There are people who think that legacy T technicians are safer because they are too necessary to achieve the goals of this company and its growth. I agree that they are very necessary, but I do not agree that they are any safer than others. Why would they be? Here people are just a number and nothing more. Just my two cents.
Still, I’d love to hear more reasons why legacy T technicians are possibly safer than others?
10 replies (most recent on top)
att is moving to cloud services and all wireless setups , ie no installers will be needed in the future.
Yes there is a watermark for NTS for the remainder of the contract (for approx one more year) but I have a sneaking suspicion the.company is going to move or create another title for the tech’s performing ABFS work Here in the northeast a split has already occurred whereas all tech’s doing ABFS work fall under Business Field Services (Ann Chow) and the remainder staying in Network Operations under Scott Mair and we now have separate vacation ,holiday, and overtime lists
Company has realized 5G is garbage and the cable companies are eating their lunch. T, Verizon and even T-mobile are set to invest big on broadband again, running fiber, fixed wireless etc. They are even hiring again for techs because the work is there.
I’m a Legacy T tech but I don’t doubt that the company could find a way to outsource us. Back when SBC merged with/acquired us and took our name back in 2005, they cut both the inside and outside tech down to skeleton crews. The Legacy T contract has a watermark stipulation that requires them to have a certain amount of outside techs (NTS’s). I don’t believe the inside techs for Legacy T have that same protection. Although my job seems fairly safe while we are under contract, I definitely don’t consider my job to be surplus proof.
We legacy technicians are safer because we know more and we work harder. Lay off some of you other lesser folks.
OP said “Here people are just a number and nothing more.” While this is true, I beg to differ on the technician side of things. We are just tools used to make other peoples numbers. 1st level, 2nd level, 3rd level, and on up the ladder. We are even used to make numbers for dispatch. Technicians have gotten wise to this fact, hence if you’re a manager that’s a prick you get the minimum that it takes for us to make our numbers. But, that doesn’t necessarily equate to you (the prick manager) making your numbers.
“we're all equal under collective bargaining, period!” Except techs with more seniority are “more equal”.
I’m one, but I never feel like the company wouldn’t try to find a way to outsource us. When SBC merged with/acquired us in 2005 and took our name, they immediately started cutting us down to skeleton crews. The inside technicians (Comm Techs) were hit harder than the outside tech (NTS’s). The outside techs are spread pretty thin as it is and we have a watermark written into our contract that states that the company can’t go below a certain amount of us nationwide. I don’t believe that there is a watermark for the inside techs. As long as we have a contract we are somewhat safe, but I don’t fool myself into believing that the company wouldn’t try to get rid of more of us at some point.
They're safe because T is going to rely on their know-how to complete projects inside as well as utilizing their backs to run fiber throughout comnercial buildings. CWA made a deal with T to have the technician do most if not all work whether it be for comnercial customers or even internally...not sure about the Mobility side of the business. That said, T hired a bunch of Network Technical Specialists to do all phases of work inside and out. So, that's why they're gonna be here for at least the next 3-5 years give or take! T is not hiring more techs so they can layoff the older legacy techs over 50 or 60...we're all equal under collective bargaining, period!
Seniority.
Worked for me.