Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
HP Businesses IT News

HP CEO Meg Whitman To Employees: No More Telecommuting For You 477

Posted by Soulskill
from the p.s.-you're-all-slackers dept.
McGruber writes "AllThingsD has the news that Hewlett-Packard has enacted a policy requiring most employees to work from the office and not from home. According to an undated question-and-answer document distributed to HP employees, the new policy is aimed at instigating a cultural shift that 'will help create a more connected workforce and drive greater collaboration and innovation.' The memo also said, 'During this critical turnaround period, HP needs all hands on deck. We recognize that in the past, we may have asked certain employees to work from home for various reasons. We now need to build a stronger culture of engagement and collaboration and the more employees we get into the office the better company we will be.' One major complication is that numerous HP offices don't have sufficient space to accommodate all of their employees. According to sources familiar with the company's operations, as many as 80,000 employees, and possibly more, were working from home in part because the company didn't have desks for them all within its own buildings."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

HP CEO Meg Whitman To Employees: No More Telecommuting For You

Comments Filter:
  • HP? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by AlphaWolf_HK (692722) on Tuesday October 08, 2013 @11:03PM (#45078339)

    This one was aimed at Microsoft, but HP certainly deserves it too.

    http://2eq9hztv2wc1k6odx469m9znq0.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/Screen-Shot-2012-11-06-at-10.53.18-AM.png [netdna-cdn.com]

  • Thank You NSA (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 08, 2013 @11:03PM (#45078341)

    NSA has killed telecommuting as we knew it for the foreseeable future (20 years, at least, hence).

  • Erm, ok. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by girlintraining (1395911) on Tuesday October 08, 2013 @11:09PM (#45078385)

    CEO makes blanket policy decision, backs it up only with "Because I said so," film at 11. In other news... this is the human equivalent of marking your territory by peeing on something, then kicking up grass. Will it screw a lot of things up? Of course. Will anyone complain? Assuredly not. Is it news? No. We have a term for this kind of behavior in corporate america: Tuesday.

    • Re:Erm, ok. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by theshowmecanuck (703852) on Wednesday October 09, 2013 @12:12AM (#45078735) Journal
      I worked on a contract at a major telco in the U.S. that had a lot of telecommuting. They were implementing new ordering, billing, provisioning... systems. They had so many issues during that time, mostly because the left hand never knew what the right hand was doing. My impression was it was caused by people not being in the same office or campus. I worked on a similar project at another telco that didn't telecommute and things went far smoother. People were able to actually walk to someone else's desk and confer. And face to face meetings always had the result of better communicating ideas than in chat windows and even phone calls. It also helped blow walls in the silos between teams when you could go to the area where the other team sat. Or call meetings with people in the same room. Telecommuting is nice for the workers, and I too like it, but is absolute shit for creating quality work in a timely manner. Slag at this all you want, but that is my perspective from two projects implementing the same system using two different management policies: telecommuting versus 'no telecommuting'. And 'no telecommuting' produced better work.
      • Re:Erm, ok. (Score:5, Insightful)

        by girlintraining (1395911) on Wednesday October 09, 2013 @12:47AM (#45078947)

        Telecommuting is nice for the workers, and I too like it, but is absolute shit for creating quality work in a timely manner. Slag at this all you want, but that is my perspective from two projects implementing the same system using two different management policies: telecommuting versus 'no telecommuting'. And 'no telecommuting' produced better work.

        You're using personal experience to make your argument. Well, good for you. Glad it worked out in your case. However, not everyone agrees [research-advisors.com]. I was lampooning this CEO's blanket policy decision. Blanket policies are universally bad -- there has never been one that didn't leave a trail of carnage in its wake. "Ruling a kingdom is like cooking a fish. Don't overdo it." -- Lao Tzu. Effective leadership is more about a direction than a destination. It is less about policy and more about guideline. And great leadership is so transparent you don't even notice it. Everything just seems to click. Well... things at HP aren't clicking. And this CEO is coming in and trying to prove herself with a nice big shakeup. This is what almost every CEO does. It's like when people buy a house... they invariably paint it a different color as soon as they can! The other color might have been their favorite color. It might have been the best color for the house. But it has to be changed, because until it is, for psychological reasons that person won't consider the house "theirs" until it does.

        This is about painting a house. It's about marking territory. Because if it wasn't, then the CEO would be making that decision on a per-business unit basis. Some lines of work function better with it. Some don't. Investigating and then making a decision shows thoughtfulness and consideration of the complexities of the business. Shoving a policy down everyone's throats screams "I gotta paint my new house!"

      • Re:Erm, ok. (Score:5, Insightful)

        by sjames (1099) on Wednesday October 09, 2013 @01:18AM (#45079101) Homepage

        That just means they didn't appropriately adjust their communication style for telecommuting. I have seen organizations that absolutely forbid telecommuting that are just as disconnected internally. They COULD go sit in another group's work area and hash it out but they don't. They COULD call a teleconference and hash it out but they don't. They could even implement an internal discussion board, but you guessed it.

        There are quite a few very successful large projects out there (just about any free software) where the developers have never met and may never meet. In other cases, key players meet a few times a year.

        Telecommuting can either result in a huge disconnect or the people can actually think about communication and become more connected than ever just because they were finally driven to think about it.

        In general, I have noticed that for some reason telecommunication companies really suck at communicating.

      • by Xest (935314)

        I telecommute usually a day or two a week and I'm definitely more productive on the ways I do. I'm not distracted by others in the office and I'm far more rested as I can get an extra hour's sleep instead of having to deal with the early wake up followed by the stress of the commute.

        Ultimately it depends what you're doing, I agree if people are working from home all the time and communicating you'll have problems, but that doesn't mean you need to ban telecommuting altogether - on the contrary that means yo

    • What ticks me off to no end is that you may rest assured that nobody gets fired for that blunder. Or, rather, nobody who is actually responsible for it, because it's certain that SOMEONE has to be blamed for it. Can't be the CEO who is too stupid to figure out that it's impossible to actually pull that shit off, oh no. Someone that expensive can't be wrong, right?

      Fuck, fire that idiot. Out of a cannon, preferably. It could save a lot of lives and most likely a company.

  • by Ralph Spoilsport (673134) on Tuesday October 08, 2013 @11:09PM (#45078391) Journal
    and the last 7 she basically worked from home. They had a "desk" for her, but it was fairly useless and in a pen with a bunch of other desks. She never used it. Carly drove a stake through the heart of the company, and so my wife opted for "Early retirement". There was NO reason for her to be in an office - she managed multinational projects - her team was scattered all over the place and none of them were in Silicon Valley. She could have been on the moon and except for the time delay due to the speed of light, no one would have noticed.

    This is just typical - they're trying to shed employees, cut staff, make money. That's what the Compaq merger was about. It had nothing to do with computers and had everything to do with Compaqs crappier HR policies which were adopted as HPs, saving the company millions, forever. My wife lost a week and a half of vacation time because of that. Dicks.

    • by MrEricSir (398214) on Tuesday October 08, 2013 @11:35PM (#45078543) Homepage

      While Carly deserves her share of the blame for the fall of HP, let's not forget that it was her successor, Lew Platt, who split HP into two companies. Prior to that split, HP was more like Samsung and less like, say, Dell.

      • by timeOday (582209) on Wednesday October 09, 2013 @12:23AM (#45078803)
        What does HP even do any more? I just visited their homepage to find out - it lists Laptops, Tablets, Desktops, All-In-Ones... so, reselling stuff made by companies such as Asus and Lenovo, which they increasingly no longer need an American storefront headed by an over-paid CEO to help them market.
        • by putaro (235078) on Wednesday October 09, 2013 @12:31AM (#45078855) Journal

          I thought they sold ink, or at least that's where all the profits come from.

        • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 09, 2013 @05:54AM (#45080041)

          What does HP even do any more?

          The vast majority of its profits come from "Industry Standard Servers" I.e. the Proliant range. Another good chunk comes from Software (things like Arcsight for example), Storage (LeftHand, 3PAR, tape solutions), and Printing & Imaging (which contrary to Slashdot trope, is not solely comprised of selling ink).

          They also have Professional Services (ex-EDS), Cloud, networking products, big-iron stuff and various other bits & pieces.

          Also contrary to standard Slashdot group think, HP are very profitable and the stock has doubled since Meg Whitman took over, so she seems to be doing something right.

          • by jambox (1015589)
            Stock prices often go up when people are getting laid off. Unilaterally getting rid of telecommuting appears like lay-offs by the back door.
          • by dwpro (520418)

            Stock shows to be down 9% since Whitman was named CEO Sept 22, 2011. What are you talking about?

      • by happy_place (632005) on Wednesday October 09, 2013 @08:34AM (#45081007) Homepage

        Lew Platt was Carly's predecessor, not successor. Lew split off Agilent first, then Carly came along and enacted the first ever lay-offs inthe company's history, because she was enamored with the draconian Cisco model leadership, which boasted a mandatory firing of the bottom 5-10% of the workforce every year, which was in direct and utter opposition to the HP Way (the basic concept that if you trust your engineers, give them what they need to succeed, they'll rise to your expectations and do a great job). The summer prior to the Lay Offs, Carly begged the employees to give back part of their pay to avoid lay offs, claiming it would avoid the inevitable. Then she "cut the fat" as she saw it... and then bought Compaq... then she butchered both those companies... which left all those who endured the lay off wondering why they'd donated their salaries to finance their eventual lay offs. It was a new low in leadership, that has only gotten worse with the ridiculous scandals and such that continue to plague a once decent company.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 08, 2013 @11:40PM (#45078581)

      Worked at HP as a contractor before Carly Fiorina came on board.

      Initially HP treated its engineers so well that I was actually contemplating working there as permanent staff. Then Carly came on board and basically killed everything that was good about the company. At some point she asked staff to waive one day of wages, because HP was going through some difficult period; a couple of months later she gives herself a 16 million dollar bonus.

      Carly should write a book: 'How to kill company wide morale and get rich in one easy lesson'.

      Before the Carly, people were still working around 19:00 just to finish up bits, because they felt like they were heavily invested in the success of HP, shortly after the 'merger' with Compaq at 17:05 the whole office was empty.

      Quite happy I never signed on as permanent staff.

      • by Opportunist (166417) on Wednesday October 09, 2013 @12:35AM (#45078879)

        That's a lesson in HR policies.

        Treat your people right and you can have anything from them. Overtime, unpaid if necessary, people will even accept a pay cut, especially if temporary, to pull the company through. Treat people right and their loyalty will allow you to survive any kind of hardships.

        Treat them as expendable assets and you may expect to be treated as such: An expendable job position that can be traded for another one at the drop of a hat.

        Prisoner's dilemma at work. I cooperate and copy. In other words, yes, you can fool me once. But then you can expect that I'll stay with you just as long as I need to find another position, and don't expect me to go that extra mile or do anything more than the bare minimum necessary. And don't expect me to give you anything extra, not even a glass of water if you're drowning.

        • by marcello_dl (667940) on Wednesday October 09, 2013 @07:33AM (#45080541) Homepage Journal

          You are perfectly right, but the system is working as intended, it is very simple: what do people in charge use to control the others? currently, money. Therefore money must be the most powerful medium. Therefore all interference to the power of money must be removed. Culture, scruples, old style political, religious and military power. Some removals are healthy, some not. The overall effect is subtle and powerful slavery.The story of the last centuries is the story of the progressive removal of such impediments.

          Are current HR practices turning workers into expendable drones with no whatsoever care for anything in their company except the money? Perfect. That is paired with managers who have no whatsoever care, and even knowledge about the product they sell. How in hell they get to power positions? Simple, they interface with, and obey the rules of the financial system.

      • by RedBear (207369) <redbear&redbearnet,com> on Wednesday October 09, 2013 @01:31AM (#45079159) Homepage

        Worked at HP as a contractor before Carly Fiorina came on board.

        Initially HP treated its engineers so well that I was actually contemplating working there as permanent staff. Then Carly came on board and basically killed everything that was good about the company. At some point she asked staff to waive one day of wages, because HP was going through some difficult period; a couple of months later she gives herself a 16 million dollar bonus.

        Carly should write a book: 'How to kill company wide morale and get rich in one easy lesson'.

        Before the Carly, people were still working around 19:00 just to finish up bits, because they felt like they were heavily invested in the success of HP, shortly after the 'merger' with Compaq at 17:05 the whole office was empty.

        Quite happy I never signed on as permanent staff.

        One really wonders how our capitalist society could be transformed if even a small percentage of CEOs had the personal integrity to give themselves a perfectly nice $160,000 bonus and distribute the rest of that $16 million back to the people who work for a wage. Think how motivated employees would be if they actually shared in the company's success.

        Oh god, did I just turn into a Marxist or something? Fuck.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward

          One really wonders how our capitalist society could be transformed if even a small percentage of CEOs had the personal integrity to give themselves a perfectly nice $160,000 bonus and distribute the rest of that $16 million back to the people who work for a wage. Think how motivated employees would be if they actually shared in the company's success.

          Oh god, did I just turn into a Marxist or something? Fuck.

          Things like that do happen sometimes. Typically only in private companies or public companies that are stilled chaired by the founder though.

          It's a great thing for employee morale and loyalty; of course, caring about people other than yourself instead of treating them as disposal cogs is un-American[*].

          [*] Irony: This is how Communist states work as well: people are disposable, no one is indispensable, only the greater glory of the corporation... sorry, the state, matters.

        • by sandytaru (1158959) on Wednesday October 09, 2013 @07:55AM (#45080709) Journal
          The CEO of Lenovo did that in China. He distributed his 5 million dollar (equivalent) bonus right back to his workers, which worked out to an extra month's pay for some of them.
    • Hmm, I was wondering which office one should go to if one works on multiple projects in multiple cities/countries.
  • by Narcocide (102829) on Tuesday October 08, 2013 @11:12PM (#45078407) Homepage

    Hey Meg,

    Just a word of warning; this will not work. If they can't figure out how to communicate with IRC and all the rest of the internet at their fingertips, they're sure as fuck not gonna get along any better when you cram them in a conference room at the ass crack of dawn and shake them up to see if they fight.

    Sincerely,
    The Whole Motherfucking Internet.

    • But it is! (Score:5, Informative)

      by dutchwhizzman (817898) on Wednesday October 09, 2013 @01:26AM (#45079137)
      Surely it's going to work. This is the cheapest way to get a lot of people to just resign without severance pay. Just like they suddenly decided to cancel *all* external hires in Europe about a 18 months ago, killing many profitable projects with that decision, in the end they will come up with a much leaner work force that is way more eager to keep their job than the oversized bureaucratic non-functioning organization they have had for many years. Either that, or they will go belly up. They could alternatively get their shit together and actually start managing, but that would require an effort and look bad towards shareholders because it would mean long term investments and not better quarterly results.
      • Re:But it is! (Score:4, Interesting)

        by ebno-10db (1459097) on Wednesday October 09, 2013 @08:14AM (#45080851)

        This is the cheapest way to get a lot of people to just resign without severance pay.

        The problem with the "make things worse so people resign" approach is that you tend to lose your best people first, since they're the ones who can find another job most easily.

        killing many profitable projects with that decision

        Clearly I'm not up on the latest business strategies - I thought killing profitable projects was a bad idea. If it's done for the sake of some illusory goal, whose benefit can only be measured after the CEO has left, then it's pure bull. If you want to get rid of unnecessary bureaucracy, then change the managerial requirements for projects (e.g $10k expense requires VP approval), and maybe fire some useless bureaucrats. Do *not* do it by killing profitable projects.

      • Surely it's going to work. This is the cheapest way to get a lot of people to just resign without severance pay.

        You hit the nail on the head. Of course, this strategy doesn't take into account the fact that most of the productive workers tend to know their worth and will jump ship while the less productive workers will cling on to their jobs for dear life. Chalk this up to another decision made for a short-term gain while setting the company up for long-term failure. That doesn't matter, though, because

  • Meg is a copycat CEO.

  • So on the one hand due to executive incompetence, product quality suffers, sales go down and the stock tanks, then some CXX suggest cutting down on office space and having employees telecommute to save on overhead, then due to executive incompetence and marketing/sales trumping product design and innovation, sales go down, and the stock tanks. Now they say they need employees to come in to the (now non-existent) offices, yet something tells me that it's just another example of executive incompetence resulti

  • by LurkerXXX (667952) on Tuesday October 08, 2013 @11:16PM (#45078435)

    Suddenly require them to come into the office. Many won't be able to, so you can downsize without the bad publicity or cost of layoffs/severence-pay.

  • From what I hear, Dunder Mifflin has some spare office space - which is already stocked with HP computers.

    • Re:The HP Office (Score:5, Interesting)

      by real-modo (1460457) on Wednesday October 09, 2013 @12:15AM (#45078753)

      Apropos which, I found this series of posts [ribbonfarm.com] fascinating reading.

      Sample:

      [William H. Whyte, author of The Organization Man] saw signs that in the struggle for dominance between the Sociopaths (whom he admired as the ones actually making the organization effective despite itself) and the middle-management Organization Man, the latter was winning. He was wrong, but not in the way you’d think. The Sociopaths defeated the Organization Men and turned them into The Clueless not by reforming the organization, but by creating a meta-culture of Darwinism in the economy: one based on job-hopping, mergers, acquisitions, layoffs, cataclysmic reorganizations, outsourcing, unforgiving start-up ecosystems, and brutal corporate raiding. In this terrifying meta-world of the Titans, the Organization Man became the Clueless Man. Today, any time an organization grows too brittle, bureaucratic and disconnected from reality, it is simply killed, torn apart and cannibalized, rather than reformed. The result is the modern creative-destructive life cycle of the firm [emphasis added]

      Six posts in the series, each shedding much light on modern corporate dynamics. TL;DR version is "the executive class has gone feral."

      Also worth reading is another post of Venkat's, "You are not an artisan".

  • False rumor? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 08, 2013 @11:25PM (#45078485)

    My wife works for HP (as a telecommuter) and she's pretty high up - and I'm pretty sure this is false. There were rumors of a 'no telecommuting policy' for the last couple of months, but nothing came of it. I'm guessing Meg & Co took heed of the negative feedback on that idea.
     

  • by AmazingRuss (555076) on Tuesday October 08, 2013 @11:33PM (#45078527)

    ...so they can 'innovate' by not being able to hear themselves think because of the 'collaborating' going on at the desks around them.

    I work in a place like this. Its easy to identify the people that are actually getting shit done. They have headphones to block out all the jabbering.

  • by Mark Atwood (19301) on Tuesday October 08, 2013 @11:36PM (#45078557) Homepage

    I work for HP, many levels below our CEO.

    This undated document has not been distributed to employees. Most of us first heard of it today in the tech press. There is no actual *room* at all the HP offices to pull in all the employees. In fact, I understand that back when HP first started pushing telecommuting, they took the opportunity to do the logical thing, and shrink and close most of their field offices.

    So, short form, this news isn't news, because it's not a happened, and probably isn't.

    • by Shavano (2541114) on Tuesday October 08, 2013 @11:58PM (#45078679)

      Oh, so you still think you work for HP?

  • by trudyscousin (258684) on Tuesday October 08, 2013 @11:39PM (#45078579)

    To be completed in a few years here in Cupertino. Almost all the real estate for it is coming from former Hewlett-Packard sites. As far as I know, the only part that isn't is Pruneridge Avenue between Wolfe and Tantau. I understand they'll be plowing that under as well.

    There were two campuses. One was Ridgeview Court, which sprawled across seven or eight buildings south of Pruneridge. (I'm pretty sure these were among Tandem Computer's facilities before Compaq and then HP.) The other was a campus to the north of Pruneridge. It's all being torn down for Apple's new digs.

    HP also had a facility in Mountain View too. Something's happening there now, I think, but it had been empty since roughly 2002.

    All they've got now, for the most part, is a complex in Sunnyvale that used to belong to Palm, and Phillips before that, no bigger than anyone else's in the neighborhood.

    I realize these are only a few sites in Silicon Valley, but the same thing probably happened in other places across the country where HP had a presence. It's a pity HP couldn't have been a bit more forward-thinking, but that died with the HP Way about the time what's-her-name finished having her way with the company.

  • It's about time... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by QuietLagoon (813062) on Tuesday October 08, 2013 @11:43PM (#45078599)
    Whenever a person has asked me about working from home and what are the concerns, my response has always been the same --- the question will not be ~ how many hours are you working?~. The question should always be, ~ how do you intend to be a part of a team and commit to the appropriate level of communications to remain a part of that team?~.

    .
    Contrary to the opinion of most [clueless] managers, it is not about the slackers.

    ,
    It is about communication among the team.

    If you hire good employees, then you should not need to be concerned about the number of hours they are working, except to make sure they are not working too many hours.

    .Lee Iacocca - "I hire people brighter than me and then I get out of their way."

    • by cusco (717999) <<moc.liamg> <ta> <ybxib.nairb>> on Wednesday October 09, 2013 @12:54AM (#45078993)

      Lee Iacocca said a lot of great things. Unfortunately almost all of them are bullshit. A more accurate quote would go more like, "I come on board for an inflated salary, get the government to bail my company out, loot the employees' pension fund, take credit for other people's ideas, then cash in my stock options and sell a work of complete fiction that I call my autobiography." My uncle retired from thirty-some years at Chrysler and didn't have enough hours in a day to bad talk Iacocca. I think the thing that most annoyed him was Iacocca taking credit for saving the company by inventing the minivan. The initial version of Chrysler's copy of the Toyota minivan was already at the Proving Grounds being tested when Iacocca came on board, he just delayed the project by insisting on cosmetic changes. Jimmy Carter saved Chrysler, by declaring that the Federal government would only by Chrysler cars for the next ten years and going ahead with the production of the M1 Abrams tank.

  • Figures (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 08, 2013 @11:54PM (#45078651)

    Just when I finally got rid of all my pants.

  • by ErnoWindt (301103) on Wednesday October 09, 2013 @12:08AM (#45078719)

    Meg Whitman - a totally hideous person - mean, small, vindictive - has no ideas of her own, so she's just stealing Marissa Mayer's bad idea. Both are insanely wealthy people who literally have no clue how the proles who work for them actually live their lives. Step by step, the US stumbles toward its own French Revolution, but ours will make the one of 1789 look like a walk in the park.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 09, 2013 @12:38AM (#45078903)

    I've been telecommuting full time at home for over 7 years. Over half of our company is full time telecomuters spread across the USA. We are very successful at it and work very hard.

    It is not like people imagine it. You wake up and get to work in the home office and stay disciplined. A lot to times you put in extra hours too. You get a lot more work done because you don't have office politics. Lots of phone calls, conference, video chat, and texting. If people don't see you fully engaged, producing, you will get fired. --- It is that simple. But you don't deal with traffic, hearing people backstabbing in adjacent cubicles, and all the bullshit that you wish you could get rid of to get your work done...

    Sure you can take a break now and then, but if you get into goofing around people will be quick to notice just the same in this day in age. As long as you work hard and produce major results who cares. Studies have shown time and again that telecommuting produces greater results. Just don't do half and half. -- I don't think that works really well and leads to the stigma.

    Meg and Carley are totally ignorant on full time telecommuting and the huge benefits. I think they are these hardcore career obsessed women who look down at family orientated women and say "heck no to those people telecommuting"... If they could they would probably ban maternity leave or kids to work as distractions. 20% of workers telecommute. Their mentality is that people are lazy by design an they need their people to be in cubicles.

    In today's day in age unlike the 90's you've got instant messaging, facetime/skype, google video/chat... Most EDA tools can be local and licensed via a VPN license server.... I've been in countless meetings where we video collaborated work in real-time seamlessly. You don't need an office anymore for many types of industries. We would do complex engineering design online all the time.

    It is ironic they don't like telecommuting but they force many of their employees to full time collaborate via video chatting, email, text to all the other divisions around the world....

    We are headed to a contract for hire employee world as employers try to find legal ways not to offer health benefits, or trim staff like we're JIT inventory. It just makes sense that knowledge work be telecommute. It is far more efficient, cheaper for the company, and greater results.

    Since HP, Intel, etc are companies where 30% is office politics and fun and games (I happen to know personally) they would benefit significantly.

    • by Bob_Who (926234) <Bob&who,net> on Wednesday October 09, 2013 @01:34AM (#45079175) Homepage Journal

      HP bought EDS 5 years 5 months ago. That's the firm my brother was happily telecommuting for, for years. I guess he was expecting this to happen eventually. After all, why else would government work be privatized and then bought and sold by the likes of Ross Perot and Meg Whitman? It was all part of the nefarious plan to contract to perform government work for less by avoiding the costs that the government customarily pays its employees. Its like union busting but on a larger scale, and NOW its payday for them! But please America, don't be so naive that you don't see the truth about corporate America and the state of the economy. Its all just smoke in mirrors, and they intend to lower their costs and increase their profits now that they have stolen the business from you citizens. So, isn't it about time we stopped these assholes?

  • Shut up Meg (Score:4, Funny)

    by Cito (1725214) on Wednesday October 09, 2013 @01:02AM (#45079029) Homepage

    :-)

  • by sjames (1099) on Wednesday October 09, 2013 @01:29AM (#45079147) Homepage

    Usually, when a business is in deep trouble, the management starts removing perks of all kinds (even the ones that don't cost anything). When they get strict about office hours, take the funny posters down and push the dress code, update your resume, you're about to need it.

  • by dcollins (135727) on Wednesday October 09, 2013 @02:20AM (#45079331) Homepage

    Perhaps more interesting is the memo that broke today from when HP was delisted fro the Dow Jones Industrial Average (having occurred last month):

    "I hope that every HP employee took today's announcement personally," she said in the one-page internal memo on September 10. Calling HP's departure from the benchmark index it joined in 1997 a "blow to our brand," Whitman said the moved showed many people still harbored doubts about her turnaround plan. "We need to make every sale," she stressed in the memo, which was seen by Reuters. Whitman's urgency is easy to understand. Two years into what she has always described as a five-year effort, HP's sales and profits are still sliding and Wall Street is losing patience. The stock has fallen 17 percent in the past three months and is down more than half its value since 2010.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/08/us-hp-restructuring-analysis-idUSBRE9970XL20131008 [reuters.com]

    So Whitman has a turnaround plan which is clearly failing. This kind of "employees need to get more intense" plea is usually one of the last gasps of a failing company, IMO. Also notes that one her major moves was to throw executives out of their offices and into an open cube farm. So "rearranging the deck chairs" is quite literally part of what she's doing.

If the code and the comments disagree, then both are probably wrong. -- Norm Schryer

Working...