Thats what Craig said in todays Townhall, except that it doesn't seem to be the truth!
5% would translate into less than 1000 employees - just a hiring freeze would do, no job cuts needed, the target can be met in a year. And, what was that $300 million debt raising for then?
What's going on folks -- any ideas?
David Craig is your least problem.
David Craig is a leech. I would believe nothing he says.
Lot of save come from data centers. DC close team are real busy these months. I know key guy, talk to him today morning. He joke with me you better do needful, we got to get to work. Seems we got to prepone EVERY close - 2 years to close 8 DC. Tata in Bangalore offices last weeks, they are doing virtual implementation not support, no threat. Honestly I am excited. Those Britisher DC PM rocks, Bangalore managers got lot to learn.
Anything Craig-erator says it’s in all honesty best to assume it’s going to be 300% worse. He won’t ever tell you the whole story so don’t be fooled into thinking he’s looking out for ya. Not trying to be Debby-downer here, but he’s always been a “half-truth” guy. It’s going to be bad- but don’t do anything too dumb. Just take package and leave and spare yourself. That’s what I’m doing
“I don’t see it as offshoring; it’s about getting talent,”
So Rifinitiv only see talent as being available in cheap centres of employment ?
Lucky no talent is available in more expensive areas of employment then :-)
Well, the words of a CEO are usually taken to be "factually" correct... so 5% may be "factually" correct in that they'd fire 30% and have hiring plans for 25% (i.e. cheaper resources) over the next 3 years. So 5% may well be a "Refinition" i.e. "Redefinition" of the truth. Being a private "startup" they can get away without much scrutiny as well.
Imagine for a moment that he threw a higher figure like let's say 20% for the sake of the argument. What do you think would've happened to the employees mental state?
5% is the most balanced figure, doesn't really have to be correct, basically it was an indirect message for us to brace ourselves for whatever is that awaits us on the 8th.
Folks, that 5% may well be the NET figure. For e.g. fire 5000, but augment 3500 via outsourcing (bear in mind, only 2 weeks ago a MASSIVE outsourcing deal was signed with TCS) (OR) replace older, expensive employees with cheap new ones in low cost off shore centres OVER TIME.
That way, the 5% would still remain roughly true, and Mr. Craig will say that's what he meant from the very beginning!
We aren't fools to believe silly, childish lies!
Theyve been trying to reduce data centers for 10 years. Its very difficult; easier to fire people.
It is 300 Million a year.
Careful with your math: if $100mil is cut from payroll via firings, that is $100mil per year saved that is no longer spent. Thus the $300mil target for 2021 is hit by cutting $100mil in headcount now.
Also, that clown Craig already has talent. He's looking to fire talent where it is expensive and hire replacement talent where it's cheaper. Notching wrong with that, but he's shouldn't be a pu--y about it: just come out and say it.
As per the statement from David Craig, "the company will also reduce the number of data centres and keep tighter control over procurement."
I imagine the savings will come from selling these sites, cancelling leases and they will sell the assets from said data centres (Computers, etc.), plus the head count, remember not everyone earns the same amount. 100 of those cuts could be 80k plus earners etc.
I still don't see how the numbers stack up ?
How I understand it, there will be 5 % cut now (say 1100) but there will also be further cuts when roles are off shored ?
Does anyone have a clue what the real number is - 1100 will not make the projected savings they have forecast ?
https://www.ft.com/content/ed3bc55e-c490-11e8-8670-c5353379f7c2
"In spite of his spending plans, cost cuts will be needed. The debt prospectus described Refinitiv as “right sizing” the organisation — cutting positions and increasing the number of offshored jobs to Asia. It aims to save $300m a year by the end of 2021 from headcount and overall save $650m a year. In that period it also expects to take one-time costs totalling $500m.
“I don’t see it as offshoring; it’s about getting talent,” said Mr Craig. The company will also reduce the number of data centres and keep tighter control over procurement."
The last poster just said
“But TR is about making money and maintaining the couple of million dollars a day we pay to the Thomson family in dividends that have risen nicely over the years.”
Are you serious dude? What on earth do you think the company is there for? It is truly scary how naive that comment is. Thomson owned the company. You owe THEM money, not the other way around!
Furthermore, both you and the company have made, and sorry to say this, uncompetitive products and choices.
So they are making as much money as they shouls. I am very interested to know how old you are, and where you live. Please, pick up a business 101 book. It sounds like either you are very young and stupid, or a socialist.
Businesses are there to make a return for the owners and investors. If you ever started one, you would understand. Amazingly naive. You probably think its all easy.
If i was hiring manager, i would run from you
Ah low cost areas for employment. Would this be like Thailand Bangkok office where they reduced headcount by 43% a few years ago ?
Or India where staying with a company for 2 years is seen as unusual ?
Maybe we may return to Argentina where we did not understand the economy and 25% pay increases was actually a pay cut due to hyper inflation. They all got shafted by TR when we closed the office. Terrible what we did there to those employees.
But TR is about making money and maintaining the couple of million dollars a day we pay to the Thomson family in dividends that have risen nicely over the years.
They have to fund those multi million dollar Works of art they collect somehow :-)
What did Craig David say, is it:
Getting rid of x% & rehiring x% in low-cost areas. Net reduction will end up 5%
or
Getting rid of 5% then rehiring some of that 5% back in low-cost areas.
ta
The 5% is the net of people we're letting go (high cost primarily) and we're hiring back in (operational centres and investment growth areas). 1100 may be underwhelming when it was announced but actually it's more that what you imagined.
Honestly TR will make the cuts in the wrong spots. They tend to not replace lower level employees through attrition which makes the work load far too much for those actually doing the work. This generally leads to massive turnover of skilled employees who actually work past 2pm on Fridays. They also will not touch managers of which there are far too many, doing way too little. I wouldn’t recommend TR to anyone other than an internship as they actually are treated well. I was happy to get out of an environment in which all my competent managers worried about constantly losing talent while the worst of the worst did nothing but count the days until their pension vested.
Not to mention it will give them time to set unobtainable goals so they can place you on a PIP. Which will place you on a fast track to being fired. All in an effort not to pay out packages.
Also this doesn’t include any outsource arrangement...
Is that 5% let go or reduction in headcount? Different things if they are recruiting...
Or perhaps employ sheer frustration as their attrition augmenting tactic. Give useless job, transfer people to dreaded places, tighten the targets etc. All good ones will leave at no cost.
Blackstone will wait for 9 months before making the deep cuts as they know they will achieve a large portion of their headcount targets through attrition. After the 9 months window, further cuts will be announced on reduced severance packages. Blackstone know how to play this game.
5% in next couple weeks. $300 million over next 3 years.
There are 22,000 employees so 5% is 1100.
If they're mainly from the UK/US that would be a lot more than 5% of those teams......