back to article Stingy DXC Tech tells staff to breathe in and tighten those belts

Execs at DXC Technology have imposed a series of penny-pinching measures on staff just two months after the tech outsourcing corpse started trading, and amid a redundancy programme. The belt tightening message was delivered in a company memo, seen by us, which stated: “As part of combined efforts to improve our Q1 performance …

  1. Your alien overlord - fear me

    I think you need to Skype DXC if you want to talk to them :-)

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    No real surprises here

    At the Investor Day back in March DXC stated that they were planning to save $80m in Year 1 through "optimised travel policies".

    Not providing biccies at internal meetings will no doubt contribute greatly to the target saving...</sarcasm off>

    1. Stevie Silver badge

      Re: No real surprises here

      I wonder if the Directorial Meetings no longer feature a roast unicorn buffet with coffee made from beans that have passed through the digestive tract of a mermaid?

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    No change there then

    When I was at CSC 2 years ago, you had to have travel authorization even for a quick trip up the M1 to see a customer.

    Expenses. £20 a day, so Kebabs and McDs where the order of the day.

    CSC had already lost most of its good staff anybody left will soon leave.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: No change there then

      £20? lucky buggers.

    2. Stu Mac

      Re: No change there then

      Well that's the thing, only other corpses will still be working there​. When a company loses sight of the main mission statement, giving the employees​ a good time, it's all over, bar burning stakeholder money and liquidators.

  4. M7S
    Coat

    Free staff travel - Is there such as thing as "Run DXC"

    or you can perhaps hip-hop to a meeting

    1. MyffyW Silver badge

      Is there such as thing as "Run DXC"?

      Travel Policy...it's like that and that's the way it is

  5. James 51 Silver badge

    I have always wondering if policies like auditing every travel request could end up costing more than they save (unless they drive down the number of requests of course).

    1. sebt
      Unhappy

      Saving money isn't the point

      It's essentially about redirecting money. From people who actually do useful work, to box-tickers, bean-counters, form-drafters, policy-slingers and suits. If these parasites end up costing more than they save - no problem, there's always an excuse. Which generally results in MOOARR box-ticking, approval-begging, form-filling etc.

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: Saving money isn't the point

        " box-tickers, bean-counters, form-drafters, policy-slingers and suits"

        These never seem to be treated as cost centres. I wonder why not.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Sadly "opportunity cost" is not a term understood within the echelons of DXC.

      Unknown as to whether it actually saves more than it costs, but I had to get a mileage-only journey costing £4.40 approved by 5 approvers including an L3. The word "bonkers" doesn't do it justice...

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Auditing Costs

      They do cost more but that comes out of a different budget.

      The bean counters are not client facing so generally enjoy the same regeime on expenses as the bosses.

      Having to explain why you went to a customer in order to save the contract seems to be beyond the MBA (more bloody arseholes) who run this sort of business these days is deeply degrading.

      DXC is a dead man walking. Moves like this are almost the last throw of the dice when it comes to the lifecycle of a company. I should know, I saw it at DEC 20 years ago.

    4. sawatts
      Mushroom

      Different budgets - different responsibilities with no attribution to net costs.

      When I was in part of the civil service in the 90s they changed travel expenses from 'per diem' to 'actuals' to cut costs. Under 'per diem' you got an allowance and kept what you didn't spend - so penny pinching hotels where the order of the day. Under 'actuals' you were only refunded for what you spent - so convience and hang to cost. Total travel expenses increased, obviously, but at least the peasants weren't making any money through "thrift".

      More extreme (and the point at which I left) was graduate salaries being set by one group, and pay-rises by another. So by the end of my 10yrs there graduates where routinely coming in on higher salaries than the folks they were working for...

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        "When I was in part of the civil service in the 90s they changed travel expenses from 'per diem' to 'actuals' to cut costs."

        You were lucky. Although I had to go to courts & crime scenes there always seemed to be some new IR reg that meant that my travel claim was invalid: start from home, should have started from the office, start from the office, should have started from home and that sort of nonsense.

  6. Duffaboy
    Trollface

    Hang on a Minute

    What about our Exec Golfing days ?

    1. Wensleydale Cheese

      Re: Hang on a Minute

      "What about our Exec Golfing days ?"

      Marketing budget.

  7. wendyfig

    I work for DXC and have no complaints. Most of us in the tech industry work remotely so the no travel thing is common practice to most of us. The consultants and delivery team along with sales all travel extensively. I have regular meetings remotely with my team and enjoy them without having to get on an airplane.

    Are you complaining on my behalf? Please don't. I love my work family balance. I am also enjoying the company culture after the merge.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Enjoy the culture...

      Enjoy it while you can, you probably won't have a job in the next 12 months - whether you save the company twenty quid on travel or not.

    2. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge

      Can your job be sent to India?

      If so watch out.

      Enjoy the new environment while it lasts. My contacts inside the company are all looking for a way out ASAP. They see the stormclouds building.

      I'm glad that I'm out of it all now. My garden had never looked so good.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Can your job be sent to India?

        They have told employees this explicitly: for flat-rate accounts, the company goal is to shift work to offshore resources so the margin on those accounts goes up. There is no future for on-shore workers at DXC (unless you're one of the 100-or-so EVPs).

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Can your job be sent to India?

          But it's crystal clear for everyone inside (I'm in DXC and ex-HP too) - it was told directly and many times that future delivery will be only done from global centers and absolutely minimum possible will be left in EU (there are some accounts that require support from inside EU) and for sure none of them will be left in high cost locations. Remaining delivery for such geographically restricted customers is now heavily moved from UK or Germany to Poland, Bulgaria or Slovakia. So anyone working in delivery in UK would have to be deaf and blind not to expect his position to dissappear sooner or later. However, there are lots of vacancies and lots of possibilities if only you want to learn (or know already) something modern and needed on the market and then your location doesn't really matter. I'm hiring people currently having 15+ vacancies in a team. And this is DXC initiative under new budget, so from my perspective it looks much better now than under ES.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: no complaints

      Not all roles are the same. I'm a consultant, and that means at least some F2F time with clients is absolutely required to do one's best. Were I a DBA, for instance, that would be much less important.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Well done you.

      I also work for DXC (transitioned from HPE) and have found them to be as equally useless so far as HPE before them, and CSC also. (I worked for CSC many years before). The company culture was embarrassing beforehand, and it's business as usual so far.

      My current line manager I've verbally spoken to a grand total of once. Ever. They've been my manager for a year now, and our only conversation was to perform my EOY appraisal. I'd hope that some of this is a failing with individual managers, but from speaking with others in the business, it's not a one-off.

      CSC, HPE and now DXC care only about one thing, and that's screwing as much money as possible from their customers, whilst not giving a damn about skilled employees.

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    It is all about the employees - Top level anyway

    It is true that DXC is cutting costs in every way possible and it is clearly impacting employees ability to perform their job. Employees are told over and over how the company considers them important but the company seems to act differently unless you are talking about the top 5% of the employees. The CEO is making millions upon millions while employees are told there will be now pay raises. The CEO holds huge off site events that require travel by lots of employees, spends tons of money on facilities and such for the event, had the event catered....etc. So all the cost cutting measures apply to the general employee but clearly not the CEO!

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019