|
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
JF Mezei
*nix forums Guru
Joined: 21 Jul 2005
Posts: 2556
|
 Posted: Mon Jun 05, 2006 8:44 pm Post subject:
HP to cut down on telecommuting
|
|
|
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/14732974.htm
About 1000 employess in the IT division will no longer be able to work
from home. Those who don't accept to work in one of 25 designated
offices will be let go without severance.
Not known if this is to spread to other divisions.
HP had been a world leader in flexible work rules startting with
introduction of flextime back in 1967. Last July, they hired an ex
Walmast IT director and it seems he doesn't believe in telecommuting. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Neil Rieck
*nix forums Guru Wannabe
Joined: 13 May 2005
Posts: 274
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 06, 2006 10:34 am Post subject:
Re: HP to cut down on telecommuting
|
|
|
"JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message
news:4484978C.674A9F97@teksavvy.com...
| Quote: | http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/14732974.htm
About 1000 employess in the IT division will no longer be able to work
from home. Those who don't accept to work in one of 25 designated
offices will be let go without severance.
Not known if this is to spread to other divisions.
HP had been a world leader in flexible work rules startting with
introduction of flextime back in 1967. Last July, they hired an ex
Walmast IT director and it seems he doesn't believe in telecommuting.
|
Typical Wal-Mart thinking. You've got to come into the office so we can
"see" you working. (but at first opportunity we'll ship your job Asia where
we can't "see" them work but we'll get workers at a really low hourly rate.)
Neil Rieck
Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge,
Ontario, Canada.
http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steve Matzura
*nix forums beginner
Joined: 10 Apr 2006
Posts: 23
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 16, 2006 2:09 am Post subject:
Re: HP to cut down on telecommuting
|
|
|
This is a trend I'm finding is taking hold across the VMS board. I
was just recently let go from a job where I'd been asking for the
ability to telecommute since '99. Unfortunately, it was 9/11 that gave
me that ability when the building in which my ofice was housed was
closed for three months thereafter while they cleaned it up. After it
reopened in January, 2002, I worked at home at first two days a week,
then three, then I got a new supervisor who permitted me to work at
home full time. It was the best possible situation for both sides--I
was available for more hours per day, which was good for the company,
and I got to lose a commute with which I really couldn't deal due to
physical limitations, which was good for me. Since my separation from
this company earlier this year, I've been looking for VMS work where
telecommuting is embraced, but there's a trend going on out there to
bring everybody back into the ofice that very well may spell the end
of this 25-year VMS professional's work life. And here I thought I had
at least another decade or more to go.
On Mon, 05 Jun 2006 16:44:09 -0400, JF Mezei
<jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote:
| Quote: | http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/14732974.htm
About 1000 employess in the IT division will no longer be able to work
from home. Those who don't accept to work in one of 25 designated
offices will be let go without severance.
Not known if this is to spread to other divisions.
HP had been a world leader in flexible work rules startting with
introduction of flextime back in 1967. Last July, they hired an ex
Walmast IT director and it seems he doesn't believe in telecommuting. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Main, Kerry
*nix forums Guru
Joined: 22 Jul 2005
Posts: 399
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 16, 2006 1:06 pm Post subject:
RE: HP to cut down on telecommuting
|
|
|
| Quote: | -----Original Message-----
From: Steve Matzura [mailto:number6@speakeasy.net]
Sent: July 15, 2006 10:09 PM
To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com
Subject: Re: HP to cut down on telecommuting
This is a trend I'm finding is taking hold across the VMS board. I
was just recently let go from a job where I'd been asking for the
ability to telecommute since '99. Unfortunately, it was 9/11 that gave
me that ability when the building in which my ofice was housed was
closed for three months thereafter while they cleaned it up. After it
reopened in January, 2002, I worked at home at first two days a week,
then three, then I got a new supervisor who permitted me to work at
home full time. It was the best possible situation for both sides--I
was available for more hours per day, which was good for the company,
and I got to lose a commute with which I really couldn't deal due to
physical limitations, which was good for me. Since my separation from
this company earlier this year, I've been looking for VMS work where
telecommuting is embraced, but there's a trend going on out there to
bring everybody back into the ofice that very well may spell the end
of this 25-year VMS professional's work life. And here I thought I had
at least another decade or more to go.
On Mon, 05 Jun 2006 16:44:09 -0400, JF Mezei
jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote:
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/14732974.htm
About 1000 employess in the IT division will no longer be
able to work
from home. Those who don't accept to work in one of 25 designated
offices will be let go without severance.
Not known if this is to spread to other divisions.
HP had been a world leader in flexible work rules startting with
introduction of flextime back in 1967. Last July, they hired an ex
Walmast IT director and it seems he doesn't believe in telecommuting.
|
There is always going to be some debate which is better, but this is
only one division in HP doing this that I know of. Others have very
openly embraced the virtual work from home strategy. Indeed, facility
closures are usually based on this virtual work closure concept as the
cost of facilities is just way to big of a cost. It assumes a relative
ratio of 3-5 (or higher) workers per virtual work "pod" and if everyone
had to go back into the office, then new facilities would be required.
For DR scenario's, you need to have an established work from home
infrastructure as workers may not be able to physically get to the
backup site. In addition, if everyone is in the office at the same time,
it further raises the risk of a significant event impacting the majority
of your workers.
Think of a single person walking into your office facility and Health
authorities find out he/she was exposed to SARS. They may not even have
it - simply being exposed is enough to close the entire building and
send *everyone* in that entire building home for 10 days minimum. For
those who have not lived through SARS type events, that is the accepted
process.
This SARS / pandemic worry is not theory - it actually happened in
Toronto. The entire facility was closed and everyone sent home for 10
days. It just so happened that a data center was also in that building.
The DC had to be vacated immediately (no backups, no gathering tapes -
just leave now!) and closed to all physical access for 10 days as well.
Fortunately, the DC was part of a dual site design and the workers could
continue working from home along with staff at the other facility, but
how many companies have this multi-site + remote work from home
capability today?
It is also why new DC's being built today should be dedicated structures
away from major centers and that do not have any shared access with
other tenants or office space.
Regards
Kerry Main
Senior Consultant
HP Services Canada
Voice: 613-592-4660
Fax: 613-591-4477
kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom
(remove the DOT's and AT)
OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
William Webb
*nix forums Guru Wannabe
Joined: 22 Jul 2005
Posts: 172
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 3:06 am Post subject:
Re: HP to cut down on telecommuting
|
|
|
On 7/16/06, Main, Kerry <Kerry.Main@hp.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Matzura [mailto:number6@speakeasy.net]
Sent: July 15, 2006 10:09 PM
To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com
Subject: Re: HP to cut down on telecommuting
This is a trend I'm finding is taking hold across the VMS board. I
was just recently let go from a job where I'd been asking for the
ability to telecommute since '99. Unfortunately, it was 9/11 that gave
me that ability when the building in which my ofice was housed was
closed for three months thereafter while they cleaned it up. After it
reopened in January, 2002, I worked at home at first two days a week,
then three, then I got a new supervisor who permitted me to work at
home full time. It was the best possible situation for both sides--I
was available for more hours per day, which was good for the company,
and I got to lose a commute with which I really couldn't deal due to
physical limitations, which was good for me. Since my separation from
this company earlier this year, I've been looking for VMS work where
telecommuting is embraced, but there's a trend going on out there to
bring everybody back into the ofice that very well may spell the end
of this 25-year VMS professional's work life. And here I thought I had
at least another decade or more to go.
On Mon, 05 Jun 2006 16:44:09 -0400, JF Mezei
jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote:
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/14732974.htm
About 1000 employess in the IT division will no longer be
able to work
from home. Those who don't accept to work in one of 25 designated
offices will be let go without severance.
Not known if this is to spread to other divisions.
HP had been a world leader in flexible work rules startting with
introduction of flextime back in 1967. Last July, they hired an ex
Walmast IT director and it seems he doesn't believe in telecommuting.
There is always going to be some debate which is better, but this is
only one division in HP doing this that I know of. Others have very
openly embraced the virtual work from home strategy. Indeed, facility
closures are usually based on this virtual work closure concept as the
cost of facilities is just way to big of a cost. It assumes a relative
ratio of 3-5 (or higher) workers per virtual work "pod" and if everyone
had to go back into the office, then new facilities would be required.
For DR scenario's, you need to have an established work from home
infrastructure as workers may not be able to physically get to the
backup site. In addition, if everyone is in the office at the same time,
it further raises the risk of a significant event impacting the majority
of your workers.
Think of a single person walking into your office facility and Health
authorities find out he/she was exposed to SARS. They may not even have
it - simply being exposed is enough to close the entire building and
send *everyone* in that entire building home for 10 days minimum. For
those who have not lived through SARS type events, that is the accepted
process.
This SARS / pandemic worry is not theory - it actually happened in
Toronto. The entire facility was closed and everyone sent home for 10
days. It just so happened that a data center was also in that building.
The DC had to be vacated immediately (no backups, no gathering tapes -
just leave now!) and closed to all physical access for 10 days as well.
Fortunately, the DC was part of a dual site design and the workers could
continue working from home along with staff at the other facility, but
how many companies have this multi-site + remote work from home
capability today?
It is also why new DC's being built today should be dedicated structures
away from major centers and that do not have any shared access with
other tenants or office space.
|
Aaah, the circle of life. Or DP.
Sounds like the trend is to return to the days of glass walls and white coats.
:-)
WWWebb
| Quote: |
Regards
Kerry Main
Senior Consultant
HP Services Canada
Voice: 613-592-4660
Fax: 613-591-4477
kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom
(remove the DOT's and AT)
OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works.
|
--
NOTE: This email address is only used for noncommerical VMS-related
correspondence.
All unsolicited commercial email will be deemed to be a request for
services pursuant to the terms and conditions located at
http://bellsouthpwp.net/w/e/webbww/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Main, Kerry
*nix forums Guru
Joined: 22 Jul 2005
Posts: 399
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 4:01 am Post subject:
RE: HP to cut down on telecommuting
|
|
|
| Quote: | -----Original Message-----
From: William Webb [mailto:william.w.webb@gmail.com]
Sent: July 18, 2006 11:07 PM
To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com
Subject: Re: HP to cut down on telecommuting
On 7/16/06, Main, Kerry <Kerry.Main@hp.com> wrote:
|
[snip...]
| Quote: |
It is also why new DC's being built today should be
dedicated structures
away from major centers and that do not have any shared access with
other tenants or office space.
Aaah, the circle of life. Or DP.
Sounds like the trend is to return to the days of glass walls
and white coats.
:-)
WWWebb
|
Yep, I am getting a bit cranky with DC strategies and some Cust's really
hate what I tell them .. Like zero tours of their DC facility - if some
exec wants to show off whats inside the room, then install cameras.
Bottom line is that every time you have a non-essential person enter the
DC facility, you increase the risk of closing that facility due to some
exotic pandemic issue that the person *may* have been exposed to in the
last number of days. Why take unnecessary risks?
Same goes for developers that like to "reach out and touch the system"
occasionally. Take their access away and let Operations staff do any
hands on work. That usually strikes up a few conversations with the dev
staff ..
:-)
Regards
Kerry Main
Senior Consultant
HP Services Canada
Voice: 613-592-4660
Fax: 613-591-4477
kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom
(remove the DOT's and AT)
OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dave Froble
*nix forums Guru
Joined: 21 Jul 2005
Posts: 1172
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 4:42 pm Post subject:
Re: HP to cut down on telecommuting
|
|
|
Main, Kerry wrote:
| Quote: | Same goes for developers that like to "reach out and touch the system"
occasionally. Take their access away and let Operations staff do any
hands on work. That usually strikes up a few conversations with the dev
staff ..
|
Well that doesn't make a lot of sense. What happens when it's the
operations staff that are the problem? Data center is still closed.
Now if you'd proposed total hands off, it would be more reasonable.
--
David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA 15486 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Main, Kerry
*nix forums Guru
Joined: 22 Jul 2005
Posts: 399
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 5:02 pm Post subject:
RE: HP to cut down on telecommuting
|
|
|
| Quote: | -----Original Message-----
From: Dave Froble [mailto:davef@tsoft-inc.com]
Sent: July 19, 2006 12:42 PM
To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com
Subject: Re: HP to cut down on telecommuting
Main, Kerry wrote:
Same goes for developers that like to "reach out and touch
the system"
occasionally. Take their access away and let Operations staff do any
hands on work. That usually strikes up a few conversations
with the dev
staff ..
Well that doesn't make a lot of sense. What happens when it's the
operations staff that are the problem? Data center is still closed.
Now if you'd proposed total hands off, it would be more reasonable.
|
General strategy is "lights out", but if there is any hands on required,
then that is responsibility of Operations staff. If there are OPS staff
training issues, then that is a separate issue that needs to be
resolved, but the principle remains that Dev groups do not require
access to servers in the DC.
Regards
Kerry Main
Senior Consultant
HP Services Canada
Voice: 613-592-4660
Fax: 613-591-4477
kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom
(remove the DOT's and AT)
OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steve Matzura
*nix forums beginner
Joined: 10 Apr 2006
Posts: 23
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 4:09 am Post subject:
Re: HP to cut down on telecommuting
|
|
|
Hi, Kerry:
On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 09:06:13 -0400, "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com>
wrote:
| Quote: | There is always going to be some debate which is better, but this is
only one division in HP doing this that I know of. Others have very
openly embraced the virtual work from home strategy. Indeed, facility
closures are usually based on this virtual work closure concept as the
cost of facilities is just way to big of a cost. It assumes a relative
ratio of 3-5 (or higher) workers per virtual work "pod" and if everyone
had to go back into the office, then new facilities would be required.
For DR scenario's, you need to have an established work from home
infrastructure as workers may not be able to physically get to the
backup site. In addition, if everyone is in the office at the same time,
it further raises the risk of a significant event impacting the majority
of your workers.
Think of a single person walking into your office facility and Health
authorities find out he/she was exposed to SARS. They may not even have
it - simply being exposed is enough to close the entire building and
send *everyone* in that entire building home for 10 days minimum. For
those who have not lived through SARS type events, that is the accepted
process.
This SARS / pandemic worry is not theory - it actually happened in
Toronto. The entire facility was closed and everyone sent home for 10
days. It just so happened that a data center was also in that building.
The DC had to be vacated immediately (no backups, no gathering tapes -
just leave now!) and closed to all physical access for 10 days as well.
Fortunately, the DC was part of a dual site design and the workers could
continue working from home along with staff at the other facility, but
how many companies have this multi-site + remote work from home
capability today?
It is also why new DC's being built today should be dedicated structures
away from major centers and that do not have any shared access with
other tenants or office space.
|
Well said. Now if only we the workers could get some of the tax
breaks Big Corporate got for building some of those big office towers
filled with us who no longer work there, then it'd be about as perfect
a world as one could get! There are tax advantages if you own your
own home and dedicate a portion of it entirely to your job function,
but if you live in a small apartment, you can't just wall off a
section of it and say nobody can set foot in it unless the office is
open and functioning as such. In my apartment, for instance, you
couldn't leave the living room if what used to be my office was walled
off and locked up. Well, if you turned sideways and made yourself
really really thin, maybe you could, but the point is that if you
don't regularly go into an office to perform your work function,
certain space allotment and tax abatement should be granted to you
because you are essentially paying for your own office space. The
rules in this country are, I think, far too strict just now to make it
possible to do things strictly by the book. This will probably change
over the next couple decades. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Google
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
The time now is Thu Nov 20, 2008 9:17 pm | All times are GMT
|
|
Gas Suppliers | Mortgages | Web Design | Dutch Bodybuilding Forums | Mortgage Calculator
|
|
Copyright © 2004-2005 DeniX Solutions SRL
|
|
|
|
Other DeniX Solutions sites:
Unix/Linux blog |
electronics forum |
medicine forum |
science forum |
|
|
Privacy Policy
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Forum index
»
Not Unix
»
VMS
