Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

My Position On The Disney Layoffs

plus.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 148 posts

Re: My Position On The Disney Layoffs

#51

Post by dspillett »

kogus wrote: post #23
coldcode wrote: post #5

"... and they routinely sacrificed personal time and freedoms to help make your experience in the parks what it was". Never do this unless its a startup you own. You get paid for X to do Y hours and nothing more. Anything more is volunteer work for a for-profit employer.

That's a pretty cynical attitude. It's definitely possible to work for a for-profit company and still care personally about the success of whatever they are doing. You don't have a moral obligation to bend over backwards for a company, but it's ok to be committed for reasons other than a paycheck.

> It's definitely possible to work for a for-profit company and still care personally

It is certainly possible, and usually very much appreciated (sometimes even rewarded) in the short term.

Just don't expect it to make much difference to how you are treated over the longer term. The company won't forget that you are an employee and you shouldn't either. Heck, a company with shareholders is practically legally obliged to screw you over if it is better for the company to do so than not.

Re: My Position On The Disney Layoffs

#52

Post by dspillett »

pgrote wrote: post #35
protomyth wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They hired them through a third-party, thus Disney had to justify nothing. Look at the list of H1B awards and you'll see the big body shops.

I am having trouble understanding your point and hoping you can clarify it. Disney contracted with this company to perform this action. Isn't Disney responsible for accepting these actions?

All Disney have done from their "you can't prove anything else" point of view is cut costs by finding a cheaper source of local labour through a 3rd party. They have no control over how said 3rd party arranges for the cheaper labour to be made available, or at least no control that can be proven beyond doubt. In fact they probably have no interest at all in how the people get to them - it is none of their business and something to concern the 3rd party only. At least that is my reading of the situation.

Re: My Position On The Disney Layoffs

#53

Post by protonfish »

someone7x wrote: post #32
theklub wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do we need to make it easy for people to come take our jobs? Why would we do that?

I suppose the logic is that with the same bargaining power as domestic workers, there would be a lot less exploitation. By extension, "job taking" by underpaid foreigners would decrease but competition for jobs would increase.

Exactly. I have worked with many new/aspiring Americans and have no problem with them and welcome the competition. The problem is that they have much more to lose, so they are open to abuse. If I don't like a job, I can quit, but they can be deported. Current immigration policy treats foreign workers like crap and nobody should have to compete with another worker with the same skills but with a government stamp that allows them to be treated like garbage.

Re: My Position On The Disney Layoffs

#54

Post by exelius »

ececconi wrote: post #49
exelius wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe the author is simply mistaken that H1-Bs are the problem. H1-Bs are limited enough that they can't be responsible for the volume of outsourcing. They also carry salary parity requirements, and while H1-B holders rarely actually make market salary, the savings still aren't enough to prompt a wave of outsourcing. There was a problem at one time with H1-Bs, but the H1-B lottery has become so competitive that i…

I've seen some firms make org charts that showed that a person on an L-1 visa was "managing" someone when in fact they were an independent contributor.

Yeah, that's what I mean by lie; I've seen these types of documents used in L-1s as well. But at least in India, there's no cultural taboo against lying to someone you don't know to get what you want (the assumption being that they are also lying to stonewall you in exchange for a bribe).

Re: My Position On The Disney Layoffs

#56

Post by fluidcruft »

iktl wrote: post #31
mlrtime wrote: post #29

To voice your opinion, email guest.services@disneyworld.com. This was the reply I received: Dear Guest, Thank you for contacting us regarding recent media reports about the information technology restructuring at Disney Parks. We greatly value the contributions of our Cast Members. We take great pride in the fact that we have regularly been ranked as one of the best places to work in the United States, but we are alw…

Sadly, none of which says anything about the 70 new jobs and 30,000 jobs total added in the US being non-citizens. New jobs in the US != NOT H1B workers. Skillfully avoiding the topic, but I guess that's why he has that job. And I say this as a non-citizen working in the US.

As reported in the original NYT article, the 70 new Disney IT jobs are actual Disney employees, not the controversial outsourced contractors (though the new Disney employees may or may not include H1-B workers).

The eliminated Disney IT jobs were outsourced to a contracting shop. The contracting shop hired H1-B workers to perform the outsourced work. The net overall effect appears to be that H1B workers replaced Disney IT workers.

If you look at the corporate level: Disney didn't hire any H1-B workers as part of the restructuring, ergo Disney didn't replace existing jobs with H1-B workers. The contracting firm didn't fire anyone, ergo the contracting firm didn't replace existing jobs with H1-B workers. But apparently nobody is accountable for the overall effect.

Re: My Position On The Disney Layoffs

#57

Post by SlalomStallone »

jerf wrote: post #16
ThePhysicist wrote: post #7

"I'm sharing news about it because this experience has taught me the H-1b Visa program needs to change to protect others in the future." It's surprising to me that Disney was able to replace its local workforce by foreigners via H-1b visas, since I always thought that companies making use of this type of visa were required to prove that they would not be able to find an employee with the required qualifications in th…

I'd also be curious if there was some possible form of recompense possible, like a class action suit. (To be clear, I'm just tossing legal terms around that I have a vague understanding of, and I know that's what I'm doing. I'm asking for those who might know more for the real info. Emphasis "know".)

They could if they wanted to, but I don't know if I'd want to be known as the guy that sued his employer.

Normally the plaintiffs see very little of the cash if they were to win, it's normally the lawyers that make out like bandits in those cases so it wouldn't be worth it.

Most likely anyone at Disney that was facing layoffs and has marketable skills will leave.

Re: My Position On The Disney Layoffs

#58

Post by gigawhat »

I used to rail against the H1-B program until I realized that the body-shop consultancies aren't hurting demand for my services. . . they're increasing it.

It seems like at least 75% of the body-shop projects end up being so poorly executed that people like me inevitably get called in to revamp and clean up the mess.

By all means, corporate America, keep giving out big projects to the lowest bidder, who will throw their international cheap labor at it. Then call me up to pick up the pieces in a year or two at my usual high rate, working from home 100%.

Re: My Position On The Disney Layoffs

#59

Post by talmand »

exelius wrote: post #47
pgrote wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am having trouble understanding your point and hoping you can clarify it. Disney contracted with this company to perform this action. Isn't Disney responsible for accepting these actions?

Disney doesn't ask questions about how people are procured. From Disney's perspective, they're just hiring a company to take over technical operations and support. Technology is honestly not Disney's core competency, so it makes sense to outsource to someone who can do the same work with a lower cost base because it IS their core competency. They just have to sign a contract with Cognizant/Wipro/Infosys/etc that says…

I would somewhat disagree with the thought that technology is not Disney's core competency. Technology is a really, really big deal for Disney and has been for a long time. It is a major part of their day-to-day across the entire company and they are quite competent at it. They didn't hand these tasks over to someone else because they were somehow better at it or Disney's people were incompetent. I simply cannot believe that.

Re: My Position On The Disney Layoffs

#60

Post by ececconi »

gigawhat wrote: post #58

I used to rail against the H1-B program until I realized that the body-shop consultancies aren't hurting demand for my services. . . they're increasing it. It seems like at least 75% of the body-shop projects end up being so poorly executed that people like me inevitably get called in to revamp and clean up the mess. By all means, corporate America, keep giving out big projects to the lowest bidder, who will throw th…

Then the project ends up being delivered late, over budget, then the middle-managers that signed off on it get replaced or reprimanded by the execs. Vicious cycle.

If you see the way these body-shop projects are pitched, it's one of the few things that make me lose hope in humanity. They bring in an exec who pitches the project, undercuts the competition by about 50%, then they staff some PMs who have no idea what they're walking into.

Post reply on HN