Slashdot Mirror
Nokia-Siemens Axing 17,000 Positions
alphadogg writes with troubling news for the network hardware joint-venture between Nokia and Siemens. Quoting the article: "Struggling network infrastructure vendor Nokia Siemens Networks is planning to cut 17,000 jobs worldwide, as it aims to cut $1.35 billion from its costs by the end of 2013, the company said Wednesday. About 23% of the company's 74,000 employees will be laid off. The 4 1/2-year-old joint venture between Nokia and Siemens has been struggling to compete with Swedish Ericsson and Chinese vendor Huawei. Parent company Nokia's ongoing problems have made Nokia Siemens' situation even more difficult."
Unless perhaps you're looking at a CEO's salary, there are other areas besides HR that cost a company money. Add to that:
The 4 1/2-year-old joint venture between Nokia and Siemens has been struggling to compete with Swedish Ericsson and Chinese vendor Huawei.
Equipment and facilities can be purchased or leased again. But innovation and attracting and retaining key talent is priceless. What are they losing in order to save their budget?
Equipment and facilities can be purchased or leased again. But innovation and attracting and retaining key talent is priceless. What are they losing in order to save their budget?
Who cares? It's more important that they keep their profits high for each quarter, so the CEO can get a bigger bonus. Why should the CEO care about his company's long-term future?
Hi, European NSN employee here. The company is selling or putting into "permanent maintenance mode" basically all of its R&D business units with the exception of CDMA/LTE Mobile Broadband unit. This means that Packet Networks (Carrier Ethernet + MPLS), Optical Networks and Microwave Transport are being cut. Hopefully the B.U. will be sold (it already happened with Microwave Transport) and the engineers won'tl be fired.
At the cost of sounding vendicative and resented (I confess, I am, a little bit), let me say that NSN has been a complete mess since day 1 (april 2007). We have been struggling from day one with bad management, bad planning, bad product line definition, bad choices, millions and millions of money wasted with idiotic things, while headcount in Europe continously got less and less (and India and China grew) to be more competitive with Huawei, Ericcson, etc... And even in all of that, we did some excellent products.
However NSN grew from 60000 (Nokia Networks + Siemens Networks merge) to 74000 with Motorola Networks acquisition *even if right after 1 month from the merge they started headcount reduction and voluntary leave plans*. We have been struggling psychologically with that for 4 years. It seems that it will be over soon.
I would say that government is actually the key stabilizing force in the market.
Where the Fed can cut interest rates to 0% or raise them to 10%?
This argument is silly, the Fed's chief goal is market stability, and sustained growth.
Do you want to explain how a company can plan years into the future when the EPA can declare tomorrow that oxygen is a pollutant?
The EPA is around to protect the environment; if your business model requires you destroying the environment to succeed, then you need to deal with the fact that the general populace doesn't want to sacrifice their breathable air so you can turn a profit.
Where Congress can pass a new minimum wage or new tax that makes your business model unsustainable?
If your business model requires paying workers wages that keep them below the poverty line, then you shouldn't (and shouldn't be allowed to) put it into practice. It seems like you would argue that slavery is good business model, if only the damn government would stay out of your way.
The success of your business shouldn't be valued over the success, happiness, and prosperity of society as a whole, sorry.
-- Let us endeavor so to live that when we pass even the undertaker shall be sorry. -- M. Twain
You could at least have said "Oh no - they're Finnished" in a first post!