90% of the workforce are paid at least 40-70% below market rates
No sites open, or barely any sites
Remote first and everything is at the employees expense
Clients are funding roles at market rates
No pay reviews
No staff days out
No staff stationary costs
Minimum vacation terms
Minimum layoff terms
Legacy infrastructure so no costs with new tech rollouts
This is a genuine question….
Didn't DXC recently get ripped about underpaying on call? I was on double a colleague, then all of a sudden, he is 1.5X mine.
I still work for DXC. Just getting that out there..
We were told a few years ago that in order to get a pay rise, we have to go out and actively look for a job, go through the interview process and once we get the letter of offer, take it to your supervisor and they will see if they can get it matched in order for us to stay. I get a 0.46% pay rise every 2 or 3 years only. We also need to get managerial approval just to use our Amex in order to pay for parking at a client site.
One time about 2 years ago, we were told to take the train to some sites. Imagine going out to install a PC, monitor and printer, on a train, with 3 cardboard boxes on a trolley, IN YOUR DXC SHIRT!
@1xsu+1v81F90p if you don’t like being 90% below market rate , then change employers or shut the duck up already. Same 💩 every day for 10-13 years
@3rqv+1v81F90p There is no pay review. Managers have been instructed to find fault with everyone they can so they can justify why those people didn't get a rise this year. It's not that hard considering most gave up long back.
Thanks @2hrf+1v81F90p I do know how the company works.
HR implements corporate policy and HR is the face of that policy.
So I'm quite happy with what I said and confident that it is correct because I have had the conversations with HR about their policy. Their goal is to keep staff below 80% of the midpoint of their self defined salary band mid points. Ask them yourself. Get the relative positions of a band of employees and you'll see if for yourself. Where as typical HR policy is to have your normal distribution based around the mid point, in DXC it is shifted far to the left.
So come the much touted salary review whatever money gets dripped down to managers, will come with caveats around that figure.
So if "Capgemini, Accenture, etc operate typically on 28% to 35% margin" that makes them 25% more expensive than dxc, yet customers pay it?
It makes sense in a lot of ways, you can't have all of the buildings, expensive staff, bonuses etc if you aren't getting the money in but equally it's probably only certain types of customer you can ream like that.
I don't think dxc is in the government IT systems game any more whereas those two definitely are.
@2iyz+1v81F90p "How can Accenture, Cap, IBM have onshore resources, multiple sites, pay reviews, training, market rate salaries and still be cheaper than DXC?"
Simple - those companies treat their staff right. Their staff actually want to do a good job. They feel valued and adequately rewarded. The clients know when you put work with the above, they get it done, and for that are quite happy to pay a premium, and will put the next task with them as well.
: @1xsu+1v81F90p. HR doesn’t keep you below market rate , grow up. HR doesn’t what they are told my the CEO and the board. Dont blame HR for no pay increases or reviews that go nowhere they just do what they are told, line you do!
Grow up and learn the companies are run before you post stupid 💩
@1wjp+1v81F90p Mass exit after Christmas, what utter popycock , been hearing the same 💩 for 12 years.
No one is leaving their n their own. UK are waiting for redundancy payouts , the other people are comfortable with doing very little or having other jobs on side.
No one is leaving , and you will hear these same posts with different executives names for the next 5 - 10 years
You know how to have DXC make money, sell repeatable offerings , no one of support. Charge customers to bring their servers , storage , backup up to supported levels and if they don’t charge a super high rate to support that old cr-p.
Have the sales team actually learn something about the technology so we don’t get fixed costed projects that end up taking more resources and time to
install.
Get rid of two in a box manager style and have your functional manager your only manager.
Get rid of Dell , Pure contractors as they make everything more difficult
Have Platfirm teams , networking , Storage , backup all know what projects are priority across the board instead of everyone pulling teams left and right saying there project is more important
@1hsr+1v81F90p, DXC still managed to find billions to repurchase stock and inflate executive salaries, so claiming poverty with regard to salaries of those _who actually earn the company's revenue_ is bollocks.
2dgz+1v81F90p
That’s not answering the question.
How can Accenture, Cap, IBM have onshore resources, multiple sites, pay reviews, training, market rate salaries and still be cheaper than DXC?
"
1hsr+1v81F90p
Luxoft was a great acquisition
They’ve sold profitable parts of the business too. So what’s your point?
Tell me what expenses don’t generate revenue that are high?"
Except that Luxsoft was a Russian company bought by an organisation that counts defence sector customers as key accounts. That was only ever going to end one way. Of course, following acquisition of Luxsoft, they promptly WFR'd a load of DXC Consulting folks. Great messaging - we're going to buy a company so we can lay a load of you off.
In terms of profitability, it's simple: DXC doesn't understand the margin it needs to make to be profitable. Capgemini, Accenture, etc operate typically on 28% to 35% margin when calculating a deal. TCS and equivalents operate higher, but with lower cost offshore resources. When I was at DXC the model was to use a 10% margin, then cut the size of the team after a few months (WFR). That doesn't work - client gets angry as service isn't being delivered, DXC can't cut too far or client walks, result is too low a margin to ever make profit.
As for now - well, I left four years ago, and I'm amazed that DXC still exists. Sally was incapable of turning it around, and it's really too far gone to save. The ship is sinking - don't count on redundancy payments, as there may not be any money left for them.
@2zig+1v81F90p We have been instructed not to do our timesheets properly and just put them in to the end of the month so we can get the quarter end charging done. Going against the accurate time recording ethic. The company says all the right things, but when it comes to money it does the opposite.
I've said similar on other threads here, it will be interesting to see who is left come Feb
I have the feeling that even with some (hopefully) significant merit increase (yes, I know DXC never give merit increases), the point of no return was crossed long ago.
Too many good people left or "were left", we are all overhelmed with daily fire fighting within the accounts. No one has time or interest in innovation, sales, whatever, just because no one will get anything on top.
Juan Parra sounded nice and motivated yesterday, if I was in a startup. But I am not.
I foresee a massive exit, if not layoff, right after xmas.
Let's see.
When the company hires someone new on 20% more, how does the company expect that person to even by 50% as useful as the current staff. Who's going to show them anything useful. If you want our knowledge there is a price. If these people are worth so much more maybe they know it already and don't need help to get started. Good luck with that one.
Completely agree with original poster and don't forget DXC's HR policy is to keep people below 80% of what HR say is the market rate, which is of course much lower than what they have to pay new hires who expect the real market rate.
If the company wants to ever make a profit again - it needs to share it with the people who can make that happen - the staff doing the work!
DXC doesn't make money because too many people know they can do not a lot and still get the same 0% pay rise as the next guy. People hide behind paperwork rather than getting on with the job. Nobody wants to make a decision because it's on you when you get it wrong, and most people have learnt it's less noise doing nothing and leave it broken, than doing something and it's still broken, and certainly no reward for fixing it. Managers just complain it took too long and ask why it broke in the first place. Everyone wants the cheap / quick win way of working, but that doesn't delight customers so they don't put new work with DXC.
Luxoft was a great acquisition
Money wise? Sure. Luxoft allegedly having ties to Russia while DXC has clients in the defence sector? Not so much.
DXC is making money, lots of it. The top levels are taking it all before the cash has a chance of filtering down to the lower levels. They take gigantic bonuses, take not needed 1st class trips world wide and then say that there is no funding for pay rises.
1hsr+1v81F90p
Luxoft was a great acquisition
They’ve sold profitable parts of the business too. So what’s your point?
Tell me what expenses don’t generate revenue that are high?
The things mentioned are why the free cash flow is high. But DXC has a lot of other expenses that don’t generate revenue so ROI is low. Years of poor acquisitions of small companies took a toll on DXC finances, as well as the weight of internal systems and inefficient processes.
That is exactly what I'm wondering. In country where I'm working it is mainly beacause of goverment contracts, "Somehow" they can be done only by DXC or group of companies, so basically monopoly. Used technologies and apps are from last decade so in my field almost ancient.
Honestly the last things that are keeping me here are remote first work and above pay rate salary, but every year the inflation is slowly eating it away. I'm planning to ask about cost of living pay rise. But honestly it looks like next year I will be forced to look for pay rise elsewhere.
Add to that no aged experience expensive workforce
No staff training
Not enough staff to do the job