Intel

Pawwed Rig · 27-03-2021 11:39am

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I didn't see any previous posts on lack of collective bargaining, but I am not remotely surprised. And yet there will be dupes here, defending Intel to the very end.

Re collective bargaining the redundancy package in 2009 was 10 weeks pay for every year of service. This was a voluntary redundancy scheme. That is one of the best payoffs I have heard of before and since. People are quite entitled to unionize if they want but a company has no responsibility to talk to a union. There has never been enough unhappiness there that drove the workers onto a picket line. I remember 1 time in 1996 it came close but the company just threw cash at the problem and contented all but the most belligerent. They would never let the industrial relations get bad enough where a union would be required.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

That sounds good actually. I’d be happy right now to trade in the 8 hours 5 days a week with 12 hours 3-4 days a week. That’s a long weekend or a very long weekend every week.

Down side is that your shift could include Friday, Saturday or Sunday night. The hours can be fairly unsocial which is why I am happier I a normal hours job. Suits some though.

27-03-2021 11:45am

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Re collective bargaining the redundancy package in 2009 was 10 weeks pay for every year of service. This was a voluntary redundancy scheme. That is one of the best payoffs I have heard of before and since. People are quite entitled to unionize if they want but a company has no responsibility to talk to a union. There has never been enough unhappiness there that drove the workers onto a picket line. I remember 1 time in 1996 it came close but the company just threw cash at the problem and contented all but the most belligerent. They would never let the industrial relations get bad enough where a union would be required.

Down side is that your shift could include Friday, Saturday or Sunday night. The hours can be fairly unsocial which is why I am happier I a normal hours job. Suits some though.

Haha, I actually deleted my post because I thought "nobody seriously cares about defending multinational corporations, that's deathly boring",and now here ou are defending how generous Intel is when it makes you literally redundant.

The best redundancy in town! Jesus Fcuking Christ.

27-03-2021 11:48am

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Haha, I actually deleted my post because I thought "nobody seriously cares about defending multinational corporations, that's deathly boring",and now here ou are defending how generous Intel is when it makes you literally redundant.

The best redundancy in town! Jesus Fcuking Christ.

Their redundancies were indeed brilliant. You really seem to be blowing what they’re saying out of all proportion.

Pawwed Rig · 27-03-2021 11:55am

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Haha, I actually deleted my post because I thought "nobody seriously cares about defending multinational corporations, that's deathly boring",and now here ou are defending how generous Intel is when it makes you literally redundant.

The best redundancy in town! Jesus Fcuking Christ.

It was a VOLUNTARY redundancy. That means that people VOLUNTEERED. So nobody was forced out. It was their choice and with that choice came a massive wad of cash. Many had jobs line up elsewhere already so this was money in the bank to pay down mortgages etc.
Did you work there? Why so negative about the place?
I did work there and as I said I didn't like it much but that had nothing to do with how the staff were treated.

DaveyDave · 27-03-2021 1:58pm

For the record I have never worked for Intel, but every employee is making a company money. They're a business at the end of the day. If they want to get more out of their employees through education so be it. At least the employee has a personal gain with qualifications they can take elsewhere but will also be beneficial if they stay.

Stop acting like you're somehow worse off by having Big Corporate pay for it. If you get a degree on your own accord it still benefits a company in someway only you're thousands out of pocket.

All three of my sisters are currently in college. One works for a small engineering company in an office, they're paying for her degree. The other two are doing a master's on their own while working. They're all doing them as it benefits them in their jobs. Whether it's just a leg up when it's time to review salaries or expand their skillset for future roles. The ones doing them of their own accord are no better off because they're paying it themselves.

Brian? · 27-03-2021 2:03pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I think you're great for going ahead and getting an education, but so, you're obviously intelligent enough to know that Intel aren't doing this for any philanthropic purpose.

They're doing this because they're in the business of manufacturing valuable assets. Intel know that most people will not leave. If their scheme works, then they are having their workers go off and study for extended periods to improve the Intel workforce, unpaid.

It's a little bit genius, a little bit dystopian.

Of course it’s in Intel’s benefit. But that’s what makes them a great company to work for. They treat their people like assets and not liabilities.

It’s all part of the lean philosophy. They know If they invest in people they get the best results.

I was one of the few who paid for my own college. But I did get extra time off when I needed it for exams etc. absolutely no problem. You see something sinister to it, I don’t. It’s a symbiotic approach. We were encouraged and incentivised to improve ourselves, which benefits intel in the medium to long term. It’s not dystopian, it’s a smart way to run a company.

Joe4321 · 27-03-2021 2:05pm

Intel redundancy back in 2009/ 2010 was not voluntary, hundreds of employees were made redundant, from what I know the package was average compared to what was been given out at the time but the big kick in the teeth for long term employees at the time was the redundancy package was capped at 24months, a lot of employees was not compensated for their length of service,

Pawwed Rig · 27-03-2021 2:10pm

Joe4321 wrote: »

Intel redundancy back in 2009/ 2010 was not voluntary, hundreds of employees were made redundant, from what I know the package was average compared to what was been given out at the time but the big kick in the teeth for long term employees at the time was the redundancy package was capped at 24months, a lot of employees was not compensated for their length of service,

It was voluntary. I was one of them. I volunteered and got redundancy. It was not capped at 24 months. It was capped at 10 years service ie the most you could get was 10 weeks x 10 years = 100 weeks pay

Brian? · 27-03-2021 2:13pm

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

It was voluntary. I was one of them. I volunteered and got redundancy. It was not capped at 24 months. It was capped at 10 years service ie the most you could get was 10 weeks x 10 years = 100 weeks pay

There was involuntary after you left. It was the one and only time it happened. 50% of the techs in IFO were let go. The place was on its last legs.

Joe4321 · 27-03-2021 2:16pm

Your wrong in what you say, it was not voluntary for most people, as they done multiple times before that they asked for people to volunteer but this time around they did not get as many people to volunteer, a few hundred people were laid of, that is not voluntary, they were brought in one by one by there respective manager and the majority cam out with a white envelope with there redundancy package in it, people did not know who was been laid of until they went in to talk to there manager on the day, they did not have to work up there notice period as they got paid for that,

Joe4321 · 27-03-2021 2:19pm

@Brian? You are correct in what you say, people were told that if they appeal their decision that the same redundancy package most likely would not be on the table again hence people just accepted it

channelsurfer2 · 27-03-2021 2:25pm

Sounds like intel are being paid a fortune by the IDA for any new job they add. As for unions intel and any other American company hate them. I laugh at this American idea of corporate culture where "team members" are valued.your only valued as long as you can make money for them and don't object to intel or any other company you work for making you jump through hoops. From reading the thread it does seem to be for some people though.

Joe4321 · 27-03-2021 2:30pm

Intel is a good company to work for but this type of work it not suited for everyone, the shift that they work sound great but it is tough on your body, one month of days followed by a month of nights, you work some part of the weekend every week.

fryup · 27-03-2021 2:31pm

sounds like they're the aldi/lidl of the manufacturing world

Joe4321 · 27-03-2021 2:33pm

@fryup what do you base that on

Joe4321 · 27-03-2021 2:34pm

Aldi and lidl actually pay above the market rate

fryup · 27-03-2021 2:39pm

Joe4321 wrote: »

@fryup what do you base that on

the comments in this thread,

the vibe is..they pay well but you have to sell your soul to them, they own you

Joe4321 · 27-03-2021 2:49pm

Not a fan of either aldi or lidl but same can be said of a lot of employers who pay minimum wages but it's more noticeable in this type of working environment

Brian? · 27-03-2021 2:54pm

channelsurfer2 wrote: »

Sounds like intel are being paid a fortune by the IDA for any new job they add. As for unions intel and any other American company hate them. I laugh at this American idea of corporate culture where "team members" are valued.your only valued as long as you can make money for them and don't object to intel or any other company you work for making you jump through hoops. From reading the thread it does seem to be for some people though.

The money the IDA give Intel is buttons to Intel. They do get a lot of tax benefits from hiring graduates through. Again, this is a good thing for everyone involved. Intel is the biggest net contributor to the Irish economy in the private sector.

Brian? · 27-03-2021 2:55pm

fryup wrote: »

sounds like they're the aldi/lidl of the manufacturing world

In what way?

Brian? · 27-03-2021 2:58pm

fryup wrote: »

the comments in this thread,

the vibe is..they pay well but you have to sell your soul to them, they own you

Sell your soul? I’ve heard this line a few times over the years. I’ve never understood what anyone meant by it.

You get well paid to work in a company that treats its employees with respect and actively encourages them to improve themselves. They do it for profit of course, but the employee still does well.

27-03-2021 2:59pm

If you’re a tech then they definitely don’t own you. You forget the place as soon as you’re out the door for your days off and there’s zero expectation for anything extra. They “own you” far less than any other company I’ve ever worked for.

darragh o meara · 27-03-2021 3:00pm

Joe4321 wrote: »

Intel is a good company to work for but this type of work it not suited for everyone, the shift that they work sound great but it is tough on your body, one month of days followed by a month of nights, you work some part of the weekend every week.

I work there and agree 100% a great place to work but shift doesn’t suit everyone, for those that it does you can’t go too far wrong... Long may it last.

@Brian ? I get a feeling we know each other somehow.

Brian? · 27-03-2021 3:02pm

darragh o meara wrote: »

I work there and agree 100% a great place to work but shift doesn’t suit everyone, for those that it does you can’t go too far wrong... Long may it last.

@Brian ? I get a feeling we know each other somehow.

There’s a good chance of it. What shift are you on?

darragh o meara · 27-03-2021 3:04pm

Brian? wrote: »

There’s a good chance of it. What shift are you on?

A

Brian? · 27-03-2021 3:06pm

darragh o meara wrote: »

A

The only shift I never worked on

.

ExMachina1000 · 27-03-2021 3:09pm

Taiwan semi conductor and Amd are fast closing the gap on Intel.

This expansion is a do or die scenario as their share of market slips away due to project failures and delays.

Intel ready to spend 20 billion on chip production and facilities in Arizona. A catch up play

MrMusician18 · 27-03-2021 3:19pm

Joe4321 wrote: »

And yes they do call them Chips

I was in the old Motorola factory out in swords years ago, I did have a chuckle when I saw their canteen was called mega bites.

Brian? · 27-03-2021 4:06pm

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Taiwan semi conductor and Amd are fast closing the gap on Intel.

This expansion is a do or die scenario as their share of market slips away due to project failures and delays.

Intel ready to spend 20 billion on chip production and facilities in Arizona. A catch up play

This is a classic case of a little knowledge being a bad thing. You start with the gap closing and then call it a catch up play, which both contradict each other.

TSMC is a silicon foundry. Their current 7nm process is ahead of Intel. AMD design chips. Their current laptop CPUs are ahead of intel, their server CPUs are behind. The gap isn’t closing, Intel are behind.

Intel is the only one left who design and make their own chips. It’s not “do or die”, it’s do or restructure. If this doesn’t work the manufacturing and design sides of intel will split into a design company and a manufacturing company. The way AMD did with Global Foundries. In this scenario the Fab in Leixlip will still be there, but have a different name.

ExMachina1000 · 27-03-2021 4:07pm

Brian? wrote: »

This is a classic case of a little knowledge being a bad thing. You start with the gap closing and then call it a catch up play, which both contradict each other.

TSMC is a silicon foundry. Their current 7nm process is ahead of Intel. AMD design chips. Their current laptop CPUs are ahead of intel, their server CPUs are behind. The gap isn’t closing, Intel are behind.

Intel is the only one left who design and make their own chips. It’s not “do or die”, it’s do or restructure. If this doesn’t work the manufacturing and design sides of intel will split into a design company and a manufacturing company. The way AMD did with Global Foundries. In this scenario the Fab in Leixlip will still be there, but have a different name.

What are Intel pumping 20 billion into in Arizona?

A foundry among other things

Joe4321 · 27-03-2021 4:19pm

Intel are continuesly investing and upgrading their manufacturing facilities,

Brian? · 27-03-2021 4:26pm

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

What are Intel pumping 20 billion into in Arizona?

A foundry among other things

How is this a response to my post? Your post makes no sense. Especially the “foundry” remark. A foundry is just a fab who makes wafers for someone else’s design. Intel aren’t building a foundry, they’re unlikely to run a fab they do buold as a foundry

Intel are building factories because the demand for silicon is increasing exponentially and they’ve lost their technological leadership.

TSMC are also building a fab in Az. Samsung are looking to build another one in the US, either Austin or Az is likely.

The Intel CEO says they are likely to open another site in Europe.

Infineon and STMicro are expanding in Europe. There’s a new STMicro fab in Northern Italy.

None of these are “do or die” they’re a response to demand.

kowloon · 27-03-2021 5:47pm

Rumour has it if you mention the word union within range of Intel's secret microphones they deliver a foup full of nerve gas to the nearest stocker and switch off the fans. There's a closet full of discoloured skeletons in the F24 sub-fab.

sheepondrugs · 27-03-2021 6:27pm

The comments about education here are ridiculous.
There are many many reasons why people don't or cant pursue further education even if it is paid for.
The thoughts of 3 years of mechatronics or robotics at night in IT Blanchardstown does not appeal to everyone.
I could see how a supervisor sitting on his or her arse for the whole shift in his cube would go for it though.

Del2005 · 27-03-2021 7:32pm

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

What are Intel pumping 20 billion into in Arizona?

A foundry among other things

Because of an over reliance on 2 countries with seriously dangerous neighbours for computer chips. They are pumping 7 billion into Ireland

Zebra3 · 27-03-2021 7:41pm

fryup wrote: »

the comments in this thread,

the vibe is..they pay well but you have to sell your soul to them, they own you

I think that can be the perception if you step up into the management ranks though there can be a lot of pressure on everyone for a new technology start up.

In saying that management types tend to be incredibly well paid and those who go for it tend to thrive on the pressure so while to those on the outside it may seem like they are selling their soul, but to the individual it can seem like a great career challenge.

And like all "important career focused people" everywhere it can be an excuse to get away from the family life they hate. :pac:

deravarra · 27-03-2021 8:22pm

Zebra3 wrote: »

No pleasing some people? :rolleyes:

Give it a rest.

Working four x twelve hour night shifts and then faced with study in between your next batch of night shifts isn't for everybody.

People have different commitments outside of work, some find remote study difficult and need a more structured set up, but enjoy the high horse anyway.

Have a look back at what I said. There were opportunities given to folks to do their studies on their workdays and not during their days off. They would get full pay for this, and it would be less than the 12 hour shift they would have had to do if they were at work. Some refused.

No pleasing some people!

Brian? · 27-03-2021 9:14pm

sheepondrugs wrote: »

The comments about education here are ridiculous.
There are many many reasons why people don't or cant pursue further education even if it is paid for.
The thoughts of 3 years of mechatronics or robotics at night in IT Blanchardstown does not appeal to everyone.
I could see how a supervisor sitting on his or her arse for the whole shift in his cube would go for it though.

99% of the people I know who went back to college were techs, including myself. Sups/shift GLs rarely needed to.

4 of my team did L8s in Blanch. Distance learning. As I said earlier. It isn’t the 1970s where people need to go to night classes.

Brian? · 27-03-2021 9:15pm

Zebra3 wrote: »

I think that can be the perception if you step up into the management ranks though there can be a lot of pressure on everyone for a new technology start up.

In saying that management types tend to be incredibly well paid and those who go for it tend to thrive on the pressure so while to those on the outside it may seem like they are selling their soul, but to the individual it can seem like a great career challenge.

And like all "important career focused people" everywhere it can be an excuse to get away from the family life they hate. :pac:

What a horrible attitude. I was a manager at intel and my number 1 priority was my family.

Brian? · 27-03-2021 9:24pm

deravarra wrote: »

Have a look back at what I said. There were opportunities given to folks to do their studies on their workdays and not during their days off. They would get full pay for this, and it would be less than the 12 hour shift they would have had to do if they were at work. Some refused.

No pleasing some people!

Myself and 3 other lads on the same shift were studying at one point. We all took turns on shift covering If a machine went down. Our GL was grand with it. He completely understood if we were studying on work time but everything kept going as normal.

Pawwed Rig · 27-03-2021 9:45pm

Brian? wrote: »

Myself and 3 other lads on the same shift were studying at one point. We all took turns on shift covering If a machine went down. Our GL was grand with it. He completely understood if we were studying on work time but everything kept going as normal.

That's it. I always had my notes on my desk. I could hear if any of the machines alarmed and did all of the pms/repairs but still managed to do the majority of my studying on the clock

deravarra · 27-03-2021 9:57pm

Brian? wrote: »

Myself and 3 other lads on the same shift were studying at one point. We all took turns on shift covering If a machine went down. Our GL was grand with it. He completely understood if we were studying on work time but everything kept going as normal.

Ye were the lucky ones so

I was in ops at the time, and it was impossible to do anything at a desk.
Still, it was my decision to study. Intel were kind enough to pay for it. And it meant keeping my job.

I'm actually thinking about going back to college again!

mariaalice · 28-03-2021 12:35am

Some of the comments here are bizarre I'm all for unions if that's what people want, companies are not there to love someone they are there to make money.

I have work shift and either every second or third weekend all my life that's just the way it is.

12 days are hard going but on the other hand, there is all the time off.

Zebra3 · 28-03-2021 12:53am

deravarra wrote: »

Have a look back at what I said. There were opportunities given to folks to do their studies on their workdays and not during their days off. They would get full pay for this, and it would be less than the 12 hour shift they would have had to do if they were at work. Some refused.

No pleasing some people!

And people still would have had to study on their days off. Fair play to those who could do it, but it there's no one size fits all.

But again, enjoy the old high horse.

Brian? wrote: »

What a horrible attitude. I was a manager at intel and my number 1 priority was my family.

What has my post got to do with you?

I never mentioned you. Why would I, I don't know you.

Again, get off the high horse, and take your anger issues elsewhere.

deravarra · 28-03-2021 12:56am

Zebra3 wrote: »

And people still would have had to study on their days off. Fair play to those who could do it, but it there's no one size fits all.

But again, enjoy the old high horse.

What has my post got to do with you?

I never mentioned you. Why would I, I don't know you.

Again, get off the high horse, and take your anger issues elsewhere.

No high horse here. Of course these courses were not suitable for everyone - but they were perfect for lots.

What seems to be your issue with those who managed a work/study/life balance?
You do realise that there will always be some element of sacrifice involved when it comes to work and study? Do you think that all the study should have been done during work time only, and the employer should pay for the time spent studying and completing assignments?

Brian? · 28-03-2021 1:34am

Zebra3 wrote: »

And people still would have had to study on their days off. Fair play to those who could do it, but it there's no one size fits all.

But again, enjoy the old high horse.

What has my post got to do with you?

I never mentioned you. Why would I, I don't know you.

Again, get off the high horse, and take your anger issues elsewhere.

It has to do with me because you tarred every manager at intel with the same brush and I used to be one.

Anger issues? The kind of comments you’re making aren’t worth getting angry about.

28-03-2021 1:41am

deravarra wrote: »

Do you think that all the study should have been done during work time only, and the employer should pay for the time spent studying and completing assignments?

Eh. Yes. Absolutely.

We are not talking about some hobby here, it's not like learning about watercolours or classical arabic. These are skills that are usually only useful in an industrial setting. It's only right and proper that an employer should pay for the training that it will derive a profit from.

There's no need to reinvent the wheel here, it already happens in the public service. You know these doctors and nurses that we all appreciate so much? They were all paid to do their specialist training. It's often the same story with financial institutions and accreditation.

When comes to qualifications that benefit a company, this company should pay. The employee derives no benefit beyond his employment.

deravarra · 28-03-2021 1:50am

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Eh. Yes. Absolutely.

We are not talking about some hobby here, it's not like learning about watercolours or classical arabic. These are skills that are usually only useful in an industrial setting. It's only right and proper that an employer should pay for the training that it will derive a profit from.

There's no need to reinvent the wheel here, it already happens in the public service. You know these doctors and nurses that we all appreciate so much? They were all paid to do their specialist training. It's often the same story with financial institutions and accreditation.

When comes to qualifications that benefit a company, this company should pay. The employee derives no benefit beyond his employment.

Employers have absolutely no obligation to pay for anyone's education. You seem to think it's an employer's obligation to pay for it, and have them do no work for the duration of their studies.

I would not have been able to afford the college fees if it were not for my employer. After the study, I got a better position and better pay.

28-03-2021 1:58am

deravarra wrote: »

Employers have absolutely no obligation to pay for anyone's education.

Obviously not. Nobody said they have a legal obligation.

But I think we should draw a distinction between, say, modern poetry and computer engineering.

Where something is so obviously an industrial skill, theres an argument that it should be funded by employers. After all, it is they who will profit from it, it isn't something that people tend to study for personal fulfilment.

I had to sit postgraduate exams when I started out in my career. The employer paid for these, and the idea that I'd have to pay out of my own pocket (for their benefit!) would have been obviously absurd.

YellowLead · 28-03-2021 2:08am

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Obviously not. Nobody said they have a legal obligation.

But I think we should draw a distinction between, say, modern poetry and computer engineering.

Where something is so obviously an industrial skill, theres an argument that it should be funded by employers. After all, it is they who will profit from it, it isn't something that people tend to study for personal fulfilment.

I had to sit postgraduate exams when I started out in my career. The employer paid for these, and the idea that I'd have to pay out of my own pocket (for their benefit!) would have been obviously absurd.

Their benefit only? Really? I assume most people take up those courses because they want a better position with better pay. You feel they do it out of the goodness of their heart to benefit their employer???
Yes it benefits the employer to pay in some circumstances - if the employee needs to be upskilled within their own position. Or if they have an amazing employee who could leave and go elsewhere if benefits are not offered....but often times guess what they can hire somebody else who already has the skills.
If you are useful to your employer they will pay, if you are replaceable they won’t...it’s called capitalism...

Intel

Comments