Half of All Data Centers Understaffed

alphadogg writes "Fifty percent of IT executives say their data centers are understaffed, and companies are still looking for more ways to cut costs, according to Symantec's latest 'State of the Data Center' report. Sixteen percent of survey respondents said their data centers are extremely understaffed, and another 34% called their data centers somewhat understaffed. At the same time, data centers are becoming more complex and harder to manage, with more applications, data and increasingly demanding service-level agreements. 'Data center complexity has led to a lot of staffing challenges,' says Sean Derrington, director of storage management and high availability at Symantec."

Comments

Not only data centers

[bogaboga]

Banks are "guilty" of under staffing too. You call a bank for help or a query on something very dear to you and here's what you are likely to face:

1: A long wait for service after being informed that they've been "receiving higher than normal call volumes..."

2: You then face a menu system that tries to keep you away from speaking to any human being...

3: When you finally get to speak to a one, this human being knows nothing about what you need...or cannot help you!

4: Or if he/she can be of any help, their accent makes you take "too long" to actually get service...

5: When you decide to 'attack' your branch office to "actually get service", you realize that you are dealing with a fella who is paid small amount of cash...almost minimum wage...that they are actually inefficient...

These financial institutions are guilty guilty guilty too.

Get Your History Right

[mpapet]

Unions were invented to protect unsuspecting workers from manipulative business owners

No. It was really much simpler than that. People were tired of working for peanuts. Lots of people were tired of working for peanuts. Lots of those people were plenty smart. How else do you think they got organized?

Before unions, the institution of the 5-day work week was another long, hard-fought, pitched political battle that business was *sure* would absolutely end the U.S. economy. When Ford doubled pay and shrank working hours, the rest of American industry would not follow because from a capitalist's perspective, you are blowing your labor costs out of site! History suggests it seemed to have worked for Ford.

You don't get to blame organized labor for all of the auto industry's ills. Maybe you recall the Pontiac Aztek as possibly the apex of bad auto product? The labor that allocated resources for that project and a long history of uninspiring ones before that, weren't part of a Union. What's the managerial ratio at those companies 'burdened' by Union labor? What are the managerial labor costs at those firms 'burdened' by Union labor? I think you will find them both expensive and inefficient non-union workforces.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_time

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-hour_day

It's time to bury that notion that Unions cripple an economy. It's used primarily to reinforce the ridiculous American ideal of 'rugged individualism triumphs over all" and concentrates power and resources to the least efficient few.

Unions work fine for German, British and others.

[jotaeleemeese]

Some of the most productive car plants in the world are there, the Unions in Germany (who actually have input in how the companies are run) would be classed as nothing but communist by most Usians from their brainwashed point of view of world politics.