nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Intel

[Deleted User]

If jobs are supposed to migrating to cheaper economies because we are paying ourselves too much? in the rich western developed world, how come this is happening in intel Leixlip?.

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2021/0323/1205737-intel-to-create-1-600-new-jobs-at-leixlip-campus?

Also how come it's a campus and not a workplace?.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Brian?

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.

[Deleted User]

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

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?

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

Brian? wrote: »

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

Brian?

darragh o meara wrote: »

A

The only shift I never worked on

ExMachina1000

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

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?

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

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

Intel are continuesly investing and upgrading their manufacturing facilities,

Brian?

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

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

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

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

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

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?

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?

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?

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

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

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!

[Deleted User]

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

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

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?

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.

[Deleted User]

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

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.

[Deleted User]

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

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...