[kaushik_s]

Originally Posted by dadu

8) Aricent--- a communication based software company, has never fired any employee and gives great perks & incentives, lot of projects in kitty. Minimal level of attrition.

Wow, looks like some PR person from aricent have added this to the list which was missing in the original list what a sad way of advertising.
BTW this whole list is crap, mods please delete this thread (disclaimer : I don't work for any of these companies but remember receiving this mail few years back)

[diabloo]

List may be out-of-date but not crap. There are many who would like to work for cozy companies (low risk, low returns) and this thread can provide pointers. I request all members to update this thread and keep it up to date.

Originally Posted by kaushik_s

BTW this whole list is crap, mods please delete this thread

[kaushik_s]

Originally Posted by diabloo

List may be out-of-date but not crap. There are many who would like to work for cozy companies (low risk, low returns) and this thread can provide pointers. I request all members to update this thread and keep it up to date.

This thread may be a good idea to inform people but the list on the first post is not.And as you've said the list is not up-to-date then what's the point of having that list ? With this ever changing IT world something not up-to-date means obsolete and adds nothing. And I know quite a few information provided on the list not correct and misleading.For example, say if some Team-bhpian has got an offer from a company from the black-listed companies on that list, and say it was Intel ,but he decided to give it a pass as he has read it here that Intel is firing people(which is not true in current scenario).So who will be at loss ?Wasn't a person got misled by a piece of wrong information ? It's about someone's career so better to keep distance from such rumors.
Regards,
Kaushik

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by diabloo

A person gets 'X' salary. If he asks '2X', he won't get it. So he quits. When the same company hires a new person, they are willing to pay '2X', while incurring recruitment costs. Why don't they pay '2X' and retain the person?

The guy who didn't get 2X probably didn't deserve it. The guy who got it probably deserved it or at least showed potential for deserving it.

Generally most IT guys are overpaid, actually very few are underpaid, and it is them who finance the rest.

Ok, hold on to your horses, before exploding on me, hear me out. As somebody who runs a software company, I can explain the dynamics.

You may have heard this statement, 80% of the world is owned by 20% of the people and the remaining 80% people own the remaining 20%. These percentages can vary, but the idea is clear.

The IT companies are heavily depended on the skill level of their employees, more so than any other industry. The same 80:20 (it can vary, even 90:10 in product comapnies) idea works in IT companies. When a company hires 100 people, it is the top 10 performers from those 100 who really make the difference and bring success to the company. The remaining 90 people matter, but their contribution is supplementary and they can be easily replaced. I am not talking senior management vs junior staff here. Consider all 100 to be of same seniority. If one goes purely by contribution, the top 10 deserves 10 times or more compensation when compared to the the rest. But that never happens. At the most the top most performer may get twice as the worst performer at the same seniority level. If you average it out, most people among this 100 are actually overpaid compared to their contribution, and the few top performers are underpaid compared to their contribution.

No company would really mind paying 2X to a top performer, the problem starts when an employee thinks he is part of the top few and the company doesn't. Who is right, it depends on individual cases. Sometimes, the company is underestimating the employee's real value and sometimes the employee is overestimating himself/herself. But in the current IT job scene I can definitely say that most employees overestimate their worth. The companies still pay because it is the industry standards. All the while they are secretly hoping that a few may turn out to be severly underpaid, in other words earn 10-100 times of what they are paid.

[rjstyles69]

Meaningless thread !! I remember reading the same mail about 2 years back.
I dunno what ground it holds coz I see some of those top firing companies in the big list for hiring and vice -versa.

You deserve to be fired if you never worked.

[dadu]

@ All, Please read the disclaimer along with the source link provided by technocrat which is most recent (yes, I wasnt aware of that blog when I posted) and this is without any prejudice to anyone here, working / prospective or otherwise.

I am sure most of us here have heard about MNC's downsizing due to lack of work/ profitability etc.

But I have never heard any Indian/ transnational organizations doing it for the same reasons, its always productivity and performance.

I am also sure that most of our information comes from newpaper, TV and other media as you dont expect the company PR representative to call you.

Media is our prime source and we believe in it.

[diabloo]

The irony is that recruiting companies found the potential to pay '2X'. But their current companies never found their potential. In the end, both get '2X' and all are happy.

Originally Posted by Samurai

The guy who didn't get 2X probably didn't deserve it. The guy who got it probably deserved it or at least showed potential for deserving it.

The reason for this anomaly is that HR is clueless about what to do and so they blindly do what other are doing. We have seen great engineer, great CEOs, great marketing, great financial people who innovate and come out with solutions. Alas, we haven't seen a great HR. They just seem to hang in there (and try have a good time).

[diabloo]

Why post in a meaningless thread?

Originally Posted by rjstyles69

Meaningless thread !!

Voila, you have something to say

I remember reading the same mail about 2 years back.
I dunno what ground it holds coz I see some of those top firing companies in the big list for hiring and vice -versa.

Has anybody been fired for non-performance in India? Most likely the reasons got nothing to do with performance.

You deserve to be fired if you never worked.

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by diabloo

The irony is that recruiting companies found the potential to pay '2X'. But their current companies never found their potential. In the end, both get '2X' and all are happy.

Who do you think will know more about the employee, the current company or the future company? Anyway, this can be debated until cows come home.

Originally Posted by diabloo

Has anybody been fired for non-performance in India? Most likely the reasons got nothing to do with performance.

The very first guy I ever interviewed and hired (in 1991), I was forced to fire him for incompetency, we were a small company without HR department. I guess that was because of my inexperience, it was my first and I only had one year experience.

However, I have seen lots of people getting fired for incompetency over years, many times in India. Therefore, don't go around thinking nobody gets fired for incompetency in India. Unless you have visibility to actual decision making process, you are only making wild guesses.

[Firebird]

Originally Posted by diabloo

Voila, you have something to say
Has anybody been fired for non-performance in India? Most likely the reasons got nothing to do with performance.

In most of the companies in my IT career I have seen people fired for non-performance.

Pink slip sometimes has some link to performance....but not always....I really donot see any sense in firing or layoffs happening in India. The ratio is still 1:2 or 1:3 considering India and US/UK....so India operations are still safer to work.

[akroy]

Originally Posted by dadu

8) Satyam --- Currently stopped firing. The Attrition rate is very high. No firing from 2005 until now when 1000 employees were fired in Hyderabad.

dadu, the firing was done based on background check (fake resumes, experiences, education), which I fully support. There are lots of people in the IT industry who fake their resumes.

Post 2006, they have a proper background check methodology before anyone joins them. I joined Satyam in Dec06 and I had to send the background informations/certificates before I got my offer letter.

How come no mention of Sasken in the list? they didnt fire anyone even in 2001 slowdown (reduced their salary by 20% and then heavy hiked when things came back to normal in 2003)

Abhi

[VJ_MAVRICK]

Adding my 2 cents to this firing scenario mostly prevalent during background checks and i happen to know that IBM falls in this category as some of my acquaintances had this bitter truth surface after joining.
I fail to understand this specifically, concerning the firing on background checks with regards to IBM in particular as it is laid out that when a person gets hired and before joining this is done, and i suppose this needs to be done before a person is hired. I don't understand why is this not done before giving the offer letter and quite ridiculously done after some "n" number of months in this case can refer to IBM.

[diabloo]

I wonder why the HR accepted the fake stuff in the first place? First they should have been fired for dereliction of duty.

Originally Posted by akroy

dadu, the firing was done based on background check (fake resumes, experiences, education), which I fully support. There are lots of people in the IT industry who fake their resumes.

Can you recall when the HR was efficient?

Originally Posted by VJ_MAVRICK

I fail to understand this specifically, concerning the firing on background checks with regards to IBM in particular as it is laid out that when a person gets hired and before joining this is done, and i suppose this needs to be done before a person is hired. I don't understand why is this not done before giving the offer letter and quite ridiculously done after some "n" number of months in this case can refer to IBM.

During hiring spree, they turned blind eye to these fake stuff. When the going got tough, suddenly they found about these fake stuff and found a reason to fire them.

[kaushik_s]

Originally Posted by diabloo

Has anybody been fired for non-performance in India? Most likely the reasons got nothing to do with performance.

Yes, many companies fire people on non-performance, may be you don't know but that doesn't mean that it doesn't happen. It's also true that most of the time you'll read in the newspaper about about downsizing due to financial crisis but that's what media like to portrait and it's a news.But other way also it happens and that never comes to news and I guess it shouldn't also as it's not a news at all.
regards,

[VJ_MAVRICK]

Originally Posted by diabloo

Can you recall when the HR was efficient?


During hiring spree, they turned blind eye to these fake stuff. When the going got tough, suddenly they found about these fake stuff and found a reason to fire them.

Yea Diabloo ! Thats definite for sure but still why is it that others succeed in implementing while some fail? Need a revamp of such HR policies