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

61–70 of 148 posts

Re: My Position On The Disney Layoffs

#61

Post by mnglkhn2 »

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…

This article "Who Really Let the Disney Tech Workers Down: Disney or the H-1B Visa Program?"(http://discuss.ilw.com/content.php?4564-Article-Who-Really-L... explains the loophole used by Disney.

It is very important to understand that Disney did not hire H1Bs, because it couldn't do so. It would have been blocked by the H1b Visa rules. What Disney did was to subcontract a company to take over certain parts of the IT infrastructure.

Disney can easily argue that it is in its own economic interest to find and use the path that generates the most profits, while legal. The same as the argument that it is in everybody's own right to use any loophole to pay as little tax as possible. And both arguments are enshrined in what makes America great and allows for everybody to have a shot at the American Dream.

Now, you can read my lines above and maybe sense a hint of sarcasm. But I find it disingenuous to blame the H1Bs as being the problem.

[1] Who Really Let the Disney Tech Workers Down: Disney or the H-1B Visa Program? By Michael Phulwani, Esq., David H. Nachman, Esq. and Rabindra K. Singh, Esq. (http://discuss.ilw.com/content.php?4564-Article-Who-Really-L...)

Re: My Position On The Disney Layoffs

#62

Post by jobu »

This is a great line:

"If you view your staff as a liability, it's more likely a leadership problem."

If a company's employees are not an asset, then leadership hasn't done it's job of either weeding out the bad people or spending enough money to attract and grow good people.

Re: My Position On The Disney Layoffs

#63

Post by jonlucc »

dspillett wrote: post #52
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?

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 an…

In fact, if Disney had control over hiring decisions by the contractor, they'd open themselves up to co-employment issues.

Re: My Position On The Disney Layoffs

#64

Post by xienze »

kirinan wrote: post #6

I usually don't comment on immigration policies because I'm a US citizen and have never been an immigrant worker, however I dont believe this affects the long term success or failure of the H1B visa program and nor should it. We do exist in a global economy and you must therefore compete globally. If a company feels that they can get equal talent to mine in another country for cheaper costs then so be it; I didn't do…

> If a company feels that they can get equal talent to mine in another country for cheaper costs then so be it; I didn't do a good enough job selling my talent or showing why Im worth my rate. Its also the company's loss if they chose to lay me off; I know what Im worth and Ill go find what Im worth.

This is a very common line of thinking among the younger crowd. And especially in IT, since we all think we're brilliant ("I work at Google, I'm a pretty big deal"). The thing is though, one day in your 50s you ARE going to get replaced and it probably won't be because you suck, just that you're too expensive to keep around. And you may never get hired again. It DOES happen, and while a protectionism policy seems, like, totally unfair to everyone else, at the end of the day you have to look out for yourself.

Re: My Position On The Disney Layoffs

#65

Post by student123 »

Yet another xenophobic article. What if disney hired an American contractor that replaced their old infrastructure with new age docker/cloud/YC-funded stack and were able to save costs by cutting 250 positions replacing them with 50 pure blooded americans (oh wait and another 10 pround "undocumented" immigrants). The reality is that this person is on the wrong side of efficiency argument. And he is just blaming his incompetence on others. I expect better from HN than to give voice to this xenophobic trash.

Re: My Position On The Disney Layoffs

#66

Post by hibikir »

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?

It's the same as any consulting arrangement, common in big companies. My current contracting client has about 20% of their IT staff in house, and the rest is consultants like me. This is done often for accounting reasons: The employee is an expense, accounting-wise. I am paid out of a project, and employed only while the projects is there, so my salary is considered a capital investment. In my specific case, I am far more expensive than their employees, but accounting wise, my expense is far more convenient. I do not work for my contracting client: I work for an intermediate company. How I get paid, what is my visa status... it's all none of their business.

The same thing happens here. No company is laying off Americans to hire H1-Bs. One company hires H1-Bs, another lays off Americans/Green card holders, and the companies just contract a price for the work. Disney can say they have no idea whatsoever of the immigration status of their contacted workforce.

Is it shady? Absolutely. Do I like it? Not a bit. But it's not against the law. If there's anyone you could claim might end up in legal trouble at some point, it's the contracting firm, not Disney. But even then, I doubt it: Body shops don't hire a citizen or permanent resident that is any good, because anyone that is good will get better money and working conditions elsewhere. They really don't get applicants.

Re: My Position On The Disney Layoffs

#67

Post by [deleted] »

dspillett wrote: post #52
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?

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 an…

[deleted]

Re: My Position On The Disney Layoffs

#68

Post by suprgeek »

What Disney has done is certainly reprehensible but fully legal (given the "contractor" loophole in the H1-B program). However the backlash is focusing on the "them foreigners taking our Jobs" aspect a bit too much.

What should be troubling is the fact that someone in the Executive Suite contracted out important IT functions (such as these jobs were I am assuming).

If the CIO/CTO etc are perfectly wiling to disrupt core functions to shave off some costs - you have to wonder about the strategic abilities of these highly paid morons who cannot think past the next quarter.

That is the real outrage - whether those outsourced jobs are done by H1-Bs (or even possibly L1-Bs who are much more prone to abuse) is the minor part of the story.

Re: My Position On The Disney Layoffs

#69

Post by jgoewert »

silverbax88 wrote: post #8
justizin wrote: post #4

"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." Anyone who still supports FWD.us and believes that the US doesn't produce enough professionals to satisfy the needs of our businesses is straight up, while they are reading this, actually holding a crack pipe to their mouth.

I'm not clear (or arguing the point) about how this is specific to H-1B. Companies routinely lay off older, more expensive workers to get cheaper, younger employees. It's not what companies should do, but they do it all of the time. And then there's this, where apparently Disney cancelled the layoffs: http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/06/17/us/in-turnabout-disney-... Which I don't see how that's entirely possible given…

Anyone else read the article with the nagging voice saying:

"Oh crap, we got caught trying to really bend the H1B program and have irked our main customer base. We'd better say that we are undoing it then put a policy in place to more slowly drive out everyone making more than minimum wage by using bad reviews and implementing impossible goals. No one will notice if we do it slowly."

Re: My Position On The Disney Layoffs

#70

Post by exelius »

talmand wrote: post #59
exelius wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 beli…

Technology is not their core competency, marketing is. All of their technology would be far less valuable without Mickey, Elsa and Cinderella plastered all over it. Their C-suite may have decided that their technology department was too expensive and the needs of the business could be adequately served by an outside firm.

Quality likely didn't factor in to the decision; so long as it was good enough to not be a roadblock for their marketing teams.

Post reply on HN