I've been here for two years and most of it I hated. Some of my coworkers keep remembering "the good old days" but I'm having trouble believing this place was ever much better than it is now. I can understand that companies change but not by that much. There had to have been a COLOSSAL shift in culture, politics, management, and pretty much everything for Honeywell to have ever been as good as they claim. Is that really what happened?
20 replies (most recent on top)
I wish I could hit the + five times for that post. It is exactly correct.
Each of the legacy companies was excellent. Be it Garrett, AiResearch, Bendix, Sperry, Honeywell, Sundstrand Data Controls, etc.
"Growth through acquisition" ruined aviation.
Unlike how Honeywell pays suppliers net 180 days, it's pension payments are perfectly on-time.
What I remember (as opposed to how it may be now):
- HR was on your side, not the company's (not HR's fault but this ended ~20 years ago)
- Approachable, competent, caring manager, almost always (your results may vary)
- Co-located, sometimes, with a focused team with good chemistry, usually (~maybe)
- A pension and a 401K match, way way cool (pension long gone)
- A decent shot at making Band 4 with MIP (getting very difficult, also is the MIP shrinking?)
- A culture of integrity and quality, even if it wasn't world-shaking edgy technology (dunno)
- For a short time, even, paid overtime for exempts, yes, really (that's history)
- Frequent enough travel to nice places (dunno)
- Some customers really great to work with, some challenging (I suspect this is still true)
- Most co-workers more than decent, some ... uh ... more interesting than others (probably the same)
- Once actually had one engineer co-worker who was an extrovert (he quit)
- Outside of work activities with co-workers (this may have fallen off a bit)
- Completing a tough but successful program or activity (must still happen)
- They worked you hard and paid you good (dunno)
I loved my Honeywell career, every minute. Bring as much light as you can.
Lots of relevant and accurate comments. In my opinion the slide started when Allied Chemical got involved in the '80s and accelerated tremendously when the GE refugees took over. Prior to Allied, both Garrett and Honeywell were companies full of relatively satisfied workers who were proud of their companies and the products they made. That continued at Honeywell until AlliedSignal got involved.
All these comments are right on. I've been here for a really long time and just am staying for the pension and 401k match - but these are getting much less important. The view changed about 15-20 years ago - today Americans are expensive and nothing more than a necessity for the export compliance need. I find it ridiculous that the expectation is to pick up your Honeywell well pom-poms and cheer for the company. The total lack of understanding that employee loyalty to a company is directly related to company loyalty to the employee is wild. Listen, I'm under no illusion that they would RIF me tomorrow (and still may) if I didn't fill a small need. I have no interest anymore on what this company does or thinks it can do. I just make sure my resume is up to date.
Pure and simple. Allied-Signal, later combined with the original Honeywell, became infected with GE culture. Neutron Jack and his evil spawn – Bossidy, Cote, and now DA. The biggest 'tell' for me came when I tried to get Allied-Signal to match a gift to my alma mater during Cote's reign. They very quietly did away with such matching gifts to American colleges at a time when Cote bragged about his support for students in India (or Indier as he liked to pronounce it). Disgusting.
- C*te changed the culture. (And he doesn't care from his island off Fla coast.) For me things really started changing in 2008. At Aero, after SAP went in corporate wanted instant savings. It also coincided with the rapid off-shoring - Czech and Mexico. SAP itself wasn't a saver, if you don't have fewer people and / or lower price of supplied parts. I started in 1998. The focus was all about making the best parts, engineering, the processes - more technical. I'll even add people - the company wanted trained, skilled people who knew how to make parts. So people were valued. Around 2009 everything became a widget and employees became a block n the big corporate Excel sheet. I remember the email when the company banned "celebrations", and also shut down employees club and all company sponsored events for employees too. Also ended all the training we used to get. Expenses.
About 20 yrs ago allied signal bought Honeywell but took the Honeywell name because their name and reputation was horrible with customers, vendors, and employees. That is no joke. Unfortunately the business practices stayed and now only the name is different.
I think there needs to be a note added to this discussion. The internet has enabled the globalization of jobs.
The turning point of large corporations started around 25 years ago. President Clinton attempted to bring bloated CEO pay back in line and the tax code was changed to try to cap executive pay. Like any other tax code change, a loophole was added which resulted in the opposite effect. Companies were taxed on ordinary compensation for their executives, but not on performance bonuses (usually tied to stock performance). The top executives might make a two million dollar salary, but get 40 million in performance bonus stock options (which they then held onto for a while so that they would only pay 15% in capital gains tax). Thus the seeds were sown.
If you can't grow the company to increase stock price, it becomes a sure bet to do the same by moving labor offshore to lower cost markets, buying back stock to keep the price up, cutting employee benefits, reduce overhead with fewer locations, shifting tax burden by reporting sales etc. These changes help to meet the stock performance objectives while punishing domestic employees. As another poster noted, it is not just Honeywell but all large "multi-national" corporations who do (or will do) this. Pure greed, but they will claim it is for the good of the shareholders.
The tax code could be easily fixed except for the lobbyists, whose job it is to keep the palms of those in power thoroughly greased with corporate money through PAC donations, buying books that nobody will read, and other shenanigans. Did you ever wonder how those that are elected to congress become obscenely wealthy just like their corporate executive brethren (and how they end up on corporate boards after leaving office)? Party does not seem to matter.
Fantastic company to work for in the 70's when I started, at least in Aero. Learjet was phenomenal with our engines and couldn't make them fast enough. Everyone aligned to meet the challenge, and we owned 85% of APU market. Two things happened in my view. One, we started getting overconfident because of 85% APU market share opening the door for competitors which pressured sales. And the biggest, in my opinion, was taking the position that you didn't need to know anything about the business to be a manager, just how to handle people, That sunk us as they started bringing in leaders from Mars candy, Ford, Mattel, and other places who were abject failures. Floor bosses that knew how to write people up but couldn't solve one single problem on the floor and couldn't even hold a conversation on the subject. Later the added insult to injury by publicizing that anyone who stayed in a job for more than 18 months was not aggressive enough to be in leadership, further sinking the boat as respected experts were passed by for the whiz bangs who later incorporated off shoring as a corporate principle.
Before HW, I worked at another large, global corporation. They did approximately the same things as HW in terms of tightening benefits and office space over a period of about 12 years, but they were not as nasty about it. With the help of prominent outside consulting firms, top leadership had a shift from viewing Americans as the life blood of the company to expensive overhead that must be replaced with lower-cost workers and hubs in emerging economies.
The turning point for us "on the ground" was when they hired someone from another culture as the head of HR, who started bringing in cheap workers from his country, and pushed out the Americans who had invented the product line that was #1 in the industry. Those Americans who remained were expected to adjust to his unamerican values regarding working conditions and compensation. The company is no longer #1, though their main competitor is doing the same dance and is faltering as well.
It was a "process" for the company to go from a "great place to work" to a "great place to leave". Though I came to HW after the damage was done, I can believe that it really was once a great place to work, but the guys at the top took the consultants' advice to extremes and trashed the place for their personal gain.
I worked at engines in engineering from 1990 to 2010. I was a new graduate when I was hired. Working at engines in engineering was fun, challenging and rewarding. I felt as if I was valued and rewarded. I was a principal contributor to many engines developed in the 1990’s and early 2000’s. These engines were and still are very successful. The change you see today started in the early 1990’s. I see that looking back. I believe the change is just money.
I can understand why it would be hard to believe that Airesearch, Garrett, Allied Signal was once a fantastic place to work. But simply put the company cared about it's work force. If market rate was say $xx per hour AS payed that and 10 to 20 % more. Benefits the same, example many companies had 401K matches 4 % was common 6% by a few Allied 8% Great Christmas bonus, the thinking pay or benefits will never be a reason for a person to not accept a job offer. h––l In the 70s we even got 2 reviews per year AND a COL adjustment. I think I worked there for probably 25 years before they started with the no raise c––p and the "promotion" with no raise or salary ban bump. Even if you were highly payed in your band a 2 to 4 % lump sum was typical . But beyond all the great pay and benefits you felt like you were part of a team and at the end of the quarter again you received recognition for making a shipment goal. I could list more examples of why it was such a super place to work but I'm sure you get the picture. Oh we did have occasional RIFs or layoff but some times we went 10 years between them.
I worked at engines in engineering from 1990 to 2010. I was a new grad just out of college when I started in 1990. Engines was a challenging, fun and exciting place to work in the 1990’s. Engineers were treated as an asset. I was a principal participant in creating several new engines over the years. All were/are successful. I was very lucky to have been given opportunity. I believe the result today is just money.
Yes, before Allied merged with Honeywell the Honeywell culture was fantastic. I do not have time now to provide many specifics other than leadership cared about employees and customers. It was all about delighting the customer and doing what was right and not just to save a buck. We invested for the future and employees were really treated like assets. You were never afraid back then to speak up if you saw something that could be done better. Never was concerned about job security. Everyone was treated with respect and your efforts were appreciated.
What always confused me is that I heard similar comments from the legacy Allied people about how great the Allied culture was prior to the merger.
Depends on the organization.
I spent 10 years in what is now SPS and it has changed very little from the time I started to the time I left. Every raise was followed by a furlough to claw back money. Promotions were token but never allowed a band jump. Bosses were toxic and more concerned about self preservation. Annual reviews had very little to do with actual performance. Asked to wear multiple hats and given few if any additional resources. No one should go themselves about this organization.
Yes