After Merger, T-Mobile Lays Off Hundreds of Sprint Employees (techcrunch.com) 81
In a conference call on Monday lasting under six minutes, T-Mobile vice president James Kirby told hundreds of Sprint employees that their services were no longer needed. He declined to answer his employees' questions, citing the "personal" nature of employee feedback, and ended the call. From a report: TechCrunch obtained leaked audio of that call, which was said to be one of several calls held by T-Mobile leadership throughout the day to lay off staff across the organization. The layoffs come just two months after its contested $26 billion Sprint merger was finally completed. On the call, Kirby said T-Mobile was eliminating Sprint's inside sales unit (BISO), a sales division that focuses on small businesses across the United States. The executive didn't say exactly how many staff were laid off. Almost 400 people were in the phone meeting, a person on the call told TechCrunch. Kirby is heard saying that the division's layoffs would make way for 200 new positions, and encouraged employees to apply for one of the new positions using T-Mobile's external careers page, spelling out the web address on the call twice.
That explains yesterday's issue (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:That explains yesterday's issue (Score:5, Insightful)
This is exactly why ALL corporate mergers should be prohibited. Not only do you end up with massive job losses, you create a handful of companies that are so big nobody can compete against them.
T-Mobile has over 50,000 employees. Sprint has almost 30,000. A few hundred cut by a merger, of which a couple hundred are being offered alternative positions, is not "massive job losses".
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No, we need to redefine the purpose of corporations.
Imagine if the purpose of a company was to, of course, keep things running eg. network infrastructure in this case, but rather than a tunnel-vision focus on profits they kept people employed as long as they could stay profitable by doing so. Imagine if global corporations did not put billions upon billions in their war chests every year but actively worked to reduce unemployment and poverty by giving people jobs.
Yes, there would be some who don't pull thei
Re:That explains yesterday's issue (Score:4)
There's a solution to that. Have you heard of Soylent Green [wikipedia.org]? The future is tasty, if only we can get over our fundamental respect for human life. <snark/>
Re: (Score:3)
Plenty of countries have inflexible labor laws that keep people in unproductive jobs. Since it is difficult to shed workers, companies are reluctant to hire. So the result is lower productivity and higher unemployment, the opposite of what you predict.
Since it is hard to find a new job, workers are reluctant to quit even a low paying dead-end job. So companies are stuck with workers they don't need while workers are stuck with jobs they hate.
Re: (Score:1)
People keep talking about how efficient big companies are and how it's impossible to compete against them. I'm guessing none of those people have worked for a big company, or for a company that got much bigger while they worked there, or a small company that got bought by a larger one. "Efficiency" is not the word I would use.
Neither would Dilbert.
Some beliefs are impervious to mere facts, and the feeble attack that is reasoning.
Gee, that's a surprise (Score:4, Funny)
A merger ending up with massive layoffs? I'm shocked. Shocked I tell you!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I too am shocked, anyone is shocked — mergers of competitors always result in entities having duplicate departments, for everything.
And many things — like software, for example — can easily scale to a much bigger userbase so some departments can be eliminated entirely.
What this means, is lower costs for all of the users — as long as other competitors remain, of course.
Re: (Score:2)
"What this means, is lower costs for all of the users..."
Or not, and probably not. Trump would love it though, right?
Re:Gee, that's a surprise (Score:5, Insightful)
What this means, is lower costs for all of the users
Why would a company go through all the trouble of merging to increase their profits, and then decide to cut the costs for their users?
At best, they might keep them the same because they can afford to avoid raising costs now.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would a company go through all the trouble of merging to increase their profits, and then decide to cut the costs for their users?
To increase market share.
Re: (Score:2)
Well isn't keeping prices the same over time technically lowering the cost because of inflation?
My cell plan has been the same cost for the last several years.
Re:Gee, that's a surprise (Score:4)
I too am shocked, anyone is shocked — mergers of competitors always result in entities having duplicate departments, for everything.
And many things — like software, for example — can easily scale to a much bigger userbase so some departments can be eliminated entirely.
What this means, is lower costs for all of the users — as long as other competitors remain, of course.
There are two problems. First, Sprint was the only competitor that competed mainly on price. Now, only the MNVOs provide downward price pressure. So, the elimination of that one competitor should cause prices to increase. Second, my guess is most if not all the operational efficiencies savings will go towards profit margins. There's basically no chance that any of the savings will be passed on to consumers, unless forced by market competition.
Two of the government-mandated terms of the merger approval were keeping existing plans in place for several years and the creation of a new low-price pre-paid plan. Those two conditions were necessary due to the expectation of reduced market competition. The hope was that by the time the mandates are to sunset, the fourth competitor in the shape of Dish Network would arise. However, Dish Network might manage to mess things up and prevent the emergence of a fourth competitor.
Re: (Score:1)
It was sales people, who needs 'em?
Let them learn how to splice cable
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
This leads to the complaint, "WTF, this cable looks like it was spliced by a sales rep!"
Re: (Score:1)
Oh well, I guess all those sales people can just go into politics; that's the other 'profession' that doesn't require any actual skils.
Re:Gee, that's a surprise (Score:4, Insightful)
You and I might not value it very highly, but it's not something everyone can do just as good without having their conscience driving them crazy.
But you're right, politics is a promising field for people with that skill set.
"Re-apply for your job" (Score:5, Insightful)
Kirby is heard saying that the division's layoffs would make way for 200 new positions, and encouraged employees to apply for one of the new positions using T-Mobile's external careers page
So they "reset" their employment back to "new employee", and likely lose benefits in the process (either in the interim new-hire-grace-period, or permanently because of general benefits changes).
Tell me again why CEO's aren't assholes? About "trickle-down economics"? Why mergers are "good for consumers and companies' employees"?
Re:"Re-apply for your job" (Score:5, Insightful)
They're not. But you suckers keep swallowing.
Re:"Re-apply for your job" (Score:5, Insightful)
Communism is lethally stupid; but if Capital has the right to organize via Corporations, Labor needs to exercise it's right to organize via Unions.
It's not as lethal as you've been told (Score:5, Insightful)
And Capitalism kills too. Ask folks in Flint, MI. Ask the 70,000 who die in America every year from lack of medical care (double that before the ACA). Ask the millions who starve to death when we've long since reached the point where we can grow enough food. Ask the millions of civilians killed in wars for oil.
Mind you, I'm not a communist (Democratic Socialist actually) but blind hate and fear of communism is often used to deify capitalism and make excuses.
Re: (Score:2)
So, who was the Flint, MI government competing with? The water problem there was caused when they stopped buying water from Detroit, and started using their own local source. What tenuous link to capitalism are you trying to make?
Re: (Score:3)
The water problem was becuase the governor (Score:3)
It as about money, plain and simple. That's where the link to capitalism comes from.
The trouble with Wikipedia (Score:2)
It's not hard to connect the dots, go watch the YouTube videos from "Status Coup" on them.
Re: (Score:1)
Google it (Score:2)
Go find your own sources, there's dozens of them. Find one you like and trust. It's not hard to see why so many die. You ration insulin. You skip your heart medication. You don't get that skin blemish checked out and it metastasizes. On and on and on.
Re: (Score:3)
Wow, where did you get your weed?
Dude, it's like inside-out dimension. Whoaaaa...
Re: (Score:1)
Though one may argue, a good work of art requires — or can be helped by — intoxication, a coherent fact-based opinion is the opposite.
Yes, I tend to agree, that we are on the different sides of the reality...
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, which is why Unions are subject to laws about things like bribery etc.
Which is also why law enforcement shouldn't be allowed to have unions.
Re: (Score:1)
You're only partially right here — yes, common crimes committed by union-members are still crimes, but the RICO laws [wikipedia.org] do not apply even when such crimes are committed on behalf of a union and to advance its agenda. This allows a union boss to advise rank and file members to, say, slash tires or otherwise sabotage the employer's equipment without penalty — at the most, the actual saboteurs will be prosecuted for the petty c
Re: (Score:1)
Labor needs to exercise it's right to organize via Unions.
How would unions help here? The main purpose of this merger was that both Sprint and TMobile did not have enough capital on their own to compete with ATT and Verizon on 5g infrastructure. The combined company (along with the efficiencies of such) is better situated to compete and be a viable third player in the mobile space. It was likely that without this merger, both Sprint and TMobile would not have been viable alternatives, leading to the potential of only two options for consumers. Part of the impr
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure where you're writing from, but at least in all Western countries that I know of, they DO *always* have the right to *try* to organize into unions. What they don't have the right to do is to COMPEL workers into unions who don't want to cooperate (except in some cases, there are legacy laws where it's impossible to work in some positions and NOT join a union, which is crazy).
Generally, workers are uninterested; that's why union membership is what, about 12% of the workforce today?
Re: (Score:2)
Communism is lethally stupid; but if Capital has the right to organize via Corporations, Labor needs to exercise it's right to organize via Unions.
Totalitarian Soviet big "C" Communism is lethally stupid. That's because a revolution becomes poisoned if it is lead by an intellectual "vanguard" that makes all the decisions instead of democratically. There is a huge danger that the vanguard starts ruling for themselves instead of the people they claim to represent. Imagine the US if Washington hadn't refused to run for a third term and instead served for 20 years (assuming he didn't die in 1799, of course), or even worse, took up the mantle of king as
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They usually notify employees and they let the apply before the termination date. If selected, it is just a transfer. I've seen this several times during mergers and consolidations.
Then why wouldn't they have said this, instead of emphasizing the website where to apply twice?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
How do you know that's what's happening? Every time I've seen this, if the employee on the chopping block gets selected for a new position, they keep their seniority and the associated benefits. They usually notify employees and they let the apply before the termination date. If selected, it is just a transfer. I've seen this several times during mergers and consolidations.
(emphasis mine):
[Kirby] encouraged employees to apply for one of the new positions using T-Mobile's external careers page
Doesn't sound like "Internal transfer opportunities" to me.
Re: (Score:3)
Raises for the rest? Ahahhhaha
You must be an executive practicing your pitch on the plebes first.
Re: "Re-apply for your job" (Score:5, Insightful)
We need a business paradigm shift. Businesses shouldn't be accountable to shareholders, they should be accountable to stakeholders. That means customers, suppliers, employees, and shareholders. Focusing on shareholder value is how you get boondoggles like the MAX, which screwed over boeing customers, boeing suppliers, and employees of all 3. Focusing on shareholders is how you get 4th quarter layoffs to boost year end financial numbers, or how Disney brings in cheap offshore labor and forces the outgoing senior programmers to train them.
Re: (Score:1)
Who is the "we"? Unless you've invested actual money in it, it ain't your business — both literally and figuratively.
"Shareholder" and "stakeholder" are synonyms.
So, my delicatessen buying wrapping foil from you should give you a right to decide, how I operate it? Or you buying a sandwich? Seriously?
Re: (Score:3)
I have never heard anyone say a merger was good for employees. The line is "Good for consumers and good for companies".
Standup (Score:2)
citing the "personal" nature of employee feedback
You haven't seen anything yet. [youtube.com]
Well they are Sprint employees (Score:1)
Well they are Sprint employees so they're used to existing in a layoff environment.
That's the life of a sales agent (Score:1)
I am really doubting many Slashdot posters know how salespeople are universally treated by companies, this doesn't sound out of the ordinary at all - in fact the ability to re-apply seems like a rarity!
6 minutes who cares (Score:1)
What is useful isn't the length of the call, but what time the call happened, considering other events of the day.
Sucks, but an opportunity for more $ (Score:2)
Indeed today sucks for those people. I feel for them.
AND if you've practiced selling in that job and you've learned how to sell, maybe you can sell something bigger than a phone. Selling cars makes a lot better money, if you're a good salesperson. Selling houses makes much, much more money, again if you know how to sell. I hope many of these salespeople move on to something better.
Re:Sucks, but an opportunity for more $ (Score:4)
This is all just a race to the bottom of human psychological manipulation.
Is this really the shape of the society you want to live in? It seems that many people, of all classes, have resigned themselves to the foregone conclusion of capitalist hellhole.
Is is so absolutely imperative I buy more stuff that it justifies the never-ending river of psychological trickery, outright deception, false billing, dark patterns, and everything else that goes with it?
Then, you need to really knuckle down on people with a heavy duty militarized police force, some with budgets exceeding the defense budgets of most nations, in order to keep the lid on the kettle.
Is all this worth it? Is it worth our humanity? Or could we maybe do something different?
Re: (Score:3)
So many other countries have better standards of living, and welcome english speaking immigrants with skills.
Re: (Score:3)
Because other nations either prioritize their own workers first, or are already in agreements with nearby nations to allow their citizens to bid on jobs.
e.g. the Shenzen // EEA areas
Thats the point (Score:2)
One of the big reasons to merge is to cut the overhead; this sounds like that cut.
It wasnt a merger (Score:3)
Sprint will take over TMobile (Score:4, Insightful)
Thats how McDonnel Douglas managers took over Boeing and destroyed its engineering culture. Thats how Porsche took over VW and created the diesel-gate scandal.
Re: Sprint will take over TMobile (Score:2)
You got a point. And maybe the acquirer managers also find "super savings" in the run-down company they acquired. "Ah, we spent half a billion on network last year, while you guys did it in 230 million. You're hired. We'll do it your way.". But they the real cost of those savings is only found later.
I am suprised, not! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I am declining to upgrade my phone until everything settles out. Currently a Sprint/T-Mobile customer.
Re: (Score:2)
I get the impression it sucks working for telecoms (Score:2)
Soulless. (Score:2)
I'm working for a company with > 70000 employees that just announced it will shed 10% of the workforce. We've already 4 multi-hour long Q&A sessions with our CEO where people could ask anything and despite the shitty situation everyone is in we're still at least treated with candor and respect.
If what is said is true then James Kirby deserves a punch in the face. And groin. Actually employees should line up and take turns hitting each.
Ah HA! (Score:1)