Its an open secret that DXC India staff have quietly been exposed and given access to customer environments and ITAR data.
There are other threads detailing elsewhere but for for example Aerosoace account is probably the worst run by DXC UK and has been since the tail end of CSC
https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1m3Hia8M
https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1m4U3iva
https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1m10n541
https://www.thelayoff.com/t/1l1r4r2Y
https://www.thelayoff.com/t/ZQei2Yl
https://www.thelayoff.com/t/ZplNzhH#qvjo
Previously it had an OK service and some very competent staff but years of redundancies and WFRs have thinned out numbers so people with experience have moved on. What replaced the experienced staff is a skeleton crew of overworked and underpaid techs and account managers, supplemented with underpaid and overworked juniors (ex grads and apprentices) still on their entry salaries, along with the rare new hire that was lucky enough to come in on favourable terms. There have been staff who were not properly UK SC cleared brought on due to desperation for project and run support and when this was highlighted people who blew the whistle were told to shut up
Because of an unfavourable contract it operates at a constant service credit deficit and in return most of the legacy CSC / non HP DXC staff to book their time, even training or other client work, to the BAE account WBS charge codes. Even support for the other UK accounts such as Defra, Urenco, MOD, Leonardo etc. I asked my management about this when I worked there and the answer was basically to not say anything to the account leads or BAE as it wasnt our problem. There are endless tales of kit going walkies too, ££££ worth of comms, server, desktop kit etc all disappearing down a blackhole
BAE also paid for an all singing all dancing 24x7 Ops teams dedicated to them but the reality was it was an upjumped service desk that was looking after other accounts like Urenco and Leonardo. After this was mentioned a memo went out from some managers to their teams that this was to be kept quiet and not directly communicated to BAE because they had paid for a dedicated service. This is the same with other areas of run where services haven't been transitioned from project into run support leading to run teams especially in ITO unable or refusing to touch them because they havent had any knowledge handover, and instead having to beg and barter for one of the project engineers to fix issues. A lot of the KSA services are in this state with unfit infrastructure that run TLs will refuse to support
A lot of ex CSC & DXC staff went over to work for BAE such as their IT management and technical staff so they know the game and can't be easily fobbed off. So inevitably when work has to be done for run support you have client SDMs and management some with prior experience with internal DXC process ready to jump on the phone and ask DXC staff questions they're told not to answer. It makes for a culture where getting engineers on the phone leads to infighting and junior staff are used to take the heat instead.
Because the contract essentially allow customers to pull rank they use their perogative to force escalation of issues even where it isn't sensible to do so, and DXC account leads will throw up their hands and just say "well the contract says...." and people are forced to get on with it. Part of it is customer behaviour and expectations but that comes after years and years of poor service and being fed blatant rubbish by DXC execs
It is not a plewsant work environment and having seen it first hand anyone trying to change things for the better is quietly pushed aside n bullied into silence because simply put there is no real drive or motivation by the actual DXC leadership to do this. Every few months a new delivery exec will take on the account and chair a town hall at which point people unload their frustrations and nothing is done. They did this a few year ago, they made a big deal about opening a BAE account concerns n suggestions mailbox and no real action was taken, I actually saw one person being told to take out the account execs name probably cos because they couldnt handle it.