In Germany, where most SAP employees are situated, they have the option to remain unaffected and participate in voluntary programs, while layoffs are prevalent elsewhere. This arrangement seems to grant preferential treatment to employees based in Germany, regardless of their performance or the nature of their work whether they work for ERP or Cloud. I feel this is totally unfair to employees in other locations. Do any of you feel the same?
16 replies (most recent on top)
Don’t think anyone questions this, but what people wonder is whether it is this mentality that is holding SAP back.
50 years later and some of you still don't get that SAP is a German company with German execs and a German culture.
They give preferential treatment to German employees which is their right.
For those who think talking about salary and considering this question as nonsense, here's some insight:
Salaries can vary based on location, meaning some managers may earn less than their employees. For instance, a manager in China might earn less than a US-based employee. However, SAP strives to ensure fairness through purchasing power parity (PPP), aiming for similar pay across different regions. (Note: SAP US is not paying like companies such as Microsoft or Google in the US.)
Now, onto the issue of fairness: Imagine a scenario with 3,000 employees worldwide, each location having 1,000 employees (US, CN, DE). If the company decides to lay off 1,200 people and Germany (DE) prioritizes retaining its employees, then 600 employees in the US and China could be affected. This might result in 200 high-performing employees (including 500 low-performing ones from the US and China) losing their jobs, while the 500 low-performing ones remain in DE. Is it fair to let go of better performers than low performers? (Note: This is just an example.)
As for a fun fact: I recently learned that SAP Germany employees have the option to skip coming to office three days a week, while in other locations, it's mandatory to come to the office. The CEO acknowledged that it wouldn't be fair for some employees to have to come to the office while others don't. This raises questions about fairness in company policies for employees across.
@wmh+1s4Cnx66: And I see nothing wrong about that!
@nay+1s4Cnx66 You are right. The cultural closeness, the timezone closeness and the fact that most Europeans (now, after Brexit) use English as a second language, putting everyone on the same footing, makes it very easy to collaborate amongst Europeans.
I do not want to generalise, but I encountered a lot of American colleagues who were very much oblivious to the need to adapt (for example, by slowing down when speaking and by trying to avoid hard-to-understand accents - Texas, I am looking at you!). If you are in a call where you hear an Italian, Spanish, French and German accent when people speak English, everyone becomes aware of the fact that there are cultural differences.
I also know a lot of Americans who are sensitive to that, but also loads who are not. Which makes collaboration with such colleagues... let's say "difficult".
And the timezone argument is really hard to beat.
@vrf+1s4Cnx66 Even if the company moved its headquarters (which they will never do), employees from the countries where there an actual labour code will still get "better'' treatment.
@wmh+1s4Cnx66 Germans prefer to hire Europeans because it's much easier to communicate when the culture is shared. I've always had trouble with American colleagues - mostly with regards to how they communicate with the customers and their very low reactivity. Plus, European employees usually speak at least 2 languages, very often more, so they can fit better in the business of European countries.
This is an absolutely nonsensical discussion. German employees are, like Americans, "Expensive"... and, unlike Americans, do get preferential treatment. Now, someone mentioned that "fair" doesn't come into it. First, I agree, to expect "fairness" is naive... this is a very American business point of view (after all, America is an "employment at will" society). But, second, all of the facts simply point to it being absolutely clear that German employees get preferential treatment. Now, this is mostly due to the labor laws. But, even when it comes to making hiring decisions, German managers are more likely to hire Germans that they have near them in the office. I have, in my time with SAP, found that quite a few German managers are not thrilled with managing virtual teams and, more disturbingly, take a dim view of having teams made up of non-German direct reports or, in most cases, non-European direct reports. They will use some argument about team building, time zones, etc... but that is nonsense. A good manager can effectively manage across multiple time zones (and I mean more than 2 or 3) and can see the value in having a team that is made up of colleagues from many different parts of the world. So... the company focuses management in Germany... German managers tilt (clumsily) towards having Germany-centric/Eurocentric teams... even though its nearly impossible, in times like these, to have the flexibility to impact German employees. Let's face it... for all of its globalist propaganda, at the end of the day this is a German company run mostly by Germans (token non-German and token non-male sprinkled through leadership) that just loves to rake in the Dollars and other non-European currencies, while doing its best to limit its non-European employee footprint. The sad thing is that this group of myopic dinosaurs will soon learn that you can't have it both ways.
It is a decision for SAP. They can choose whether to be located headquartered based in Getmany.
@swc+1s4Cnx66: Oh yes, the car allowance, you are also falling for it. SAP is making a big fuss out of it („Look, you get… A CAR“) and most colleagues are falling for it (because… A CAR) without doing the math. It is a full-service car leasing offer. You are paying the company for it by salary cuts - in fact, 1,6% of the purchase price (I.e. after all discounts, not MSRP) is taken from your net salary every month.
Really, it is not as great as you think. It is still just another con by the company to show how much they „care“ for us and how „great“ they are while saving shitloads of taxes at the same time (every company car related expense reduces SAPs taxable profit). For me personally, I just got my own, five year pre-owned BMW because it is so much cheaper than having a company car.
If salary differences between employees in the US and Germany are a concern, it's worth noting that employees in China and India receive almost one-third of the salary of those in Germany. The layoff also happens here also because of redundancy. Which is applicable to employees in germany also . My question is the company performs well, everyone benefits. However, when the company experiences a downturn, employees in Germany are often spared while those in other locations are impacted unfairly. This practice becomes even more unjust when the company ends up laying off the wrong people from different location due to an inability to fired layoff the right ones due to legal restriction. Is this not unfair.
There is no expectation or requirement that a business decision be "fair" - what planet do you live on?
@swc+1s4Cnx66 I was looking at the total compensation package.
If I look at German salaries compared with the US, Canada or Switzerland,
Do you also look at the fact that employees in Germany have car allowances of some sort? That does not exist in US.
"In Germany, where most SAP employees are situated..."
There are fewer SAP employees in Germany than in the United States.
In part this is due to the legal situation. If SAP tried to fire lots of people in Germany, or any people for non-person-related reasons, such as a restructuring, the labour court would look at the balance sheet ("best year ever... interesting...") and send them home packing. Just stating the need to reduce the workforce without proof does not cut it there.
If I look at German salaries compared with the US, Canada or Switzerland, the other reason is that the risk-reward-schema is different. Salaries in Germany are lower, and this is compensated, at least in part, with lower risk of being involuntary made redundant.
One can argue about the fairness and merits of such a different approach, but in part there is little SAP can do about it.
Which does not make me feel any better about the situation. When I read about the problems the American colleagues (and those from other locations where people can be sacked and are sacked), it makes me feel sick.
And the fact that SAP can behave without honour towards colleagues there by no means justifies the fact that SAP does so in any shape or form.
Just my EUR 0.02
It's irrelevant how you feel. It's a government policy for employee protection and it has nothing to do with SAP.