survival instinct called xenophobia.

      The point of my original post was to point out that Communism and Fascism are inherently selfish and greedy. They never helped anyone except the party elite.

      The Founding Fathers were unusual. They were men of wealth and power. They were NOT greedy. They gave up their time, wealth, and power to establish something better for everyone. Yes, it was not perfect. They could not agree to abolish slavery in the new country. (Many of the Founding Fathers were against it.) They still had the taint of European aristocracy. But it was a start.

      How many other countries are culturally racist and sexist?

  2. So, that would mean by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 4, Insightful

    that their REAL "Elevate America" plan is to hire 10% more people but pay them 10% less?

    1. Re:So, that would mean by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ...and pay the saved 1% as a bonus to management?

    2. Re:So, that would mean by Herkum01 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Isn't this the real American way for the last 10 years? Cut employees or their salaries and give managers a big bonus?

      If you don't think that it is true, look no farther than the republican party when comes to the financial bailouts. They insist that the auto-workers take cuts in benefits and salary. Then they turn around and complain that the government should not be involved in limiting salaries of failed bank executives to 500K. If that is not hypocrisy I don't know what is.

    3. Re:So, that would mean by will_die · · Score: 3, Informative

      not 10% but 15%. Microsoft is cutting how much is paid for current contracted hires by 10% but future contract hires will be hired at a 15% decrease in amount paid to the contracting company.
      Companies are being forced into it by Microsoft saying sign the paperwork for this change in contract or we will not hire from you when your current contracts are up. Contracting companies can then push the decrease by telling the employee to sign the agreement or you are fired. Most employees are probably hired under the standard right to work so they can be fired for any reason, however most companies have an employee handbook which prevent firing for any reason, so could be a legal fight.

    4. Re:So, that would mean by pxlmusic · · Score: 2, Funny

      what?

      would you mind re-wording that a little; or at least using some punctuation?

      --
      "If for any reason you're not satisfied with our service, I hate you."
    5. Re:So, that would mean by similar_name · · Score: 5, Informative

      GM doesn't pay much more than Toyota. In 2005 GM paid on average $31.35/hr vs Toyota paying $27/hr.

      The big cost difference comes from GM paying people who aren't working (Job banks and retirees[460,000 vs 1,600]) as well as taking more man-hours (34.2 hrs vs 27.9) to build a vehicle than Toyota. Some Toyota plants actually pay more than some GM plants.

    6. Re:So, that would mean by Dogtanian · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's because management deserves it. We make the big decisions and take the risks that enable the company to succeed.

      Probable AC troll, so I won't waste time on most of it.

      It's a good opportunity however, to point out that the problem with capitalism in recent years has been that the management have *not* been exposed to risks despite having been paid accordingly. They've worked themselves into the ludicrous position where they get paid bonuses regardless of whether they succeed or not.

      They're generally are the *last* people to be exposed to the results of their failure, assuming that they haven't been astute enough to move on before the results of their short-term, shareholder-pleasing actions become evident.

      Even when they're kicked out due to extreme incompetence, they'll still end up with comfortable payoff or at worst what they managed to get out of the company beforehand.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    7. Re:So, that would mean by will_die · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Most companies with an employee handbook usually list the reasons and manner that you can or will be fired. US courts have ruled that those consist as a contract, so even though you can be fired by state and federal law "at will" the handbook probably restricts that right. So if he employee handbook lists reasons for firing, they would have to find a way to make "refusing to take a pay cut" something you can be fired for; probably just call it insubordination.

    8. Re:So, that would mean by callinyouin · · Score: 2, Funny

      He's obviously taking about working for U.S. workers who work for working foreign companies who do their work outside of their own working work zones in the U.S.
      Jeez, have you ever even worked a job before?

    9. Re:So, that would mean by Bysshe · · Score: 3, Insightful

      umm not that much more? GM pays a 16% premium over what Toyota pays. Any company would dance in the streets if they could get that kind of a cut out of their labor costs.

      --
      Read what I mean, not what I wrote.
    10. Re:So, that would mean by Fujisawa+Sensei · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Pay is irrelevant.

      GM doesn't know how to build, sell, or market anything other than a truck or SUV.

      The only division of GM with the potential to compete against Toyota, is Saturn. And they're going to shut that division down in 2012 because they've never managed to make money.

      The decision makers have been spouting off bullshit about how they deserve to make that kind of money because of their vision and leadership. All they have proved is that they're nothing more the 2nd rate salesmen who's only talent is convincing other 2nd rate sales men of their own value.

      The management have fucked themselves, the Corporate Officers, Board of Directors, and all former Officers and Board members withing the statue of limitations all deserve to be sued into bankruptcy by the shareholders and pensioners.

      And after they have been bankrupted by civil litigation, and have no money left to pay even a second rate attorney, the FTC needs to go after them for fraud and conspiracy to commit fraud, and anything else they can come up with and throw them in Federal prison. Then its the state's turn to go after them and make sure they finish out the rest of their miserable lives in the state pen with the gang-bangers and giving blowjobs for drugs. Because that the only thing they think will make their miserable lives a little more bearable.

      --
      If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
    11. Re:So, that would mean by Megahard · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Elevate America" is their way of saying "up yours".

      --
      I eat only the real part of complex carbohydrates.
    12. Re:So, that would mean by Repossessed · · Score: 4, Insightful

      While I'll agree few people could do the job of an executive well, I'd argue that very few executives manage to do a good job. Companies are failing left and right, most of the ones that aren't in distress exist on pure inertia. Nor is there any real effort to find good executives by most businesses. Instead they hire people who failed at a previous executive level job (see the guy who drove AMD into the ground, after trashing another company right before being hired), or who have the right networks to get the attention of the existing executives.

      --
      Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite (TM)
    13. Re:So, that would mean by qbzzt · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In point of fact the non-union auto-workers make more (counting benefits) than UAW workers.

      So the UAW is working against the interests of auto workers?

      Or is it that managers are non-union, and they tend to get paid more than assembly line workers?

      --
      -- Support a free market in the field of government
    14. Re:So, that would mean by Chaos+Incarnate · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, the UAW is working against the long-term interests of auto workers. They're great at gaining long-term concessions, but in the long run the Big Three simply can't afford how the UAW is bleeding them dry.

      --
      Benford's Corollary to Clarke's Law: "Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced."
    15. Re:So, that would mean by KevinIsOwn · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They did? So that's why their market share has been dropping for the past 5 years or so now? Yes, Americans did demand big fuel guzzling cars, and the American auto makers certainly delivered those, but times are changing and GM/Ford/Chrysler have been failing for the past 5 years to see that more and more people want smaller, more efficient cars. These companies didn't get into a dire financial situation overnight- it may have appeared that way from the outside since all of the sudden they said "We need help!" But the reality is, their decline has been present for a while now, and their management failed to see what many of us saw a while ago.

    16. Re:So, that would mean by tompaulco · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's because management deserves it. We make the big decisions and take the risks that enable the company to succeed. Once upon a time that may have been true. High level people who believed in the company might have actually put some money into it. These days, management is brought in, paid high salaries, and given stake in the company without having to front any money. They have only the risk of the shares they were given going down. The people who take the real risk are the people who do the work. They get paid less, and if there is a downsize, they are the ones cut, not management. Even if management were cut, they get paid enough that they could live comfortably off of the excess until they found another job, not to mention their golden parachute. Plus, if they REALLY screwed up, then they will probably get another job pretty quickly. A colossal failure is better than a mediocre success.
      No, there is no risk at all in management these days.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    17. Re:So, that would mean by tompaulco · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually the companies that came out of the depression best were ones that invested during the depression so that they would be prepared to take advantage as soon as the depression lifted. A few years from now when the economy improves, some companies will be losing money hand over fist trying to ramp up, while others that invested during the down market will be years ahead of the game.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    18. Re:So, that would mean by sr180 · · Score: 3, Informative

      I also have a friend who's an ASC certified master mechanic who says he sees A LOT of Toyotas in the shop vs. GM vehicles for more than trivial matters.

      Its a pity, because you get the American Built Toyotas. In Australia, we get the Japanese built Toyotas, and they are consistently the most reliable car by far. The Toyota's top all of the reliability surveys and have very low failure and problem rates.

      --
      In Soviet Russia the insensitive clod is YOU!
  3. Vote by ultrabot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Voting" is a rather hilarious newspeak term for acceptance of a pay cut.

    Not that I see anything particularly wrong with this approach. I find it pretty absurd that a company should be "stuck" with the contract rates it offers. And considering how big salaries in USA are, it's a small miracle that they still manage to make a profit.

    --
    Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
    1. Re:Vote by mdwh2 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I find it pretty absurd that a company should be "stuck" with the contract rates it offers.

      A contract is a contract ... I'm not sure why not being able to back out afterwards if you change your mind is "absurd" - the whole point of a contract is that you stick with it.

      (Now yes, in this case I suspect that temporary workers have zero rights, so they could easily fire them if they don't accept, but in general, I don't see how it's absurd that people are stuck with contracts that they enter.)

      And considering how big salaries in USA are, it's a small miracle that they still manage to make a profit.

      I don't think that follows - it's rather simplistic to assume that a company must be unprofitable. Given that many businesses with their "big salaries" have been staying in business for years, I find it unlikely that this is all chance. And whatever the cause of this recession is, it's not that salaries suddenly increased.

    2. Re:Vote by ratboy666 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "I find it pretty absurd that a company should be "stuck" with the contract rates it offers."

      Slow down, cowboy! If you engage me, and then decide to stiff me on a contract, I WILL SUE YOU. And I will win. It doesn't matter how long it takes, or even how much it costs me -- it's just business.

      As soon as you announce "You won't be paid", I put down my tools, and walk. Again, it doesn't matter how much I may need the work.

      Why? What other leverage do I have? And, trust me, companies understand. If I didn't stick to my guns, I am afraid that others would start to take advantage of me. This is my protection, ok?

      About the only way I would take less is if mandated by a bankruptcy court.

      --
      Just another "Cubible(sic) Joe" 2 17 3061
  4. Wrong Options by kandela · · Score: 3, Funny

    Instead of Yes/No the options should have been, in keeping with Microsoft software licensing tradition, Accept/Cancel.

    --
    Conservation of angular momentum makes the world go round.
  5. Re:This is happening in plenty of places by urbanriot · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I agree. There's plenty of companies negotiating concessions with unions and regularly staffed employees for pay or incentive cuts. Slashdot villify's Microsoft enough that they don't need to post the common business practices of third parties in the employ of Microsoft. Give us a break kdawson, enough with the sensationalist anti-Microsoft vendetta.

  6. Re:This is happening in plenty of places by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So why is Microsoft singled out? Oh, that's right, because they're number 1 in someone's twisted mind means that they can't protect their interests. They should be forced to dole out money until they go out of business so you same fucktards can caw on about how Microsoft's business model outlived it's usefulness.

    I'm sure much worse is going on elsewhere. It's just that this is such a bizarre way to do it. Do the temps really have a choice?

    Give me a break. This same bullshit is getting really old around here.

    There's the door, you know how to use it.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  7. Re:This is happening in plenty of places by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Is there an alternative to slashdot? (Honest question)

  8. volt's cut by Qrlx · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I worked for Volt at MS for a year. They offer a 401k plan and match a small percentage which is vested after a year. My year ended (MS only lets you stay a year due to the perma-temp settlement, then you have to take a 100-day break), but the Volt match never materialized in my 401k. Volt explained that to get the match I had to work 12 complete months. Sounds like a year, right? No. Since I started in the middle of the month, my first month wasn't a "complete" month, and it didn't count towards matching.

    I told them their policy was BS, since 1 in 30 employees must start on the first day of the month, assuming people's contracts are as likley to start on day 1 as any other day. They didn't respond.

    But the really nice part is today, when everybody on Slashdot gets to read about it.

    1. Re:volt's cut by stox · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'll bet Volt isn't taking a cut on their obscene margin.

      --
      "To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
    2. Re:volt's cut by jalet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > since 1 in 30 employees must start on the first day of the month, assuming people's
      > contracts are as likley to start on day 1 as any other day

      Considering your explanation above, I doubt any contract starts on day 1, because clearly they don't want to pay, and not starting contracts on day 1 is a way for them to not pay.

      --
      Votez ecolo : Chiez dans l'urne !
    3. Re:volt's cut by d8ta · · Score: 5, Interesting

      My question exactly. When I was contracting at Microsoft, after I had dug up the gig, gone through the interviewing process, arranged a bill rate, and gotten steered by MS' HR area to go through Volt, Volt was proposing to take a 35% margin off the top for a deal that I had put together. Fortunately, I was able to find another "approved vendor" with a much more reasonable margin. I've come across Volt's presence in several other contracting situations, and they've tried to cram down similar margins there too. I hope that the folks actually doing the work at MS have enough contract flexibility and persistence to find a more reasonable subcontracting vendor.

    4. Re:volt's cut by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Just to second this, I did a contract gig through Volt. At the end of my contract they changed the position to a vendor (no 100-day break) and went through another company. Same job, but I got raise and better benefits, without me even asking for them.

  9. How about by esocid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    they start sending this email to the upper management in MS and see how many Accept replies they get.

    And since when is something that's compulsory also voluntary?

    --
    Absolute power corrupts absolutely. indymedia
    1. Re:How about by plopez · · Score: 4, Funny

      Can't do that. You need to pay top dollar for the best talent. Without the best talent you wouldn't get such market winners such as the Zune or the highly profitable X-box, soon to drive Apple, Sony and Nintendo out of the market.

      Just think of where we'd be today without Microsoft Bob or Windows ME. Or Vista.

      Top pay=top talent=best leadership=best products ever. :)

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
  10. Vote No = Lose Job by racasper · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The email stated "this is mandatory in order to continue your assignment at Microsoft ". So voting yes just means you want to keep your job.

  11. Re:This is happening in plenty of places by ThrowAwaySociety · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I agree. There's plenty of companies negotiating concessions with unions and regularly staffed employees for pay or incentive cuts. Slashdot villify's Microsoft enough that they don't need to post the common business practices of third parties in the employ of Microsoft. Give us a break kdawson, enough with the sensationalist anti-Microsoft vendetta.

    How many of them made $17 billion in profits over the last year?

    It's one thing to cut salaries when you're hemorrhaging. It's another to cut salaries when everyone else is hemorrhaging, and you have a stable, monopoly-protected revenue base, just because your workers have no alternative.

  12. Strange! by brennz · · Score: 2, Funny

    I thought Microsoft only hired via the H1-B visa scam?

  13. Re:This is happening in plenty of places by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    There are alternatives, but not on one of them will you get +5 Insightful for bitching about the story and calling the readers 'fucktards'.

    The OP indicates to me that Slashdot is working very well.

  14. This is a farce by n00btastic · · Score: 4, Informative

    A large portion of their contractors are really contracted through temp companies. For example, I install computers in the Microsoft offices through one company while testing Xbox 360 hardware/functionality through another. I never received one of these letters, it was answered for me. I would also like to note I have barely had work for the last couple months, and it is terrible. Microsoft is a corporation which uses its contractors as fodder in order that it doesn't get the media that is normally involved with laying off employees.

  15. Re:This is happening in plenty of places by Daimanta · · Score: 4, Funny

    Well, you could try life.

    Disclaimer:

    Life might have (severe) emotional impact and can harm your health including but not limited to depression, skin tissue damage, loss of hair, loss of bodily functions and death.

    --
    Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
  16. Re:This is happening in plenty of places by bjourne · · Score: 2

    Especially since the story isn't even about Microsoft! Microsoft negotiates a new contract with Volt in which they pay 10% less for each consultancy hour bought. Which is not unreasonable since it costs them 2-3 times as much for consultants as for full-time employees. Volt chooses to put the lost income on each individual consultant as 10% lower salary.

    Which is reasonable if their salaries are proportional to their hourly fee. Except it usually isn't, in good times consultant companies can charge exorbitant rates while not raising salaries much which means that they have insane profit margins on their services. It is supposed to be a give and take, consultants give up some of their earning potential for greater security in bad times. But the security is just an illusion and consultants working for companies are just as vulnerable as incorporated ones. These companies are the scum of the IT industry, they offer no value neither to companies they sell to who would rather hire new employees if they were available nor to consultants that work for them.

  17. Re:This is happening in plenty of places by dmomo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So what's wrong with singling out #1? Oh, that's right, because there are other companies out there doing the same thing, which means no one should call foul. People should be forced not to take advantage of the spotlight to rally for their cause. #1 would never do that... I'm sure. So, why can't these fucktards protect their own interests? Contract firms and temp agencies are in a powerful position. People should keep a close eye on the relationship they keep with the Corporations. They provide a service, but reap profits largely disproportionate to the gains they receive.

    I was working as a Temp once for Adecco and was put into a position that required I see how much I was being billed out for. It was about 40% of my pay. I had been in this position for a few years without a raise. At this point the Temp agency was making 40% of my hourly pay for doing nothing but send me the check. I did not get enough hours to qualify for benefits. I had well compensated them fairly for finding this position. Now it's just a milking scheme.

    So, sorry to say, but you're right. Everyone should protect their interests. Even these "fucktards"

    It's easy to stand on a soap box anonymously.

  18. Re:15 Minutes to establish a LLC by careysb · · Score: 2, Informative

    Only a handful of contracting firms are considered "approved suppliers". If you are on your own your out of luck, at least as far as big companies like Microsoft are concerned.

  19. Not just Volt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    All "a-" (contract employes) were told to take a 10% pay cut. Those of us at Aquent weren't even asked to "vote".

    We're trying to get the word out on this site: http://www.msratecuts.org/

    There's no headcount for permanent hires now, and I don't think any Blue Badges are getting raises, but that's different than taking a 10% pay *cut*. However, at least on my team, they're still hiring contractors.

    On the Aces (Flight Sim) team, they fired the whole team and then asked about 3/4 to come back as contractors, forgoing their severance.

    IMHO: This is an excellent catalyst for unionizing.

  20. Re:So, that would mean I smelled a rat when i read by davidsyes · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Microsoft, as a trailblazer in the information technology industry,"

    "Whooat?" I thought... "trailblazer?" I thought most of what ms did was light the initial fire in some cases, buy and shut down in many cases, and FUD/run out of business in many more caes.

    (cue the off-topic/flamebait/troll-markers against me...)

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  21. From listening to NPR by way2trivial · · Score: 5, Informative

    I've heard that benefits for employees are also vastly in big 3 workers favor.
    I found one 'for example'
    http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/nov2008/pers-n13.shtml

    [i] Like Friedman, he writes indignantly of decades (now ended) during which Big Three workers received "gold-plated medical benefits that virtually no one else had," under which United Auto Workers members had "no deductibles, copays or other facts of life in these United States."[/i] opinions of the validity of the argument aside, such benefits add a lot to the bottom line....

    --
    every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
  22. Re:Not with insane copyright laws... by setagllib · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Will the US nationalists make up their collective mind? If capitalism and competition are good, then Microsoft can only be bad for stifling competition.

    Successful companies are a good thing, they can help improve the industry's efficiency through reduced prices and increased quality. But monopolistic companies like Microsoft rarely do either.

    If it wasn't for the monopoly, Microsoft would have been dead between XP and Vista. Six years between incremental product releases? Instant death in any *normal* industry. Fast-paced competitors like Apple and Linux would have eaten it for breakfast. And the economy would benefit. So does the US still need more Microsofts?

    --
    Sam ty sig.
  23. Re:15 Minutes to establish a LLC by batkiwi · · Score: 2, Informative

    Most big companies will not deal with individual LLCs. They have a "panel" of agencies (say between 3 and 10) that you have to go through.

  24. Re:This is happening in plenty of places by QuasiEvil · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's one thing to cut salaries when you're hemorrhaging. It's another to cut salaries when everyone else is hemorrhaging, and you have a stable, monopoly-protected revenue base, just because your workers have no alternative.

    Hate to say it, but that's exactly why. The cost of labor is dropping, because there's a massive pool of it willing to work for less right now. Market forces and all - more supply, less demand, price drops.

    Sure, it was awesome for us all during the .com boom because it was the other way around (demand outstripping supply, causing outrageous salaries, etc.), but the point is stop your bitching when it goes the other way. That's just the way an open market works.

  25. Re:fuck volt by mdwh2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding was that contractors can stand to make a lot more money than regular employees, when they are in work?

    The downside is that your job's temporary and you have fewer rights, as this article shows. That's the risk they choose to take.

  26. Re:This is happening in plenty of places by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Unfortunately, they're publicly-owned, which means they have to at the very least pretend they're coping with the economic downturn in a very visible way. Even if they really don't need to. Otherwise their stockholders will revolt, sell of their shares, and they'd be in much worse state. It also doesn't help that the other layoffs rates in Washington State have lowered the price of tech labor.

  27. Ultimately this is the answer. by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 5, Interesting

    American workers take a 25% haircut and become competitive again.

    During the great depression there were several major waves of pay cuts.

    This service economy fantasy is not sustainable.

    What's missing is the 75% pay cut for the executive class back to 1987 levels when they "only" made 50 times the average worker (instead of over 400 times today) AND raising taxes on dividends and capital gains from 15% back to normal income levels ( these extremely low tax rates on div and capital gains are why warren buffet averages 17% income tax rate while his secretary averages about 30%)

    --
    She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    1. Re:Ultimately this is the answer. by manastungare · · Score: 2, Funny

      American workers take a 25% haircut and become competitive again.

      I chopped off my hair to 3/4th of its length, but that didn't help me be competitive.

      Do you have a newsletter I can subscribe to?

    2. Re:Ultimately this is the answer. by Savantissimo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I agree, but the cap gains tax should only be on real profits over $500 per year taken as income and not reinvested. Now you pay on purely nominal gains caused by inflation, fill out onerous paperwork over tiny amounts of savings account interest, usually can't deduct all investment losses from profits, and usually take a tax penalty for rebalancing your portfolio. Investment companies don't have most of these burdens, but individuals do. Getting around the ridiculous rules is a big part of why the market is dominated by mutual funds, hedge funds, IRA money-jailers and other parasites.

      Inflation-adjusting nominal capital gains using the government's numbers isn't good enough. The have been fiddled with so much over the years that they are 3 to 6 percentage points lower than they would be when calculated using the methods of 15 to 30 years ago. This fiddling has also inflated GDP growth and screwed Social Security recipients by a similar percentage compounded over many years.

      Also, capital gains shouldn't be taxed if the underlying capital is intellectual property. Ireland got that right; it really paid off for them. (I know this is Slashdot, but individual authors and inventors would be more viable if their product weren't taxed out of existence.)

      --
      "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?" - Patrick Henry
  28. Low Volt-age geek by westlake · · Score: 2, Insightful
    How many of them made $17 billion in profits over the last year?
    It's one thing to cut salaries when you're hemorrhaging. It's another to cut salaries when everyone else is hemorrhaging, and you have a stable, monopoly-protected revenue base, just because your workers have no alternative.

    The temp's employer is Volt Workforce Solutions.

    Volt joins most but not all firms in deciding to pass some or all of the impact of the [Microsoft] cuts on to their workers. Temp giant Volt informs workers it will make Microsoft pay cuts

    How surprising is it when a wholesale supplier cuts his prices and costs to remain competitive in a recession?

    --- but is not so quick to dial back his own profits?

    Microsoft is bleeding to death when kdawson's theme is FOSS and Linux. Microsoft is rich, strong and stable when the talk turns to pay cuts and layoffs.

    The well-run company survives a deep recession - a depression - by making changes before the situation turns desperate.

    The 10% pay cut now is at least a better outcome for the temp than the 100% cut he'd take later if his job is outsourced to India.

    It's useful to remember now and again that the median household income in the states is $50,000 -

    keeps things in perspective, when you ask yourself how much your job is worth.

  29. Re:Wrong!! by Redfeather · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Cap at 100k? And you expect to attract high-power, high-earning execs to your company how? Sunshine enemas? Be logical. If a programmer makes thirty to forty thousand per year, and his boss makes twenty percent more - move five or six steps up the logical chain and of course you get million dollar salaries. Is it fair? Not really, by most logic.

    But even if you project a 20% pay raise per position five steps up the chain, you still have nearly 100k salaries - and I don't expect jumps as low as 20% are realistic. In my company, salary more than doubles from location manager to district manager - five steps up from that (Which is roughly executive level) puts salaries nearly half a million a year. I'd call that estimate conservative and I work bloody retail, where there is NO profit margin WHATSOEVER.

    This isn't an attempt to curry favour with execs, as I don't know any who read Slashdot in the first place. Your use of 100k-no-bonus just makes me wonder where in gay hell your logic is coming from.

    --
    Those things you're doing with that stuff you just bought? That's not what it's for! -
  30. employee pay by falconwolf · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well, for starters, autoworkers union != bank executives. The two situations aren't even similar. On one hand, you have a union that's doing nothing more than bleeding a corporation dry. On the other, you have a situation where the free market should really be determining things like salaries and bonuses*.

    The auto workers negotiated in just as much a free market as those bank executives did. SO they are the same in that regard.

    Truth be told, it would be better for the US Automakers if they went bankrupt. That would dissolve all union contracts, forcing them to restructure. While there are certainly other factors like demand and quality, the benefits alone received by members of the UAW make it almost impossible for American car companies to compete with non-union car manufacturers in the US.

    While it may be better if US auto manufacturers did go bankrupt, you're either discounting, ignoring, or don't know something. Even foreign auto makers what Detroit bailed out, "Why Toyota wants GM to be saved". This is because of the reason mentioned above, they all depend on the same suppliers. If Chrysler goes bankrupt it's suppliers, who also supply Japanese makers in the US may go bankrupt as well. Secondly those foreign owned factories received a lot of government subsidies. State governments have given out billions in subsidies. "Alabama offered a stunning $253 million incentive package to Mercedes ." And one of Alabama's senators, Sen. Richard Shelby was one of those who opposed bailing out US auto companies.

    Its great when a company can afford to treat their people well, but when they can't, something's gotta give. Unfortunately, the UAW doesn't see it that way.

    Neither do company executives. Even Carl Icahn says executive pay needs to change.

    Falcon

  31. Re:no problem with honest capitalism and never wil by Dogtanian · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Collectivism and Marxism already failed. We don't need to try that again.

    Don't recall anyone advocating that. Put that straw man away before it falls apart!

    Though expecting 100% free-market capitalism to work without people taking advantage and/or subverting it for their own ends (even through the "legitimate" use of markets to- e.g.- get a monopoly) is just as flawed and dependent on a grossly over-idealised view of human nature as communism is.

    Remember that though many will proclaim the merits of a free market, they really want it to be free for themselves... and will certainly seek to shut out competition given the chance.

    --
    "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
  32. What will this really accomplish? by christophercrooker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I am a contractor at Microsoft right now subject to this pay rate decrease. Although I have my opinions about why it is happening, and what should be happening instead, I think more interesting is what the immediate effect of this will be. In my case, I cancelled several services I pay for in order to absorb the hit to my income and will be increasing my W-4 deductions to maximize my current income (up to my allowed amount) in favor of decreasing my tax return next year (here's to hope).

    But, I cancelled Netflix who licenses Microsoft's streaming video technology. I cancelled Gamefly who previously rented me Xbox 360 games. I will be providing less revenue through withholding to the federal government. There will be less discretionary spending and less revenue provided to my local and state government, all of whom need it just as bad as we do right now. All of those organizations rely on Microsoft products for their dwindling operations. In a very real way (since I live in northwest Washington) there will be less money for police to protect Microsoft's physical assets.

    Don't these circular relationships represent the defintion of a "downward spiral"? Are we sure we understand the impact of these actions?

    In the meantime I will buckle under and keep working my ass off. My kid's doctor doesn't accept righteousness as a form of payment.

    1. Re:What will this really accomplish? by JoeFromPhilly · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Don't these circular relationships represent the defintion of a "downward spiral"?

      Absolutely. This is why economists get spooked when they hear the word deflation. Even now they can't bear to say it, and resort to euphemisms.

      Are we sure we understand the impact of these actions?

      We understand the economy in almost exactly the same sense as we understand the weather.

      In the meantime I will buckle under and keep working my ass off.

      That's probably the only thing anyone can do. Good luck, this year is going to be a brutal adjustment for a lot of people.

  33. everything is inflated.... by lpq · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The prices of ALOT of things jumped up after 9/11 on fear and during the gasoline crisis. They also take advantage of every weather crisis or flood to publish how it will cause a shortage and a price hike.

    Ever notice -- when these things clear up, they don't go back down.

    Everything needs to go through some deflation. The price of many things is just ridiculous.

    Things going from 25-50 cents in the 70's to 6-10 bucks... That's a hell of alot of inflation -- alot more than the
    supposed 2-4% reported by government figures each year. Over 3 decades, 4% would be a 324% price inflation.
    Instead, I commonly see things more in line with 20x (2000%). It's not just housing.

    $2.99 for a corrupted version of a song (a ringtone). vs. $4-6 for an album in the early 80's. The incremental cost
    to produce that ringtone: 0. An album might have ~10 songs... so as ring tones, that'd be $30. That's 7.5-5x and those aren't for the real song. The incremental profit margins are nearly incalculable. Piracy has hurt music companies sooooo much.....

    But contrary to what 'should' happen -- the government is just manufacturing more money backed by nothing. It's like stock dilution -- but on a massive scale -- dollar dilution. Soon street bums will be begging $20's for a cup of joe.

    Theoretically, we are so screwed...but for what really will happen? Good luck guessing!

    1. Re:everything is inflated.... by tomhudson · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, part of the problem is the "magic of compounding" ,,, so our dollar has actually lost about 94% of its' value over 50 years. For examples, just look at comic books or paperbacks, a loaf of bread, a dozen eggs, a gallon of gas, or the minimum wage (50 years ago, it was a buck an hour).

      If everything stays "in sync", then everyone survives, and everyone has enough money to participate in the economy. The problem is that we have, as you pointed out, NOT kept wages in line with inflation for a decade (the Bush years), and instead replaced wage growth with debt growth as a way to maintain or "improve" the standard of living - but it was a lie for most people; higher debts are not an improvement.

  34. Volt is a TEMP agency by ChrisA90278 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    These are CONTRACTORS not employees. The whole reason a company uses contract labor is so they can adjust the number of bodies to the workload without having to later layoff their own employees. In other works these a TEMPORARY jobs. Everyone understood they were temporary and would not last. I don't even count not renewing a contract with a layoff

    I was a contractor once too. And sure enough we were the first to go. With all of about 20 minutes notice at that. Cutting your pay is just a very nice way to say "Find another job, soon." The more normal way to say that to a contractors is "Find another job."

    Read the story "Volt" is a "temp agency". Our company uses Volt too. For thing like when a normal emplyee is on extended sick leave, they might hire someone on a 6 month contract.