Slashdot Mirror
HP Makes More Money, Cuts 16,000 Jobs
jfruh (300774) writes "Good news for HP: Profits are up by 18% over the previous year! Bad news for HP: A lot of those profits are from post-Windows XP PC upgrades, and company revenue actually dipped 1%. The solution, according to CEO Meg Whitman, is "continuous improvement in our cost structure," which means firing thousands of people. At the end of the next round of layoffs, the company will have shed 50,000 employees since 2012."
New submitter Deveauxes (3664417) links to a similar story from CNN's news service, according to which "HP said the latest layoffs would come across all its business units and geographic locations, and would generate $1 billion in annual savings beyond the $3.5 to $4 billion projected from the previously announced cuts. 'No company likes to decrease the work force, and we recognize that this is difficult for employees,' CEO Meg Whitman said in a conference call with analysts. 'I think everyone understands the turnaround we're in.'"
How many H1Bs will replace them?
They used to make really cool, quality stuff (Agilent Technologies anyone?) Now they're reduced to selling disposable printers and ink that costs more than vintage Dom. Gee thanks, Carly.
got rid of ALL the employees!
I suggest they start at the top!
Wasn't HP the one that, not long ago, hired and fired about 5 CEO's in the course of 7 years. Paying each a 8 figure severance package on their way out?
Almost right. Actually, it's upper management who gets wealthy in the name of "shareholder wealth". But yeah, too bad about the rest of the economy.
All of my calculators used to be HP, all of my bench equipment was HP or Tektronix. But these days, I no longer own an ink-jet printer, so I don't buy printer ink, so HP has nothing for me.
There are many brands that no longer represent their heritage: Philips, Zenith, Bell Labs, Kodak...
It's sad, but it's life, HP hasen't been a "high tech" company foe several years, they have been a "re-brander" of Chinese consumer products.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
It proves that if you can give a corporation tax breaks and throw off the shackles of regulation, they will do better and want to hire more people. Oh...wait.
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
It sure did. Working on getting it fixed now. Apologies if it inconvenienced you!
Being an Indian, I understand the frustration when support goes out to some dude in India who barely speaks English. I have been there myself, not only that, I have been asked how I made it to Canada.
Nonetheless, those that do make the H1B cut are not the same that answer those phone calls. H1B may be fresh grads, however most have engineering degrees, at the start of which they had to compete against 500,000 applicants for a under 10000 seats. Further, seats in Computer engineering which are valued more so than others are probably around 1000.
Furthermore, there is a contrast in fee, in US, a student might have to bail out if he cannot afford the education, so not only do you have to be smart, you have to be rich, contrasting that to peanuts, the competition gets very very tough back in India.
So joke all you want, those that do make it to US are rather smart and hard working.
I'm not saying they are not exploited, they are. The solution is simple, the employer has to prove, H1B is needed as local talent cannot be found, if thats the case, do not tie H1B to an employer, let the employee roam free. You will see a drastic cut in H1B and abuse of new immigrants.
I discovered the big problem in American business today: Executives can make big money by running a company aground. Enough money so that their grandchildren won't have to work.
Greenspan thought companies would self regulate. His mistake was subtle: He assumed that the leadership of the company needed the company to be healthy in order for the executives to prosper. But a new pattern emerged: executives could engage in behavior which could yield a multiple-lifetime supply of wealth by engaging in practices which ultimately destroyed the company.
And that's what happened to the financial sector in the US. And doubtless other companies which yield this particular prize.
I don't know what the common underlying reason is but this is the common symptom - being able to make the Big Score by running a company aground.
in the last few decades, there has been mass mind-reprogramming that seems to convince people that 'profit above all else, to the exclusion of all else' is what american companies are supposed to be about.
but go back to our grandfather's days and you would find social responsibility (which was hard fought for, during the union days). companies DID care and they DID shoulder the burden during hard times, because they saw value in the INVESTMENT in their work force! it was common for people to work at the same company for 20, 30 even 40 years!
find anyone like that today. I dare you. if you find someone working 20 yrs at the same place, its extremely rare.
this is now how it used to be. and don't accept that this was always how it was and how its meant to be. that's brainwashing by the new capitalists who are no better than white collar criminals, these days.
What has changed my friend is court cases of the 1980's defined the role of a company. The question is who owns the company? The shareholders and big banks won. It is not to make profit. It is to raise the shareprice. It must grow grow and grow and if it gets too high go do splits forever with no end in sight! If a CEO can't perform this then hire someone else who can. It is taught in finance 101 today in any college and was asked during my exam even.
So how does this change things?
1. You can't grow by creating great products when your share is saturated or is no longer a cash cow with competition
2. The emphasis on Engineers getting MBA's does not help the goal of the company. Cost accountants getting MBA's and bean counters making critical decisions and overiding IT and engineering make a better value for raising the share price
3. The only way to get a magical p/e ratio is to raise revenue and cut expenses by sitting on cash and going in debt rather than investing on growth
4. When you are out of ideas SELL or CUT DRASTIC CUTS to gain quarterly updates. When that doesn't work by other companies to get other investors raise the share price or sell it so the shareholders can sell out their high costs and give you the golden parachute for looking after shareholder intestests etc.
How many times did I write shareholder? See the problem? It is a math game today of flipping for computer programs that make entities more wealth.
That is the downside. The upside is newer agile competitors can rise up as HP is killing itself and Lenovo and Asus are taking its place. HP needs to hire more financial engineering majors to tinker with the price through accounting tricks and will cash out when it can't sell computers by selling it to Asus as a shadow of itself etc.
It is sad really but unregulated greed and Wall Street is ruining the whole country. Did you know bankers went to jail setting gold and stock prices! True ... today they do it with HFT supercomputers and do not blink. Why is this legal? But until courts role stakeholders not shareholders only you will continue to see shareholder activists like iKahn screwing things up and cashing in and funding Tea Party and anti union laws to make sure he can make even more money.
This corruption needs to stop
http://saveie6.com/
... and the good performers, innovators, and managers as well. You are left with those who just need a job because they have a questionable resume.
People forget companies do not create great products. PEOPLE DO! I can't make the best widget in the world without the best engineers. ID Software needed John Carmack to make doom back in the 486 days before 3d cards. It was not the brand image that created it. It was the employee.
HP cares more about financially engineering its stock price to rise each quarter and then sell it when it can't maximize than to innovate.
Fiona really did a job on that company. Most of the innovators went to Agilent systems which makes more money than to try to monopolize the pc market which is what Fiona wanted by buying compaq and just focusing on this. Bad bed and the Bill and Hewlett way is gone. As good employers were fired if they did not leave already as senior folks cost money etc.
http://saveie6.com/