Once the company is taken over and the business is integrated the employees of that "small company" are then picked for layoff. HP used to do the same .. acquire many businesses/small companies and kill the competition. However, the employees were retrained for other tasks/roles, in CSC/DXC it seems to be a bit different.
3 replies (most recent on top)
Inasmuch we would like to make senses out of this madness - WFR's, the bottom line is where ML and leadership can achieve the biggest savings out of "staff optimization" and facilities closures.
Here are the criteria - the longer you have been with the organization, the higher salaries and overall compensation costs more in benefits such as health care. (Assumption - you are older). They don't care the years of experience and organization knowledge you have to do a good job. They prefer to get cheaper labor - offshore or 2/3 for the price of one replacement.
It's all a stage show to convince the shareholders leadership is doing a bang up job - there is no measurable criteria (incremental) to hold leadership accountable for their performance. Simply put do nothing then WFRs to show profits.
Sadly but the reality...
ML ain't making the call. Last year McKinsey made the list with input from managers and your LI profile.
There's no such logic here. The ML way in CSC was to just randomly axe people left right and centre.
CSC made three acquisitions just before DXC and in that both acquisitions and CSC got "rationalised".
Same will be true here, although just by the numbers, proportionally more HPES people will get chopped because of the two thirds to one third ratio and that HPES wasn't nearly as "right shored" as CSC was.
Definitely though it won't be "safe" to be CSC in DXC...