[Info-vax] VMS Software, Inc. Acquires All OpenVMS Support Business from Hewlett Packard Enterprise

[Bill Gunshannon]

On 10/26/19 2:12 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
> On 10/26/2019 11:11 AM, Kerry Main wrote:
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Info-vax <info-vax-bounces at rbnsn.com> On Behalf Of Jan-Erik
>>> Söderholm via Info-vax
>>> Sent: October 26, 2019 5:37 AM
>>> To: info-vax at rbnsn.com
>>> Cc: Jan-Erik Söderholm <jan-erik.soderholm at telia.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [Info-vax] VMS Software, Inc. Acquires All OpenVMS Support
>>> Business from Hewlett Packard Enterprise
>>>
>>>> On 10/25/2019 5:38 PM, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Also, many young
>>>>> people don't want to be trained in something perceived as a dead end
>>>>> except perhaps if they were offered a life-long contract which
>>>>> continues to pay even if they can't work with VMS anymore without
>>>>> requiring them to learn anything new, which in most situations is 
>>>>> just not
>>> realistic.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Our Indian IT-consultant partner with close to 140.000 employees has 
>>> a hard
>>> time to staff our *two* positions for VMS developers. And we have, in 
>>> the
>>> five years that has passed, lost two that had got up-to-speed with 
>>> our user
>>> environment and applications for “better” jobs in Dotnet or SAP (I 
>>> think it
>>> was). One stayed within this specific company, and left.
>>>
>>> VMS is simply not attractive enough, in particular in the Indian IT 
>>> consulting
>>> market.
>>>
>> [snip..]
>>
>> Fwiw, this issue with the Indian outsourcing market is not unique to 
>> OpenVMS.
>>
>> It was very common a few years back (not sure if still is), where the 
>> demand for local tech talent was so huge that those with skills were 
>> hopping from one job to another every few months because of the jumps 
>> in pay they were offered.
>>
>> This was a problem for all outsourcers based in India (and likely 
>> other places as well).
> 
> This is a two edged problem.  You need new people.  You can hire them, 
> and train them, but if they just leave as soon as they get a better 
> offer, you've wasted all the time, and the money you paid them.  Keep in 
> mind, while in training, they do not produce any revenue.  If not for 
> the eventual need, you're better off not hiring and training.
> 
> Not sure how to address the problem, or if it is possible to do so.
> 
> Sort of goes back to what they learn in school before entering the jab 
> market, huh?
> 
> Makes me wonder how legal it might be to have some clause, that if you 
> train someone, they have to give you some agreed upon amount of time, 
> or, they pay back some amount for the training.
> 
> 

Totally legal.  EDS did it for ages under Ross Perot.  Don't know if
it continued in to the HP days.

bill