This is so messed up and it's going to cost us so much in the long run. So much knowledge is about to walk out the door and there's no real plan on how to mitigate it. There's also loss in reputation and resentment from people who were transferred against their wishes. Bad decisions all around.
10 replies (most recent on top)
@jc if you got 'rebadged' consult a lawyer before you sign anything. This stinks (legally) in more ways than one
FIS are saying they won't tell the clients. If the clients figure it out and ask then there's a PDF you have to use to send a canned response back.
@jj the clients won't be, by specific intention. The transition should be seamless, but it never is. If there are longer hold times, or delays in processing requests, then they will be noticed. It will not be brought to their attention, intentionally. Sinister, right?
Do we know what the clients are saying?
This is what Gemini said, when I asked it what the typical playbook for Cognizant was for re-badged emplyees, based on evidence.
Gemini said
When a company announces it is outsourcing a department to a firm like Cognizant and "re-badging" the existing staff, the corporate messaging usually highlights a "seamless transition" and "expanded global career opportunities."
The candid reality—based on historical examples from major transitions across the insurance, healthcare, and financial sectors—is much more pragmatic. Re-badging is fundamentally a vehicle for the client to slash operational costs without executing a highly publicized mass layoff, while the outsourcing firm secures a massive, multi-year contract.
Here is the standard, chronological playbook for how these transitions unfold behind the scenes.
- The Ultimatum and the Transfer
The process rarely feels optional for the employees involved. Typically, the client company will announce the transition and offer the affected employees a role with Cognizant.
The Catch: If an employee refuses the re-badging offer, it is often classified as a voluntary resignation, meaning the employee forfeits their right to the client company's severance package.
The Result: Most employees accept the new badge simply to maintain their income and figure out their next steps.
- The Guarantee Period (The "Honeymoon")
To prevent the client's vital infrastructure or operations from collapsing overnight, the outsourcing contract usually includes an employment guarantee clause.
Cognizant is typically required to keep the re-badged employees at their current salary and basic benefits for a set period—usually 6 to 12 months.
During this window, job security feels relatively stable, but the internal culture shifts immediately from a traditional corporate environment to an aggressive, metric-driven utilization model.
- Knowledge Extraction (The "Shadow" Phase)
This is the most critical phase of the playbook. Cognizant’s business model relies on a specific employee pyramid: a small number of onshore managers overseeing a massive pool of lower-cost offshore workers and automated processes.
Re-badged American or European employees are highly expensive. To make the contract profitable, Cognizant must eventually remove these high-cost salaries from their balance sheet.
During the guarantee period, re-badged employees are heavily tasked with mapping their daily workflows, documenting legacy code, and training offshore "shadow" teams (often framed as "building a 24/7 global support model").
- The Bench and the Squeeze
Once the 6-to-12-month contractual guarantee expires, the protection ends. As the offshore teams become capable of running the day-to-day operations, the original re-badged roles are declared redundant.
The Deployable Pool: Instead of being immediately fired, redundant employees are moved to the "bench" (Cognizant's internal deployable pool). They are told they must apply for and secure a new billable project within the company to keep their jobs.
The Financial Reality: Because re-badged employees retained their legacy salaries, their internal billing rates are significantly higher than Cognizant's standard onshore or offshore staff. Consequently, other internal project managers rarely want to hire them because it ruins their project's profit margins.
- Attrition and Exit
The final phase relies on natural and forced attrition.
Voluntary Attrition: Many employees, frustrated by the culture clash, the loss of their legacy perks, and the stress of the bench, simply quit to find jobs elsewhere.
The Clock Runs Out: For those on the bench, there is a strict countdown clock (usually 30 to 60 days). If an employee cannot secure a new billable role before the clock runs out, they are laid off. At this point, any severance paid is typically based on their short tenure with Cognizant, not the decades they may have spent with the original client.
The Bottom Line
Ultimately, the playbook is a highly efficient, phased redundancy plan. The client gets to offload their expensive workforce and bypass the bad PR of a mass layoff, while Cognizant gets the revenue of a mega-deal and the time necessary to extract institutional knowledge before replacing the headcount with a cheaper, globalized workforce.
we employees are suffering because Stephanie can do anything right to fix the stock price, just keep dropping with her so called leadership. Way to go Brandon.
You're right, but eventually Stephanie and co will walk out the door with millions and pat themselves on the back. The incentive for a CEO is extreme focus on short term growth and creating shareholder value NOW. How's that going...not so well, look at the stock price. But what that all means 5 or 10 years from now is irrelevant to her. It won't be her problem.
This is feeling an awful lot like the Fiserv playbook. And look how well that worked out for them.
Just look at the disaster Fiserv is as an example of what not to do. I was fortunate to escape that nightmare.
@OP when every decision is based on saving money, this is what happens. No investment in new systems over time, repetitive lay offs as a management strategy, over inflated executive compensation with no accountability, a lazy board of directors, short term thinking, etc.. When there is no investment in staff growth and retention, it creates a really resentful group of employees and former employees. The word is out about FIS: don't work there due to employment instability. In this economy, it's the worst reputation. The cascade failure cannot be prevented. Mazel, Stephanie.