Slashdot Mirror
After Uproar, Disney Cancels Tech Worker Layoffs
An anonymous reader writes: The NY Times previously reported that Disney made laid-off workers train their foreign replacements. The Times now reports that Disney has reversed its decision to lay off the workers and canceled training of the replacements. This follows public uproar, two investigations by the Department of Labor into outsourcing firms, complaints to the Justice Department, and calls for an investigation into the H-1B Visa program by Senator Bill Nelson. One of the workers said, "We were told our jobs were continuing and we should consider it as if nothing had happened until further notice." A former Disney employee who was forced to take an early retirement shared his personal thoughts on the matter in a Google+ post.
And start looking anyway. This is a temp stop gap to keep people from rioting, they'll hope the masses forget about it and can try this again in 6 months. Don't give them the chance, get out of dodge while you can
Disney completed the layoffs of the Florida IT division (Walt Disney World)
This was ANOTHER set of layoffs for ABC Broadcasting comprising about 35 workers that were going to undergo the same process. ABC's has been halted but, AFAIK, the Florida IT division is still SOL.
The most obvious one is the Disney Copyright Extension Act
After making piles of money on stuff from the public domain, Disney has fought to have copyrights almost perpetually extended. Almost every major film title Disney released for several decades was co-opting stuff in the public domain.
Di$ney is a ruthless corporation, always has been. They'll steam roll over anybody who gets in their way.
start here.
Honestly, if you've never heard any of this, you've been living under a rock for decades.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
That almost happened to me last year when I was looking for a job. I was scheduled for an interview with the India-based Infosys (one of the companies that provided workers to Disney). If I haven't got hired elsewhere, I would be a "diversity hire" to prove that they weren't 100% Indian workers in the U.S.
"The only mistake is that people found out about it."
THAT is the "seconds to destroy" part, that the parent referred to.
for 1099ers W2 contractors working for a firm / outsource don't fail under that rule.
That's an unfortunately common misunderstanding.
There are a lot of things bunched into the "contractor" name in recent years:
A. Working for a company under a 1099 tax reporting system, the person operates under their own business independent of the company. This is a real "independent contractor".
B. Working for a company under a W2 tax reporting system, the regular employee loses their job at the end of the temporary employment. This is a temporary worker or contingent employment.
C. Working for a company under a W2 tax reporting system, but that company is closely working with another company and the individual is assigned to work under their purview. This has many different names.
The guidelines they are supposed to use, which Microsoft and many others have gotten in trouble with, is when they bring in people in group A -- independent contractors under the 1099 tax system -- and treat them as though they are group B or C -- regular employees under the W2 tax system whose employment contract may or may not have a built-in termination date. This is mostly about tax differences, since the government generally gets less revenue from option A.
Many companies will bring in people through contracting companies like Deloitte or SAP. That is case C. These people are employed by one company as regular employees, and the two businesses have a working agreement. The individual is a regular worker and needs to have all the regular labor laws followed. This arrangement can happen for many years. Giving non-technical examples, you may have a car rental company with a single worker at an auto repair facility, or have building security hired through one company where the individuals report to work at the facility yet are hired, paid, and given other benefits by another business.
To confuse things, many times the companies involved in option C will hire their workers under option B. The workers are brought in from a separate company like Deloitte (option C), and those workers are hired by Deloitte as W2 workers with a temporary employment agreement (option B).
Unfortunately for workers, big companies often confuse the rules for them, calling them all "contractors" and dumping them under the same rules. Workers who were hired under option A must be able to work for additional groups. Companies get in trouble with option A when they keep the person too long since they stop looking like independent contractors and start looking like regular employees. When companies lay off lots of "contractors", usually they are laying off people under option B or C, but then refuse to hire them again because that is a rule for those under option A.
//TODO: Think of witty sig statement
The only other internal company name I've come across that's more universal is ex G.E. employees referring to it as "Generous Electric".
When I worked at TI (Texas Instruments) in the 90's, it was pretty universally referred to as "Training Institute" because so many people would work there for a few years after college before going somewhere else. Some people also called it "Tiny Income". There's some truth to both. :)