Thread regarding Williams Cos. layoffs

SEC will do nothing, except report back to Williams and file in the circullar folder, anybody filling a compliant will get black listed and never find a job again.

My Employee Stock Purchase Plan holdings/reasonable corporate profits to prevent future cost cutting etc... cares if people are making decisions for personal gain and not in the best interest of the company.

SEC may laugh as such a complaint given it is probably just bad business.

If it really bugs you that much report it to the SEC, nobody on this board or at Williams cares about it.

So we had Williams people going on overseas trips with WIPRO? I thought that would be a conflict of interest if you are a decision maker/influencer of that WIPRO agreement.

When, I talk about life not being fair,

It is not meant be negative. Just do your best, and make the most of the cards that where dealt to you.

Tiny Steps for some people, that is the just way life is, everybody cannot be a big shot at Williams and surrive, doesn't mean squat.

Do what management tells you do and do it with a smile! ☝️

To keep costs under budget on an IM project, I was directed to Expense my time to other areas and not charge my time directly to that project. My IM Manager told me to "Align" as WIPRO could do my job much cheaper. All we were doing were moving costs around, no real savings to the company.

Three things to remember,

1. Directors/managers will do anything to save costs, unless it is their own position.

2. Computer skills are in high demand right now, find a better job and better yourself while you can.

3. Life isn't fair, forget about it.

Be careful interacting with anyone from Williams that has gone on WIPRO "Business Trips" to India, they have drank the Koolaid. If true on project costing for labor, wondering where the Williams Auditors were at when the data was put together for these decisions?

Hope the Stock Analysts are looking at all of this as Williams could clean out this trash and be a great company.

I can believe it, the numbers where doctored in 2016 to justify the terminations.

Like I said, it's just like surrivor. Some groups where not touched and other groups where hammered in the termination, had little to do with talent. Very unfortunate.

This makes me wonder how IT groups handled the salary spread for employees that didn't charge to projects, while only a few in that group worked on projects. Those few had astronomical hourly rates?

That formula doesn't sound right, those Managers aren't that stupid when making a comparison.

In 2016, the cost of an IM Williams employee was calculated by also adding in a portion of the Manager's total compensation. Example: If the Williams Manager has 6 employees, their salary is split over the 6 employees hourly rate against a project. If you worked in a group with few employees, it killed your hourly rate on projects.

However, for WIPRO, they do NOT figure in the cost of the WIPRO manager pay into the WIPRO employees hourly rate.

This unfortunate calculation above is not precise, but is how some Managers in IM used Business Cases to let go Williams employees as their hourly rate was too high compared to WIPRO. This doesn't get into job performance, only the accounting. HRBPs were aware. Unsure how this is done now.

It's a game of surrival, sometimes the talented ones are retained because they need them, on the other hand lots of talented ones where terminated As well due to excess supply, and/or if they are threat to either the organization or somebody's job.

To say that the weakest ones where terminated shows a complete ignorance of how lay off works.

Life isn't fair, sometimes the best defense is a strong offense. People will always run to HR, to try throw others under the bus to get ahead.

Cover yourself, do well and ignore this krap, and you can protect yourself from being victimized by these rays and sleazeballs that will do anything to get ahead. If that doesn't work consider getting out and moving on before the hacket person comes looking for bounty.

HRBPs are active in IM when someone is called out for not doing their job, they seem to take the side of the person that contacts them first. The accused doesn't get a chance to tell their side, they are coached and you better be receptive if you want to keep your job. You simply cannot ask someone in a meeting or copy others on an email asking someone when something is going to get done if it is overdue as it may hurt someone's feelings.

Typical, every company has its own culture, and if you don't fit in better off moving on before you get hammered. I implemented a lot of safety improvements myself but also ruffled a lot of feathers doing it, I hear the culture has improved a lot, good thing.

If a project is sinking, you have got to be able to sit quiet in a meeting or tell the project leaders they are doing a fine job! Doing your job does not help you enough to keep your job. Otherwise, be ready to hit the street when the music stops.

Don't see much of a difference in talent between the ones that where terminated and the ones where retained. Seems like age was a big factor, and.Anybody that went against the flow, got hit pretty hard.

Yeah, there a few slackers terminated as well, but most of them where all ready fired.

No way!

The weak employees were let go, get over it!

The CIO appears to have excellent IT skills, but unfortunately allows himself to be surrounded by those making political recommendations. He needs to dig deeper into this.

If you challenge someone to do their job, they run to HR and you now have a target on your back. Some HRBPs have allowed themselves to be a tool of the political system.

A person needs to spend 10% of their time telling everyone above them how hard they work and that should insure survival, those spending 100% of their time doing their job could be at risk.

If you look at the number of Tulsa managers in IT (IM) that where demoted over the last 5 years, many of them still had political leverage to blacklist employees that could compete against them should they get a foot hold to regain a manager position. The CIO turned the other way as he seemed to surround himself with political people, probably worse then he realizes.

I agree, no official blacklist exists, but kicking out good employees and keeping them out in some areas was a political priority.

They also don't want a rehired employee to perform well, since it would make the decision to terminate look incorrect. It would be a threat to the status quo and nobody wants that. This would not be a consideration in a company that truly valued performance, they would be looking to bring in the best talented and qualified employee and in many cases that is the terminated employee.

There are signs of being blacklisted, read up on the internet.

I would agree with that, it is very doubtful that an actual physical "blacklist" exists. However it is very likely that the most unprofessional managers are using their own networks to toss people under the bus, even after they where terminated. It is a pretty unhealthy situation, because " wink wink" no manager or director is going to stick their neck out to rehire an terminated employee. I dont think that is good for the company or is a proper HR policy as well. Just my opinion.

It does appear there have been some cheap shots taken and laid off employees tagged as not eligible for rehire. A different case entirely if someone one fired, but to do this for a layoff is unprofessional. My guess is no list, just rogue political managers or those that are no longer managers trying to survive and not allow a strong competitor back in the door. HR turning their heads to this, horrible.

Change is good, bring em back.

Don't care they are hiring. What about the list, is it real and can someone high up like a VP please push the CEO and HR to reverse their thinking? Unlikely, but you never know, things can improve.

Most people should put Williams on their don't apply list. Williams is a memory, his co. Isn't a shadow of its former self, please move on and quickly.