Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Fudge

Anger After 900 Computer Jobs Axed

Recommended Posts

Anger after 900 computer jobs axed

* Press Association, Monday July 5 2010

Union leaders have condemned news of almost 1,000 job losses at a leading computer firm, warning it undermines the Government's view that private firms will lead the UK out of recession.

Unite warned the 934 job losses at US giant Hewlett Packard (HP) could be followed by a further 1,000 cuts next year.

The union said the announcement showed that the jobs designed to replace those lost in manufacturing were now being lost or off-shored.

National officer Peter Skyte said: "This is a further cull by HP of its skilled and experienced UK workforce, and follows nearly 4,000 jobs being cut over the past two years since the takeover of EDS by HP.

"This will create further insecurity and uncertainty in HP with the threat of yet more redundancies to come, and undermines the coalition Government view that the private sector will fuel job growth out of the economic recession."

Unite warned the company that by cutting workplace levels "to the bone", remaining workers would be in danger of developing stress-related illnesses.

Mr Skyte added: "There are also serious implications for those who remain in their jobs and carry on service to customers and clients.

"Skeleton levels of staff will lead to stressed-out workers who struggle to complete an ever increasing workload.

"The fact that the company still retains nearly 2,000 temporary staff and contractors merely adds insult to injury."

Unite said sites expected to be hit by the job losses included Bracknell, Bristol, Hook, Erskine, Milton Keynes, London and Warrington.

Copyright © Press Association Ltd. 2010, All Rights Reserved.

Anger after 900 computer jobs axed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anger after 900 computer jobs axed

* Press Association, Monday July 5 2010

Union leaders have condemned news of almost 1,000 job losses at a leading computer firm, warning it undermines the Government's view that private firms will lead the UK out of recession.

Unite warned the 934 job losses at US giant Hewlett Packard (HP) could be followed by a further 1,000 cuts next year.

The union said the announcement showed that the jobs designed to replace those lost in manufacturing were now being lost or off-shored.

National officer Peter Skyte said: "This is a further cull by HP of its skilled and experienced UK workforce, and follows nearly 4,000 jobs being cut over the past two years since the takeover of EDS by HP.

"This will create further insecurity and uncertainty in HP with the threat of yet more redundancies to come, and undermines the coalition Government view that the private sector will fuel job growth out of the economic recession."

Unite warned the company that by cutting workplace levels "to the bone", remaining workers would be in danger of developing stress-related illnesses.

Mr Skyte added: "There are also serious implications for those who remain in their jobs and carry on service to customers and clients.

"Skeleton levels of staff will lead to stressed-out workers who struggle to complete an ever increasing workload.

"The fact that the company still retains nearly 2,000 temporary staff and contractors merely adds insult to injury."

Unite said sites expected to be hit by the job losses included Bracknell, Bristol, Hook, Erskine, Milton Keynes, London and Warrington.

Copyright © Press Association Ltd. 2010, All Rights Reserved.

Anger after 900 computer jobs axed

Sorry duplicate post. Someone beat me to it. Boy you gotta be quick on here!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unite warned the company that by cutting workplace levels "to the bone", remaining workers would be in danger of developing stress-related illnesses.

That's the whole point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What does this idiot from the union expect?

Permies are more expensive than contractors/temps. They are also less flexible in terms of being able to fire and hire as workload goes up or down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest spp

And how so many people were falling for the 'green shoots' nonsense!

Politicians, banksters and MSM... be prepared.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What does this idiot from the union expect?

Permies are more expensive than contractors/temps. They are also less flexible in terms of being able to fire and hire as workload goes up or down.

more mortgagable though! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What does this idiot from the union expect?

Permies are more expensive than contractors/temps. They are also less flexible in terms of being able to fire and hire as workload goes up or down.

But they are temps?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the whole point.

It's natural that companies with unionised staff should be less competitive and fail. Shame for the people involved (but whoever heard of IT staff so lame that they needed union representation). Good for the economy and the fight against communism .

Edited by mightytharg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The move from permanent staff to temp staff is happening all over the shop. No surprise - as Rolf quite rightly says the big bosses prefer the flexibility. Yes they cost a bit more (Sometimes) - but they don't care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's natural that companies with unionised staff should be less competitive and fail. Shame for the people involved (but whoever heard of IT staff so lame that they needed union representation). Good for the economy and the fight against communism .

If all employees can be made aware of the insecurity of their positions by occupational changes around them and if, in consequence, they seek to redress this by acting in collusion with each other then every employee is a potential trade unionist.

This is not conjecture but an analytical truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's natural that companies with unionised staff should be less competitive and fail. Shame for the people involved (but whoever heard of IT staff so lame that they needed union representation). Good for the economy and the fight against communism .

Compter says no.

Economies ranked by trade union membership and ranked by GDP per head according to the World Bank.

1  Sweden:  82%   10th2  Denmark: 76%    4th  Finland: 76%    9th4  Norway:  57%    2th5  Belgium: 53%   11th6  Ireland: 45%    5th7  Austria: 37%    8th
Edited by barry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The move from permanent staff to temp staff is happening all over the shop. No surprise - as Rolf quite rightly says the big bosses prefer the flexibility. Yes they cost a bit more (Sometimes) - but they don't care.

It's got nothing to do with 'flexibility'. It's all about control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If all employees can be made aware of the insecurity of their positions by occupational changes around them and if, in consequence, they seek to redress this by acting in collusion with each other then every employee is a potential trade unionist.

This is not conjecture but an analytical truth.

Very true.

As long as there are surplus employees available, there is no risk to employers.

As soon as there are more jobs than employees, there is a lot of risk to employers.

My prediction is that there will be surplus employees for a long time to come.

Employee aggression in a time of surplus employees will harm employees a lot. Employers will hardly notice.

Employees really need to understand when they have leverage and when they don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Compter says no.

Economies ranked by trade union membership and ranked by GDP per head according to the World Bank.

1  Sweden:  82%   10th2  Denmark: 76%    4th  Finland: 76%    9th4  Norway:  57%    2th5  Belgium: 53%   11th6  Ireland: 45%    5th7  Austria: 37%    8th

Is union membership relevant or is the real test the proportion of government spending that is debt financed?

Sometimes correlation leads to incorrect assumptions about causation.

Do you have any data that exposes the relationship between capital and labour in these countries (perhaps the percentage of possible work days lost as the result of industrial action)?

Rational co-operation (by both sides) is probably more constructive than confrontation (on both sides).

How do we get both sides to "grow up" in places like the UK and the US so that we encourage growth rather than mutually assured self destruction?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Employee aggression in a time of surplus employees will harm employees a lot. Employers will hardly notice.

And even if it doesn't, it harms non-employees.

"This here is our work. You lot aren't entitled to any of it."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What does this idiot from the union expect?

Permies are more expensive than contractors/temps. They are also less flexible in terms of being able to fire and hire as workload goes up or down.

trouble is that it is not so easy to fire politicos, banksters and all the other state chartered cartels.

their costs are a HUGE overhead on the expense of doing in business in the UK.

frankly, it's no wonder companies are choosing to scale down their business activity in this country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And even if it doesn't, it harms non-employees.

"This here is our work. You lot aren't entitled to any of it."

Very true. An oversight / error on my part.

Barriers to entry in difficult times harm potential employees and slow down the adjustments required for the eventual recovery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is union membership relevant or is the real test the proportion of government spending that is debt financed?

Sometimes correlation leads to incorrect assumptions about causation.

Do you have any data that exposes the relationship between capital and labour in these countries (perhaps the percentage of possible work days lost as the result of industrial action)?

Rational co-operation (by both sides) is probably more constructive than confrontation (on both sides).

How do we get both sides to "grow up" in places like the UK and the US so that we encourage growth rather than mutually assured self destruction?

During economic boom times employers promote a partnership approach to workers and their unions because it suits them but as soon as the bad economic times hit employers resort to a more confrontational approach.

Then put the blame on militant left wing union trouble makers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Compter says no.

Economies ranked by trade union membership and ranked by GDP per head according to the World Bank.

1  Sweden:  82%   10th2  Denmark: 76%    4th  Finland: 76%    9th4  Norway:  57%    2th5  Belgium: 53%   11th6  Ireland: 45%    5th7  Austria: 37%    8th

How many of these countries have "skills shortages" that allow companies to import cheap staff, train them up to replace existing staff either in their own country or abroad, with acceptance from the Unions themselves who were so short sighted they just saw the potential to up their numbers a bit no matter how much damage it did to existing members.

Do these countries also provide tax breaks for doing the above too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These might not be truly private sector jobs, the EDS wing of HP is largely involved in government IT systems. You know, those massive, over bureaucratic systems that are obsolete long before they have passed out of the design stage.

This is probably a private sector impact of a public sector budget cut, there will be many more before this is over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

trouble is that it is not so easy to fire politicos, banksters and all the other state chartered cartels.

their costs are a HUGE overhead on the expense of doing in business in the UK.

frankly, it's no wonder companies are choosing to scale down their business activity in this country.

The biggest problem for global companies is the large certainty around future tax and regulatory regimes in countries that are in a fiscal mess. This view is a derivative of the Permanent Income Hypothesis on the cost side rather than the income side.

At this stage, the problem really isn't limited to the UK. It is clear to the owners of capital that decaying, previously wealthy, northern hemishpere nations are in decline because of the social promises that they have made which are not sustainable relative to national wealth. These nations may try to delay the inevitable requirement to cut social promises to sustainable levels relative to national income by adopting draconian, anti-business tax regimes which can only work in the relatively short run.

The low risk strategy for the owners of capital is to deploy their capital in regimes which are more likely to experience growth and are less likely to demand an unreasonable share of the returns on capital.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And how so many people were falling for the 'green shoots' nonsense!
We're in a 'Which way?...This way?....That way?' situation at the moment. The last couple of weeks have seen a return of gloom and doom, but before that there was a bit of a bull run on the markets, house prices were appearing to go up and unemployment was gong down. It wouldn't surprise me if things go a bit up-beat again in a few weeks. Maybe the economy is just bumping along the bottom, with ups and downs - with no real recovery - and it could be like this for years.
northern hemishpere nations are in decline because of the social promises that they have made which are not sustainable relative to national wealth.
I thought it was more to do with banks lending money profligately for to any Tom, Dick or Harry on the back of rapidly rising property prices. If bank lending had been less reckless, then we probably wouldn't be facing the problems of public finance on the same scale. Edited by blankster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 276 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.