Slashdot Mirror


Facing Layoff, An IT Employee Makes A Bold Counteroffer (computerworld.com)

ComputerWorld reports: In early December, Carnival Corp. told about 200 IT employees that the company was transferring their work to Capgemini, a large IT outsourcing firm. The employees had a choice: Either agree to take a job with the contractor or leave without severance. The employees had until the week before Christmas to make a decision about their future with the cruise line. By agreeing to a job with Paris-based Capgemini, employees are guaranteed employment for six months, said Roger Frizzell, a Carnival spokesman. "Our expectation is that many will continue to work on our account or placed into other open positions within Capgemini" that go well beyond the six-month period, he said in an email.
Senior IT engineer Matthew Culver told CBS that the requested "knowledge transfer activities" just meant training their own replacements, and "he isn't buying any of it," writes Slashdot reader dcblogs. "After receiving his offer letter from Capgemini, he sent a counteroffer. It asked for $500,000...and apology letters to all the affected families," signed by the company's CEO. In addition, the letter also demanded a $100,000 donation to any charity that provides services to unemployed American workers. "I appreciate your time and attention to this matter, and I sincerely hope that you can fulfill these terms."

And he's also working directly with a lawyer for an advocacy group that aims to "stop the abuse of H-1B and other foreign worker programs."

19 of 531 comments (clear)

  1. Dear Matthew by buddyglass · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Dear Matthew,

    No.

    Roger Frizzell
    CEO, Carnival Corp.

    1. Re:Dear Matthew by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 5, Funny

      No.

      That's a French company's response. An American response would probably be like this Sear's commercial, "The Boot."

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rpiz_gR9P00

    2. Re:Dear Matthew by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Foreign workers are willing to do a job at a lower salary in most if not all cases b/c the cost of living in their respective countries is a fraction of ours. I would be willing to do my job at a fraction of what I am paid currently should that (that being how expensive it is to live here) change. It is equally infuriating to me when American companies use loopholes in our ridiculously complicated tax code to shelter revenues in foreign tax shelters to avoid paying taxes while at the same time benefiting from our infrastructure, emergency services, military, etc.. Its assholes like you that always spout off about free market this or that, os some companies feduciary responsibilities to it's shareholders blah blah blah... as justification for shitty behavior.

    3. Re:Dear Matthew by unixisc · · Score: 5, Informative

      I am sorry that foreign tech workers are willing to do the same job you are, but at a lower salary.

      I am sorry that hiring them to replace you is the most rational action I can take.

      I am sorry that furthering the best interests of me and my clients means letting you go.

      I am sorry that your prospects in the job market lead you to believe that you won't find superior employment once you leave.

      I am sorry that you would like to be protected from free market forces, and to charge rates that are MUCH higher than your competition charges. I am especially sorry that trying to do this is not working out for you.

      I am sorry that you think you need to mod me troll for being objective while discussing an emotionally-charged issue.

      I am sorry that furthering the best interests of your company's shareholders and clients means letting you do - especially since yours is one of the easiest jobs to automate. One need not even hire a Kannada speaking human to step into your shoes

    4. Re:Dear Matthew by Rob+Y. · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Except that calling, say iOS sales 'generated overseas' when the software was written in the US, using US infrastructure, etc. And the company is making the bogus claim that their Irish subsidiary owns the rights to that software. It's a scam - not a loophole.

      --
      Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
    5. Re:Dear Matthew by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I am sorry that foreign tech workers are willing to do the same job you are, but at a lower salary.

      I'm sorry that this action is a federal criminal offence when you do not meet all of the required H1B restrictions on hiring unqualified replacements for American workers.

      I'm also sorry your HR department so kindly provided the evidence of your crimes by specifically indicating in writing that there is indeed at least one skilled American capable of performing the work of the H1B worker you plan to hire.

      I am sorry that hiring them to replace you is the most rational action I can take.

      I'm sorry the most rational choice you are capable of making is to break federal law resulting in a $200,000 fine and 24 months in a federal prison per incident.

      Once things get to the level of bad you are claiming, perhaps a more rational option would be to resign your job, instead of resigning yourself to prison time by committing a felony that you will be held personally responsible for.

    6. Re:Dear Matthew by geoskd · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's a scam - not a loophole.

      They are the same thing. The only way to ensure that there are no tax dodges out there is to simplify the tax code, and eliminate the words: "except", "but", "excluding", "omitting", "minus", "exempt", "without", and any other words to those same effects.

      Americans are too stupid to ever vote for a poltiician that states they will raise taxes. This means that either politicians lie, or they actively undermine the tax base. Both of those situations are bad for the majority of americans, but they vote for the same scumbags over and over, and will soundly reject any politician who openly advocates tax increases. The result is a race to the bottom. Welcome to reaping what you sow, brought to you by Democracy(tm).

      --
      I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
    7. Re:Dear Matthew by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Are you really that clueless? If that was the case, I don't think anyone would complain. But, that is NOT what happens. Google (for example) set up a company in Ireland. Google Ireland owns all the patents to the search tech. So Google USA licenses that tech from Google Ireland for several (hundred?) billion dollars per year. Thus, it manages to shift all (most) of it's income outside of the US using trickery. Google Ireland does NOTHING except own patents given to it by Google USA. Google Ireland did not invent anything, it creates nothing, it employs no one (at least not in the sense of actually doing anything related to Google USA). All it does is exist to "force" Google USA to pay huge sums of money to itself (via a subsidiary) that exists outside the USA thus "legally" shifting said income outside the border.

      There is no fucking way this is what politicians intended when the law was written. Even I'm not that cynical. I have no doubt it was to legitimately shield actual profits earned outside the US (and thus not using our infrastructure) from being taxed where they were not earned. I can't imagine anyone could forsee that at some point some fucking company would be licensing shit to ITSELF to shift profits.

      In conclusion, you are another cunt who spouts off at the mouth whilst knowing NOTHING.

      I also love all you assholes who point out that this is LEGAL. Who cares? LEGAL AND MORAL ARE NOT EQUAL. There is no law that prevents a company from acting in a moral manner. That B.S. half of you shills spout about a company having to maximize profits is a LIE. No such law exists.

      Slavery was legal for fuck's sake...... IT WAS NEVER MORAL

      I run my company in as moral a fashion as I possibly can. (And no, I'm not religious, I'm an atheist).
      I collect no data beyond what is absolutely necessary to function, none is ever shared beyond what is absolutely imperative. None is ever sold. EVER EVER EVER. And I'm very profitable. So no.. You don't have to be a cunt to have a successful business. I am so tired of hearing this bullshit.

      Companies that pull this shit are competing unfairly with companies that don't. And they should be penalized. And yeah, this is coming from someone who is very conservative. If you don't like a law, you work to change it, you don't dodge it and let everyone else suffer under it.

    8. Re:Dear Matthew by superwiz · · Score: 5, Informative

      I am sorry that foreign tech workers are willing to do the same job you are, but at a lower salary.

      This is not a lawful use of H1B visas. So working with a group of lawyers to ensure that H1B visas are not used in such a way is a completely appropriate behavior. This is no different than fighting age discrimination or race-based discrimination. There are simply some reasons which are not legally supported justifications for laying people off. Replacing them with lower paid H1B visa holders is one of those.

      --
      Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
  2. Why not spin off their own company? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    They could spin off their own outsourcing IT company and ask Carnival to hire them as consultants.

  3. Re:sense of entitlement by cahuenga · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not entitlement, incentive.

    There was a time that working toward making a company successful was an incentive as it ensured further employment. Not anymore.

  4. Re:Pointless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sure it does. From the article:

    "This business model requires employees to train foreign replacements for it to be successful," she said.

    There's your leverage. If only one or two employees argue against it, the argument is ineffectual and their bargaining power is weak. If, however, there's an organized, unified position against it from all employees then you've got some clout. Once you're organized you've got a stronger bargaining position and can get better outcomes.

  5. Want to think you're powerless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You have to try to stand up.
    The easiest thing for the ultrawealthy is to make you think you're powerless and to admit defeat without a battle.

    The best thing to do is to not train the replacements.
    The best thing to do is to fight it, even if it turns out ugly.

  6. The very definition of insanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You guys who keep pushing the union thing are like a broken record. It worked really well for Detroit, right?

    The big unions really only made the mob rich and empowered corrupt and self-serving union bosses.

    Just look at that vile union boss at the Carrier plant. Faced with the loss of ALL the Carrier plant jobs, Obama and Hillary said nothing could be done. Trump said he'd fight to stop those job losses. Obama actually made fun of this and exclaimed that Trump could do nothing and asked if Trump had a magic wand! Even before taking office, Trump cuts a deal to save most of those jobs, and within HOURS the scummy union boss goes on national TV and whines that Trump did not save EVERY job and calls Trump names. Just what was that union boss's heap of insults toward Hillary and Obama for never even trying to save even ONE job????? CRICKETS!

    Union bosses are in it for themselves. The UAW bosses did quite nicely for themselves as the auto industry fled Detroit. Trumpka and his buddies have been doing just FINE as he travels to foreign countries speaking in favor of open borders (which push down wages and benefits for his American workers), global socialism, and more imported immigrant labor (which would compete directly with his current members, but which he sees as HIS personal future since it's the agenda of HIS political allies).

    Unions are NOT the solution, an end to global corporations pushing open borders, global "free trade", and treaties like TPP (which gives almost unlimited power to corporations and frees them from oversight/limitation by nations) are what is needed. Global mega corps and billionaires running communications companies like Google and Facebook are the problem; they want a world where they can move themselves, their money, and their labor anywhere at any time to maximize their profits and their leverage over the lowly workers while dodging any oversight or laws imposed by any pesky sovereign nation. They want a world where only the super-rich can compete because only the super rich have the money to relocate as needed to maximize profits and any little upstart can never gain traction - GLOBAL cronyism on steroids. In that environment, unions are a JOKE and the union bosses only end up pretending to fight for their members while actually aligning with those very super-rich forces.

    Human nature does not change just because some dude is a union boss and claims to be "for the workers". If you have a skeptical view of corporate barons (as you should), then you should also have a skeptical eye towards politicians and union bosses; they're all human, fallible, corruptible, and not to be trusted with too much power.

    1. Re:The very definition of insanity by demonlapin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There are some universal problems with unions, but most of the ones in the US stem from the fact that US union laws are awful. If you tried to design something more easily coopted into a political machine, you would be hard-pressed to do so.

  7. The business model by bhepple · · Score: 5, Informative
    tl;dr; = short term gain, long term pain and shareholders should beware - it's not cost cutting, it's cutting off your right hand

    capgemini, accenture etc etc all have a similar outdated business model. They offer to replace a $100k first world engineer with a third world engineer for $50k. In the short term this looks good for the CEO - he's a bottom-line hero, just saved the company $50k x # engineers per year.

    Long term, it's a mess.

    The outsourcing company only pays the third world engineer $10k and pockets the $40k. This was fine a few years ago as there was a huge number of talented engineers in eg India, Philippines etc who really could do the job. Today it's not so easy. The cream of them have already emigrated to the first world on the back of their talents. The local job market has risen so that really talented people can't be found for $10k any more, so the bottoms landing on the empty chairs are attached to increasingly mediocre talent. The better ones move on quickly.

    Add to that the difficulties of working with the time zone difference, the language problems, the cultural disconnect and the profound impossibility of communicating the intricacies of a mature IT infrastructure - and you get a project that is quickly going nowhere.

    My direct experience of these changes (I've seen a few) is that the organisation keeps going on momentum alone for a few years - the existing old IT systems soldier on with only minor maintenance work being done, just enough to lurch from week to week.

    No major development is possible because the talent that put the system together has been sacrificed - so the company fails to respond to new challenges and does not innovate. Unless the enterprise's business is completely unchanging, it's a slow glide path to oblivion - but the ground is just as hard for all that.

    Now the really important thing is that by the time the shareholders realise the dirty deed they've been dealt, the genius CEO who gave them that short term gain has moved on to more triumphs elsewhere, no doubt at ever higher remunerations.

  8. Actually, if they DID unionize... by GerryGilmore · · Score: 5, Insightful

    CapGemini would be in a world of shit. Think about it...They were/are banking on a majority of the existing IT workers to do "knowledge transfer" in order to be successful in fulfilling their contract. If the existing IT workers COLLECTIVELY said NO, there is no way that CG could assume the contract and not get sued for utter failure. No KT, no success. Together, we can win - separately, we are at their mercy (of which they demonstrably have none).

  9. Shoe on other foot by orin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's interesting that on Slashdot, when it's anyone else's non-IT job getting outsourced or automated, there is a lot of chortling and discussion of buggy whip manufacturers and how non-IT workers should just suck it up. There was a story about automated truck drivers in the last month that was full of comments denigrating these workers and that it was good for society that their job would soon be done by a robot. When it's an IT job getting outsourced, "IT'S AN OUTRAGE!!!!!" Doesn't take much insight to realize why this issue will never get political traction. Who wants to stick up for the IT people when the IT people just offered snark for everyone else that was automated/outsourced before them?

  10. Train them as poorly as possible by RubberDogBone · · Score: 5, Interesting

    For years, the company where I work had an automation product which terrified everybody at the firm. We'd had no training on it. An Executive dropped a lot of money on it before anyone could even see if it would work for us, and directly, it didn't.

    But we had it and had some incentive to use it. And I spent a couple years learning it on my own and mastered that goddamn thing where I could make it do anything I wanted. I was a wizard and magician and chef and used that product to DO the very automation project they said could not be done, which terrified far more talented people than me. I was soo good at it, my team was eliminated except for me. We didn't need all those people because the automation project worked.

    The software was still scary and dangerous to touch but I knew it inside and out. It did not scare me. Among the dangers was that you could right click in the wrong spot and be presented with two different 'delete' options, one of which wiped the entire database rather than just the item you were looking at. The software was apparently designed by an idiot. But I mastered it all anyway. I made that damn thing sing barbershop quartet and fly rings around the moon.

    So all was well until they decided to get rid of me, which was not a surprise to me.

    What they did was hire a woman from Mexico, apparently off the street. I don't know what her skillset was but it wasn't like mine. And they had me do a few hours of instruction over the phone and webex and boom she took over running this program that had slain experienced people before me.

    And that was that. My understanding is that they had a critical issue the next week and they were forbidden from calling me for help. I am sure it went to pieces. It took expertise to run. They hired cheap to replace me, not smart.

    18 months later I am still out of work because a LOT of the comparable IT work has already been outsourced or automated. I failed to pay my rent this month and bills are stacking up For the first time in my life, I am facing no future. Can't find work, I'm broke, and there is no hope. But I automated something that was supposed to be impossible. I will go down in flames proud of what i did.

    --
    Sig for hire.