#contract

The long-term future of a historic Madera winery is uncertain following the expiration of its boxed wine production contract with Gallo. Mission Bell Winery, founded in 1919 by Krikor Arakelian, has been a key player in the San Joaquin Valley wine industry and once employed about 400 workers while producing roughly 10 million cases of wine annually.

https://www.fresnobee.com/news/local/article314339102.html

Last year, I was informed that I would have to switch to a non-exempt contract because the salary limit had been exceeded with the last agreed increase. Has anyone else received this? It gave me the impression that they wanted to get everyone from the old collective contracts. Has anyone refused this?

I heard OPTUM is to win a contract. Does anyone know if they won the contract to advocate for Veterans/Active Duty?

In MTech, a few contractors working with us (mostly onshore) are gone. FTEs are fine so far.

UHC lost a contract with the state of Louisiana’s Medicaid patients. Anything that impacts UHC impacts Optum. Their relationship is so dysfunctional.

Quit your whining! Late 1st, 2nd quarter 2026 VZ will be hiring back employees layed off through the various contract firms. CEO clearing the books…..not the network! Mark my words! They know good employees will come back running for higher paid jobs without benefits. Mark my words.

Verizon and the unions to start up talks again after the new year .

A logistics company announced plans for layoffs. The workforce reductions are slated to occur in Georgia. This decision comes after the company lost a major contract. The exact number of affected employees was not specified in the headline. No particular city within Georgia was mentioned as the location for these job cuts.

https://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/news/2025/12/19/comprehensive-logistics-georgia-layoffs.html

I'm noticing contractors are not being renewed. Is this just a year end hiatus ? Or the bank focusing on FTEs?

Is Xerox planning on canceling the contract with HCL? Who does Lexmark contract with for offshore low cost labor?

FIS lost the FT TA contract, their largest which includes Customer Service because they could not successfully provide the kind of service that FT financial professionals and their shareholders were used to receiving. FIS platforms su-k, the rollout of the new websites was equally bad. So many top producing financial professionals moved their business out, that FT is in the process of taking back their TA. It is a sh*tshow of the highest order. Didn't see this mentioned in this thread. Everyone who was moved over to FIS, will now have to try to get their jobs back at FT. The legacy FT employees did not cause this, but they have to live with the consequences which includes layoffs in May of 2026, if not sooner. Will the shareholders at both locations notice? Which line items on the budges will reflect this total failure? How will FIS sell this one?

Can you take a short term temp/contract job and still receive the warn severance? Would it cancel it out?

Thoughts on automation. Met is pushing this forward along with offshore. I see contracts as the first casualty.

More and more contractors are being moved to different recruiting companies that will ultimately be their last stop. Contracts will expire and not be renewed and in some cases will be cancelled outright. If you have had three or more different recruiting companies under your tenure with HP then you will likely be next on the chopping block. Your $100,000 salary will be taken from you and fed into Asia.

Any contractors heard of anything regarding their extensions for 2026?

Go Colts and Hoosiers! Now that I have that out, time to get serious. REAL SERIOUS! iI was one that was going to try to tell our leaders to give and take because of our hard times. Not after reading these words! The insistence on not listening to what matters to us will help us not bend either in our contract talks. Hold firm union leaders and brothers and sisters.

Any management in here that can explain what was told to them about next steps with contractors?

Have any teams begun laying off contractors this week?

Or its employee only special offer

I am a new employee via contract and 8 months in my observation has been WTF since month 3, when I really got the lay of the land. Beyond the share price decline and lost market value, the organization lacks unity and accountability. There are way too many mid level people actioning work who are not great at what they do or have been told by their boss that they are not accountable for keeping to a reasonable level of standards for collaboration across teams. I’ve seen senior people refuse to collaborate and throw their peers under the bus. I don’t know the history of the company’s decline/ drama but when I joined I had friend at Amazon, Chase and other solid places say it’s a great company- these are good friends BSers. I am curious if anyone here would like to share WTF happened or if it’s always been kind of a mess.

LMs for I&M, CXM, CO techs, contract services, Analysts, Motor Vehicles? I know everyone is going to be affected, but curious if anyone “in the know” has a pulse on average # per AD/SD they have to lose? I’ve heard up to 2 or 3 per SD, including ADs.

The Infosys contract is a predatory arrangement where they deliver nearly nothing and su-k Verizon dry. This latest emergency turn is the first stop on the road to he-l and Infosys is behind the wheel.

What’s going on with Legacy T techs? Big changes to Schedules, Reporting Locations, End of home dispatch for critical infrastructure crews? They giving up on business services? Contracts also up next year.

DXC Selected by Metropolitan Police Service to Lead Digital Transformation Programme
News provided by

DXC today announced it has been chosen as the successful Master Vendor to deliver BPO services as well as ERP and Resource Management (RM) replacement systems, to the Metropolitan Police Service ("the Met"), the UK's largest police force. The 7+1+1 year contract was awarded to DXC following a competitive tender process.

DXC will modernise how the Met deploys their resources, through the delivery of replacement ERP and RM systems, as well as helping to transform certain HR, Commercial and Finance services. It will enable the Met to use real time data to respond better to local needs and priorities, streamline internal processes and deliver significant savings by reducing unnecessary costs. The transformation will also enhance collaboration across departments, improve transparency, and ensure that technology investments directly support frontline policing. 

as you can see the complainers and negative feed back people are the ones that are abusers.
MST home dispatch tech use and abuse company assets. They drive 100K-200K bucket trucks to their home and back to their home garage everyday. Big V8 6.3 L engines use a lot of gas and insurance on top. Also, with MST high pay and only have .5 job per tech a day per tech how is that saving company money and liability.
There are rules to follow when joining home dispatch program. Following the rules helps save gas and time and wear and tear on a vehicle used to drive to work and to home. But MSTs abuse this program from driving to the garage every day and dispatching at the garage. Making a stop at the grocery store to grocery shop in the company vehicle before driving home. Not closing your last job at the job site and instead, drive home and being still dispatched on your work ticket and then closing the job when you arrive home. I follow the rules, and I do not want the home dispatch program to go away because of MSTs taking advantage of the abuse. Also, MST managers are favoring many MSTs and letting the home dispatch MSTs do what ever they want. STOP ABUSING THE HOME DISPATCH PROGRAM YOU MSTs. You know who you are...

Is this like CEOs of the business line and up? I found the salary chart and it says 33 and above do not have a pay scale. I assume 33+ negotiate their entire employment/contract with the company then and are not considered like regular employees?

Last week, a person wearing an AT&T uniform came to my door to promote a home plan.
After confirming he was authorized, I signed a contract for nine lines. That evening, when I received the electronic contract by email, I discovered numerous fraudulent activities.

The salesperson promised the following:
A total of $305 per month for nine lines, fixed for 36 months, free upgrades to the latest phones for all lines, and multiple stackable promotional credits.

In reality:

1.  The salesperson illegally added teacher and device discounts to each line. These discounts cannot actually pass identity verification later, which would cause a significant increase in the plan’s total cost.
2.  The salesperson claimed that any phone could be traded in for free toward a new one. In fact, devices valued under $230 are essentially worthless and have no trade-in value; any damage further reduces the value drastically. As a result, users’ old phones are taken for $0 trade-in value, while they must pay full price for the new devices.
3.  The salesperson promised multiple credits that AT&T does not officially offer, such as phone number transfer credits, loyal customer credits, and trade-in bonus credits. None of these appeared in the actual contract.
4.  The contract contains four different signatures, but I only signed one. The rest were forged by the salesperson, including the most important Right to Cancel Disclosure.
5.  The salesperson intentionally concealed the true billing details, preventing customers from noticing the real cause of price increases. They claimed that starting from the third month, the monthly fee would become cheaper and stable — which turned out to be completely false.

Overall scam logic:
The scheme works by using fake discounts to offer an unrealistically low plan price, enticing customers to trade in as many devices as possible, forging signatures to hide key contract terms, and then delaying communication until after the 3-day cancellation period and AT&T’s 14-day return policy expire. By the time the inflated bills arrive, the customer has already suffered irreversible financial losses.

Why do we think they are making us all sign this new employee agreement. I noticed it states that they can change our compensation at any time with notice.

The defense contractor L3Harris Technologies finds itself at a critical juncture, presenting investors with a complex puzzle. While the company secures a multi-billion dollar international defense agreement, significant stock sales by its top executives and a legal scandal involving a former manager are creating headwinds.

Recent regulatory filings reveal a notable trend among L3Harris leadership. Chief Executive Officer Christopher Kubasik substantially reduced his equity position by selling 83,000 shares, representing a decrease of more than 36 percent in his holdings. This transaction forms part of a broader pattern where company insiders have disposed of securities valued at over $53 million during the past quarter.

These substantial disposals by key management figures emerge alongside troubling legal developments. Federal prosecutors have brought charges against a former L3Harris manager, alleging the individual transferred eight confidential business secrets to a Russian buyer. Although the company is no longer associated with the accused, the case potentially impacts market confidence in the organization's governance and security protocols.

Counterbalancing these concerns, L3Harris announced a landmark $2.26 billion contract with the South Korean air force. The agreement involves supplying four cutting-edge airborne early warning and surveillance aircraft based on modified Bombardier Global 6500 jets. Deliveries for this strategic asset are scheduled between 2030 and 2032, enhancing the allied nation's military capabilities in the crucial Indo-Pacific theater.

Christopher Kubasik emphasized the transaction's significance, stating the company "will deliver an advanced fleet that will strengthen the operational capacity of a key American ally." This substantial order reinforces L3Harris's competitive standing in surveillance and command systems—technologies experiencing growing global demand amid current geopolitical tensions.

Investors now face conflicting signals as they assess the defense contractor's prospects. The substantial South Korean order demonstrates compelling operational strength and international demand for the company's products. Conversely, the scale of insider selling activity introduces uncertainty about management's outlook.

Market attention now turns to the upcoming quarterly earnings report scheduled for Thursday. These financial results may either alleviate concerns sparked by the executive stock sales or validate market apprehensions. The share price has recently demonstrated resilience, trading comfortably above its key moving averages, but the coming days will determine whether L3Harris can translate these contrasting developments into sustained growth momentum.

If you start a new job before the 60 days are up, you won’t receive severance pay.If you get a new job but delay your start date until after 60 days, you’ll still get your severance check.This depends on the layoff terms and when you sign the severance agreement.People laid off earlier this year may have different terms.Once your contract is signed and the revocation period ends, you’re free to start a new job.

anyone know anything on the the company’s side of this contract? “Last & Final” was just voted down.

I was just wondering what would happen if the members voted no on the contract.

Buckeye Ranch plans to lay off 66 employees by December 1 after Franklin County Children Services chose not to renew its contract with the Permanent Family Solutions Network, which ends December 31. FCCS described the move as a strategic shift to serve families directly, not a reflection on Buckeye Ranch’s work quality. The organization is pursuing internal transfers and some staff have applied to FCCS or elsewhere. The layoffs affect only the PFSN program, while all other behavioral health and child welfare programs remain operational.

Buckeye Ranch - Columbus OH -

https://abc6onyourside.com/news/local/60-buckeye-ranch-employees-face-layoffs-after-contract-not-renewed-franklin-county-children-services-ohio-department-of-job-family-services-odjfs-december

.

https://www.axios.com/2025/10/10/unitedhealth-aarp-health-coverage-medicare

UnitedHealth paid AARP $9B to sell Medicare products

.

I’m sure everyone has seen the flow chart, no by the end of Oct and you get severance. Yes…if you don’t make the get, you get severed and get the same severance. Get offered a position and decline, you get severed and get the same severance. So it appears there is no down side to saying yes to the relocation and the rejecting the position offer if you really don’t want to relocate. It doesn’t make sense….so here’s my thesis.

Summary - to prevent lawsuits, individual and class action, for forced work place move.

If you say yes to relocation, they will have data that you were fine with relocation (in a class action they’d have all the names because the survey isn’t anonymous). Then when you’re offered a position and you turn it down, you’re doing so for the position not the relocation reasoning, that’s how it would be documented in the official files. But we know the real reason people are going to say yes is to buy time…
This is all about changing the terms of your employment contract. Yes your contract has some verbiage about the company operated across Canada and can relocated you for business purposes. This is too vague and what the company is doing is constructive dismissal which has legal severance limit of 24 months of pay.
It’s easy to get a full description of this and how it works as well as cases with ruling in AB and Canada. Get Google Gemini, put it in deep research mode, prompt it to provide the employee rights when it comes to forced office relocation, and about 15 minutes later there is a very extensive report with cited examples that states it all.

This was the most interesting part in the report out I received.

VI. Corporate Risk Mitigation and Strategic Recommendations
6.1. Best Practices in Drafting and Implementation of Relocation Policies
To minimize exposure to constructive dismissal claims, employers must ensure employment documentation clearly addresses the geographic parameters of the role.
Clarity in Mobility Clauses: All employment contracts, particularly for new hires, must include an unambiguous, expressly written mobility clause. This clause must detail the specific geographic scope within which the employer retains the right to transfer the employee (e.g., "within the current city limits," "within a 30 km radius of the headquarters," or "any company site in North America"). Vague references to "transfers" are insufficient.
Retention of Recall Rights (Post-Pandemic Arrangements): For any existing remote or hybrid arrangement formalized during or after the pandemic, the employer must issue explicit, written addenda clarifying that the arrangement is temporary, revocable, and that the company explicitly retains the unilateral right to mandate a return to the physical office. This documentation is necessary to prevent the remote work arrangement from becoming an "integral term" of the contract through custom and practice, as occurred in the Nickles and Byrd decisions.
6.2. Strategic Use of Notice Periods for Contractual Change
When a necessary relocation is not explicitly permitted by contract, imposing the change unilaterally creates immediate liability. To execute a required change while mitigating CD risk, the employer must offer the employee the change with a period of advance notice equivalent to the common law reasonable notice (severance) the employee would receive upon termination.
If the employee accepts the relocation after the notice period expires, the new terms are formalized. If the employee rejects the relocation change at the end of the notice period, they are deemed terminated, but the employer has fulfilled its notice obligations by providing the time period required by common law. This strategy converts a high-risk unilateral breach into a controlled, noticed termination event.

Word on the street is they want more critical right after the contract has been settled and the job security for no layoffs per merger, but they need their quotas for criticals that just went up ! Again dealing with this company there always a get one over on the worker clause

I have several contractors that I rely on to deliver infrastructure needs, as well as developmental projects. Do I need to start planning to lose them or are they safe presumably until their contract is over?

So what happened to the rumor of a union contract and what’s up with contract extension.Come on someone has to have info