Dell To Cut At Least 2,000 Jobs After EMC Acquisition (bloomberg.com) 38
As Dell processes the acquisition of EMC Corp, its largest buyout ever, it plans to cut about 2,000 to 3,000 jobs, people familiar with the matter told Bloomberg. The layoffs are expected to happen later this year, and regions such as the United States will be impacted the most by it. From the report:The reductions are planned for later this year and will be mostly in the U.S. and in areas such as supply chain and general and administrative positions, as well as some marketing jobs, said the people. Dell is looking for cost savings of about $1.7 billion in the first 18 months after the transaction but is largely focused on using the deal to boost sales by several times that amount, the people added. The new company has 140,000 employees. "As is common with deals of this size, there will be some overlaps we will need to manage and where some employee reduction will occur. We will do everything possible to minimize the impact on jobs," Dave Farmer, spokesman for Dell, wrote in an e-mail. "We expect revenue gains will outweigh any cost savings, and revenue growth drives employment growth."
MBA logic (Score:1)
Fire more people to make more profit to create more jobs!
Now where's my big fat MBA bonus?
Re: (Score:3)
It is entirely possible that after a huge company takes over another huge company, there might be some duplicated job functions.
3,000 employees out of 140,000 worldwide, a 2% reduction, is not really a crazy number for a company that was just bought out.
Re: Fire them ALL! (Score:2)
I've personally had a job where after a while I wasn't having much to do. I even thought at the time that if I were them, I'd lay me off. And then a bad quarter came, and they shed about 10% of the workforce, and I wasn't at all surprised with what happened next.
And to be honest, I saw a lot of people let go that we probably didn't really need. The purpose of a business isn't too create work and give people paychecks, so I honestly have no complaints about layoffs when I hear about them.
Besides, getting lai
Obviously not the point, but higher paying jobs (Score:1)
Obviously the purpose of the acquisition is not "create more jobs". The *effect* is fewer, higher-paying jobs in the combined company, which should in turn encourage either more or higher-paying jobs outside the company.
Consider you have 10 people assembling computers, and the other tasks that actually produce the product.
The parts are worth $10 million, the assembled computers are worth $12 million.
Therefore, the work done by these people is worth $2 million. The "line worker" value is $2 million, that par
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
0.06% (Score:2)
That's fun to talk about, and then there are the actual numbers.
Michael Dell IS well paid as the CEO of Dell. Almost in million salary and in a *good* year almost twelve million in stocks and other compensation. When the company does well, he's paid almost $13 million.
Meanwhile, the total payroll cost for Dell is around $2.1 BILLION. 0.06% of that goes to the CEO, 99.94% goes to the other workers.
Re: (Score:2)
So net result is that their is money available for jobs within the company to get higher salaries, and some jobs move to other companies.
Whoa! Dude, where exactly did this happen anywhere.
You do not understand how it works.
The most wealthy people need more money, because if they don't get more money, they won't be able to create jobs.
The poorer people need less money, because giving them more money just makes them lazy. It sounds like a contradiction, but you can look that up in the Bible.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, quite light (Score:5, Insightful)
For an acquisition this big, I would've expect ten's of thousands gone, so keeping it so low is actually surprising. I can only posit this being round one.
Re: (Score:1)
Bingo we have a winner, mod this up.
Dude, you got Dell'ed (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The employees in those departments shouldn't be surprised at all. They're mostly back office which does in fact become redundant when you have a merger. They don't need two HR departments or two accounting departments.
The people losing their jobs probably knew for months that they were going to be let go.
Is this even a story? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
If anything I think it's the timing of the layoffs. Typically going into October, you should delay massive layoffs till January as you start running into the holidays. If you just have to by Q4, then at least offer some job assistance, letters of recommendation, etc to help them place as quickly as possible. Still though its hard to be mad at how small a cut this is for a merger with companies of this size.
Re: (Score:2)
In light of the buyout and subsequent announced RIF, anyone who went overboard on holiday shopping or vacations this year would be a certified dumb-ass.
Grow that emergency fund while you're solidly employed, folks. You can't bank 3-to-6 months of expenses in a couple of months.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
As an EMC employee (make that Dell Technologies now), I find that absolutely hilarious!
I can report that there is absolutely no worry about jobs in my engineering division. Dell wouldn't have bought us if they wanted to scale back the product I'm working on.
M & A (Score:1)
This happened to me at Medtronic; the company bought another company and had to absorb their workforce. We were over staffed so they culled the payroll by laying me off for 'poor performance'.