from a programmer - damned if you do, damned if you don't

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

When I read the thread that was started by Mike today, I was filled with a sense of sadness at the dilemma that is faced by many who have something to say about Y2K. When a person has in their experience something which is clearly relevant to an issue that is as large as what is facing the world in 6 months, they want to tell others of that experience. Perhaps, as seems to be the case with Mike, this was a defining moment. It altered how they were perceiving the issue. They had come face to face with a cold reality. They think that everyone will want to know. Then they face their personal issues - how will revealing the experience affect them personally - will they still have a job if they tell it? Will they ever get a job again if they tell it? Are they legally liable if they tell it? Then, with a great deal of courage, they decide that the issue is too large to let their own circumstances stand in the way. They try to protect themselves as best they can - but they tell their story here. I have heard it said on this forum that those who know are obligated, by the very nature of the danger that is facing this nation and the world, to come forward with their experiences at not matter what the personal cost.

Unfortunaely, because so many people are having such a good time trashing the postings on the forum, it has become difficult to discern the truth. Some people are having such great fun crying "Wolf" and deliberating misleading people who are sincerely seeking to protect themselves and their families. Some people seem to be taking a great deal of pleasure at ridiculing and mocking those who are trying to give and gather information. Others just throw in a bit of perversion to get things off track. It is in the midst of all of this, that a person has to decide - is it really worth it to try to help that person gather some information who is just beginning to understand about Y2K? - is it really worth it to help that person who is watching for signs to be able to make the most accurate forecast to prepare their family for Y2K? Is it really worth it to tell your experience and not be believed - to be ridiculed, be taunted, be mocked. I don't know, but I still remember that post where the man pleaded that it was his family's future that was at stake.

I have been working in computers for 30 years, as a consultant for 19. I completed a contract on a government system the first of this year. Here's what I know. I know that the BDAM files I was remediating for Y2K were really tough to fix. And I know that the users that we (the consultants) were not allowed to contact could not be bothered with what we were doing. I know that at this government agency they didn't have any documentation and we had to dig out anything that we could about the system from the code. And we had to test by making up data that we didn't really understand how it worked - because the system was embedded in several other systems. And I know that it was like the blind leading the blind. And I know that the testing was very limited and no future date testing was done end-to-end. The main testing was done to try to assure that what was working present day wasn't broken (1 months worth of user testing). And then the system was put into production and the staff was cut back to a skeletal staff. And I know that there are problems already with the system and that refund checks did not make it out and the government is going to have to pay interest on those refunds.

I know this - but I also know that you don't know it - you haven't had my experiences. All you have are my words posted on this forum - posted in the midst of all of these other posts.

-- Jean (jmacmanu@bellsouth.net), July 02, 1999

Answers

Thanks, Jean

-- Jon Williamson (jwilliamson003@sprintmail.com), July 02, 1999.

Jean --- Thanks.

And I "know" from 20+ years of ALL KINDS of IT experience (from programming to management of programmers) that lots of great geeks/geekettes have done heroic work on Y2K that is going to help everyone next year.

And I "know" from the same experience that we are going to be facing a worldwide mess of historic proportions next year.

I don't "know" what the macro economic and social impact will be, but I "conclude" from what I "know" that no amount of personal or familial or community preparation is too much.

And I "judge" that too many people who post to this forum are posting from ignorance and/or maliciousness towards those who "know" the score.

Thanks again.

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), July 02, 1999.


Thanks Jean. I could add much about my experiences on two Y2k projects. Those who refuse to believe Mike or you or me are beyond hope. The evidence is overwhelming. The warnings have been sounded loudly, by many like us. That it falls on deaf ears is not our fault.

-- regular (zzz@z.z), July 02, 1999.

Y2k fixes are the dirtiest, nastiest, least rewarding and perhaps most necessary work any of us will do. I've been programming for 25 years, working Y2k since 1994. Y2k is a giant sideways move in my career, won't do a thing for my long-term goals, and prevents me from keeping up in my chosen specialization. But we gotta do it.

I am personally delighted to work for a company that is in terrific shape, wrapping up now, team winding down. Never saw a company change course so fast, grab something new, accept curtailing some freedoms in exchange for cleaning up code.

(Can't give the name, and that's why I don't give a real email address. My employer allows me to use email for Y2k activities, and in return I keep a low profile.)

I look around at companies that are clueless, at programmers who are being told to tell lies, at interwoven problems of awesome scale, and at neighbors who (without knowing bits from bytes) tell me "I just don't think it's going to be that big a problem". Pretty scary.

My wife and I read the entrails in 1997, started planning, told family and friends not to do Xmas in 97, start on Y2k instead. My brother said they just figured I was overdoing my medication. We're good to a certain level of disruption, and geez I hope we guessed right. We're all (DGIs included) are entering the most amazing couple years of our lives. If we're lucky, we'll look back at this like our folks remember WWII or the Great Depression.

Whoever you are, keep a journal if you've ever been a journal-keeping type. Doesn't seem to work for me. A generation from now, people might learn something from how this all goes down.

Work with whatever neighbors you can. Form teams, share resources. Your best protection is a prepared friend who can depend on you in return.

-- bw (home@puget.sound), July 02, 1999.


Jean,

Thanks for taking the time to provide an excellent, well-written and thoughtful post. All should read your post that come to this forum.

-- R.C. (racambab@mailcity.com), July 02, 1999.



And if you guys who work in the computer/software industry think it is hard for you to "get" what is real and what is not - try being someone like me and I would venture to say many others, who barely know how to get to their e-mail and still haven't figured out how to get something on the web without getting a "choice" of 68,000 answers!! Between the government spin and the confusing reports and the Trolls ad nauseum - it is like trying to pick the individual flakes out of a bowl of cooked oatmeal. Oh well - got lots of oatmeal...

-- Valkyrie (anon@please.net), July 02, 1999.

bw's post puts the lie to the oft-heard junk on this forum that doomers discount positive Y2K work. Heck, lots of us have DONE successful Y2K work. Once again, thanks to all the "bw's"! My family is depending on you.

Alas, for every bw, there have been 'x' number of bozos, starting with my peers in management --- even so-called TECHNICAL management. Take them out back and shoot them.

No, that's too gentle.

(Memo to the FBI lurkers: that was just a joke. Get it? Just a joke).

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), July 02, 1999.


To Jean and any others who have tried to tell their story - This is one of the main reasons I spend far too much time on the 'net than I probably should. The information, verifiable or not, simply isn't available elsewhere. I'm not a programmer (although I used to work in an adminstrative capacity at a software company incapable of releasing reasonably bugfree software), so I do carefully consider any counterpoint on those threads. As a result, some of the original stories appear far more solid than others, but it adds up to a general understanding of what the problems could be, and what they might actually be. Please continue to share whatever you can with us.

-- Brooks (brooksbie@hotmail.com), July 02, 1999.

Jean

Well said.

The vast majority of the public won't care until it is far too late to do much about it. It makes me very sad.

But my family is onboard and we intend to weather this storm. I don't think it is going to be easy. It will be interesting.

-- Dog Gone (layinglow@rollover.now), July 02, 1999.


The positive stories would fill a book, but nondisclosure agreements prevent my telling all I've heard.

The question is not whether progress has been made, but whether the progress will keep the damage down to a tolerable level. I think we (as a country) are rich enough and quick enough on our feet to survive this thing, with casualties hopefully in the 10k's or 100k's. I don't buy rampant conspiracy theories, but I recognize that incompetence is common.

I suspect the rest of the world will be much worse off than the US. I foresee us struggling with patches and jury-rigs, while watching other countries suffer wars and massive famines, casualties in the 100m's and way way up. My main concern is the failure to get the 2000 crops planted, if infrastructure failures prevent shipping of seed, pesticide and fertilizer. Such crop failures put billions at risk, and the resulting stresses could easily spark wars.

There are lots of good stories, and they're important, but they're not necessarily enough.

-- bw (home@puget.sound), July 02, 1999.



There is not necessarily enough farm land either. Will we have enough of the 'tools' and fuel in place, as well? Our wheat crop here (in the wheat capitol of the world) has suffered from uncooperative weather this year. What about next year? I won't continue with my American farmers 'rant'. Thank you Jean. I'm not in the profession, but I'm no dummy and am grateful for so many like you, and so many on this forum as well. I recently stated our country has no heros. I also stated that my government has forced them into hiding and given the opportunity, our Patriots and heroes WILL emerge. You are an example as are many *here* around me. As the Irishman said, "This forum draws the finest people"! (wink to Mike)GBA

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), July 02, 1999.

Will --

Last January I was talking about prepositioning seed, fertilizer, fuel, for farmers in 2000. Absolutely not on the radarscope for administration agricultural people. They hadn't thought of y2k as anything more than an excuse for a party, at that point. How could they consider the need for contingency plans?

All these lost chances. Nuff to make you cry.

-- bw (home@puget.sound), July 02, 1999.


To bw I thought it interesting your comment about the U.S. being able to weather the y2k storm, but that you were worried about the other countries. I just spent some time talking to a veteran missionary who has been in Central African Republic for 40 years. Since 1991 the polititcal unrest has been bad enough to force most of the missionaries off the field, and at present he and his wife will do translation work here in the States. However, that isn't the point. The point is that when I asked him about the Y2k problem in a third world country, he responded that he didn't believe people would really be much affected. They are already use to not depending on electricity, food, water, and their "checks in the mail". He as a missionary has experienced all of that over his 40 years on the field. They have learned to cope. We on the other hand, are a rich nation and dependent on luxury and convenience. We are the ones who are in for a shock to the system. That is the third person I have talked to in recent months from a third world country, and every time I get pretty much the same response. I do believe that y2k may be good for America. We have become too dependant on technology and have sacrificed the "important" for the "urgent". Maybe it is time for all of us to slow down and reevaluate what is truly important. Thanks for listening.

-- Cindy (FourJDs@aol.com), July 02, 1999.

Cindy,

I think you're largely correct. Most of the world won't even notice, directly. Main risks that I see are (1) when they are dependent on technology and don't know it, (2) when they are hit by ripple effects and(3) when they depend on peace keepers.

(1) is the hybird-seed-pesticide-fertilizer dependence. In the Green Revolution we persuaded many countries to shift away from natives to high-yield hybrids that we supply. Our chem industry also sells lots of goodies that other countries are now dependent on. That is, we killed the bad bugs but also some of what preys on them, and now the bad ones have no natural enemies and can come rolling back if the chemicals stop. Also, new bugs have evolved, or chem-resistant strains, and so they need more pesticides all the time. List goes on.

If our supply of chemicals stops, or the hybrid seeds, their crops fail. This might be in an unindustrialized country that seems to have no special dependency on technology. Like the pager satellite failure, y2k may be a sort of acid test, that shows we had interdependencies that we hadn't suspected. I seem to recall stories where "gift of USA" was painted over for local political reasons. Some people might (this is pure conjecture) be dependent on us and really not know it (at the farmer's level).

(2) comes from countries that are being hurt, and are trying to minimize either the local pain or the political effects. Local pain: If country X is starving because the seeds and fertilizer never arrived, it may attack country Y to take their crops. Political: if country X is starving it may attack ANYBODY just to distract the population, perhaps averting a revolution. Look at why Argentina took the Falklands - to distract unhappy people at home. They never dreamed that England would want the islands bad enough to take them back.

(3) comes from our being distracted next year. Many countries exist peacefully, with antagonisms just under the surface, because large countries want some peace and quiet. Russia's buffer countries were peaceful because Russia wanted it that way; Kosovo is not a new problem, just what happens when the Russian lid is removed from the boiling kettle. I've suggested that any old animosity will burst loose next year, because we and other larger countries will be too distracted to play a peacekeeping role. In sum, I expect wars between India/Pakistan (been saying this for a couple years, now), China and SE Asia, many parts of Africa, you name it.

Even if most of the world (in terms of people percentage) doesn't notice y2k, the total risks facing 6-ish billion people total up to a huge hazard. As when WWII bypassed South America but stomped on some useless islands in the mid-Pacific, I think we'll be surprised by the spotty impact of y2k.

No matter what happens in the next couple of years, the most forward-looking of us is going to spend a lot of time saying "Holy Cow, I never thought of THAT!"

-- bw (home@puget.sound), July 02, 1999.


Jean, great post, thanks. The programmer's views are why I come to this forum. If anyone knows, it's these people. And thanks to Mike & Jon and RC (reporter, I know...) for telling it like it is.

M.Moth

-- M.Moth (Derigueur2@aol.com), July 02, 1999.



Agree mainly with bw. Even 3rd world countries have lost a lot of old "know how", not to mention topsoil, over the past few decades, thanks to our agribusiness "helpfulness." Besides, 1st and 2nd world companies number, oh, eighty or so last time I looked. They are just about as dependent on technology for making their infrastructure work (utilities, banking, telecom) as we are. If their iron triangle goes down, THEY are toast.

I also agree with the assessment of U.S. with respect to early to mid-2000. The main problems will come from ripple effects later that year and beyond, which I don't believe will spare us this time around. "Problems" is far too light a word for the crisis to come, IMO.

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), July 02, 1999.


Jean, "regular" and all -

100% agreement here. A while back, I reached my limit here... the "noise" here seemed to be inpenetrable by any "signal". You're far from alone in your DP experience (18 years, here) or your sadness. Thank you for your words.

-- Grrr (grrr@grrr.net), July 02, 1999.


I'll add my 33 years experience to BigDog and bw...and almost everyone above. Lots of work being done. Unlikely that it will be totally fixed in time.

Bought 10 pounds of pasta, another 4 cans of SPAM today...

-- Mad Monk (madmonk@hawaiian.net), July 03, 1999.


Jean,

My experience as a programmer on a Y2K project at a high-tech company leads me to believe that Y2K will be a 10. They cut every corner and continued to charge ahead with unnecessary new development at the same time. Everything was aimed at doing Y2K on the cheap and putting up a good PR front.

-- Mr. Adequate (mr@adequate.com), July 03, 1999.


Am I the only contractor on this forum who has engaged in many, many remediation projects that were completed and moved into production?

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), July 03, 1999.

Anita,

remember - it's a GLOBAL problem - please stop repeating your mantra that because your OK by default every other entity in the world will be ok too

it doesn't wash Anita

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), July 03, 1999.


Jean,

Thanks very much for telling it straight. Thanks to everyone here that is contributing to focusing on what's ahead. I value all of you more each day as things grow closer and closer.

I spent the last year working on a (thank goodness) successful implementation of SAP into the manufacturing area of the company I've worked at for almost 30 years. I'm frankly amazed it came off as well as it did. Still some issues to mop up, but the legacy system that's being unplugged July 30 took many years to square away so this is no surprise. It worked out because we had an exceptionally sharp VP working right with the team that had experience implementing SAP into other areas of the company. That plus some good consultants and a very focused and experienced team.

None of that reduces my concerns about the systemic nature of the overall problem. One sub-system we ported over blew up from date fields converted incorrectly (old 00/00/0000 fields converted as nulls) The first weekly purge of data blew away several thousand records that I'd spent many hours cleaning up. No problem I thought, let's just restore the table from the backup. No way, I learned. They only take an image of the entire system in case of catastrophic failure. So we reconverted the file and I spent mind numbing hours cleaning up the records again.

Beyond that, we're only sending form letters to about 250 key suppliers out of 1500 or so total suppliers. Whoa, the assembly lines won't run much if we're short just a few parts. I suspect we'll feel a little pinch come January. Plus we have a hot shot consultant pressing to move our fabrication operations to the ultimate JIT, no wip, process that can be achieved. Don't they say 'timing is everthing'?

I have grave doubts about the whole "iron triangle", the just in time supply chain breakdowns, the pacific rim and latin america, etc. doing too little, too late.

It's going to be messy. We're going on the ride of our lives kids. Hang on tight (to the One that made us!)

-- TM (digiratoX@att.net), July 03, 1999.


Anita,

Actually, I worked on two long term Y2k remediation projects that were completed and put into production. The one that I spoke about at the beginning of this thread was "completed" and "put into production". It was completed within the guidelines and restraints that were placed upon us by the agency that hired us. It was tested in the manner that they chose and to the extent that they chose and within the constraints that they insisted upon. The other Y2k project that I completed was a Y2K remediation project for a national insurance company - car insurance. I have no qualms about their Y2K compliance whatsover. They expanded date files rather than windowing. They paralleled their production, comparing all output files using Easytriev. On that contract, we knew that what we had done produced the results we wanted. So, I can say - 1 out of 2. My question is, though, which is more important, your car insurance or your state income tax?

I was very glad to hear that you have completed multiple Y2K remediations and they have all gone well. I will add this to my picture of the state of our country. We all have pictures of how this effort is going - based on our own experiences and the experiences of those with whom we interact - both other consultants that we talk to on our contracts - and the wider world that we get a glimpse of when we talk on this forum or others in which we might have chosen to participate.

I would like to thank all of those who have responded to my post. I have felt your sincerity and wish you all well.

-- Jean (jmacmanu@bellsouth.net), July 03, 1999.


Andy:

That wasn't my point at all, and you know it. I have never extrapolated on the successful remediation projects I've seen.

My question was honest. If you question that, I'll provide another example: Most contractors that I know who work on big iron in my area are now unemployed....including me. The recruiters are telling us that this is due to firms having completed their Y2k work and freezing modifications for fear of corrupting working systems. We get calls regularly from other consultants asking where the work is, as their areas have dried up also.

It's easy for me to find posts on Y2k fora or newsgroups describing the same phenomenon. It's always easy to confirm what we already believe.

It's much harder to seek out different experiences. As much as I can look at some posts regarding big iron programmers being unemployed nation-wide and feel as though Y2k problems are universally solved, it would be just as easy for me to still be working on a hopeless Y2k project, read posts of a similar nature and conclude that the world is in the dumper.

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), July 03, 1999.


Would like to make a modification to my above post. Compared the results with Comparex - don't know where my mind was. Sorry about that.

I would also like to add that this Y2K issue feels like some of the worst programming systems I have worked on - those systems that feel like you are wrestling some kind of a monster to the ground. The struggle to see the bigger picture keeps me talking to people. The problem as I see it is one of "enough". Will "enough" be done? Will "enough" companies finish? Our countries infrastructure and the infrastructures of the other countries of the world are interwoven. I am sure that there is a resiliency within that infrastructure. It can take a certain amount of failure. But how much? How much failure before the whole thing begins to unravel? I keep looking for hope - but I also try to keep my eyes very open to what is really happening in the state of the remediation. On my last contract which was not a Y2K remediation, at a major telco, employees told me about failures that had happened in their department when the year rolled over to 1999 on systems that had supposedly been fixed. That was never going to make the news. They used the term "fix-on-failure". That made me kind of nervous. Because I was not on their Y2K team, I am not really privy to their status - I do know that they are buying and installing huge generators and storing fuel.

-- Jean (jmacmanu@bellsouth.net), July 03, 1999.


Jean:

Thanks for your thoughts. My experiences were different than yours. Testing methods were left to the discretion of our teams. We were under no constraints, and had a number of anal-retentive types that chose to leave no stone unturned. Sure, stuff failed initially despite our attempts at thoroughness. We spent many hours at each site recovering. It's all part of being a programmer. If one wants a 9-5 job, I wouldn't suggest programming as a profession.

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), July 03, 1999.


Anita,

The phenomenon about contracts drying up for mainframe Y2k work is very real. It is very interesting in light of the information that I have from friends who are consultants within some of the government agencies locally. One of my consultant friends has told me that her agency has not addressed Y2K yet. They have not begun. They are talking about beginning. As late ago as 3 months, I knew of agencies that had not requested their Y2K money yet. Then they have passed laws that they are not liable for disruptions caused by Y2K.

I don't know what it all means - maybe they have decided that if they are not liable they don't have to spend the money.

-- Jean (jmacmanu@bellsouth.net), July 03, 1999.


Jean:

Where are these local government agencies? Can you give me a location? I have folks in my network who would take ANYTHING right now, regardless of location. I'm not in that position as I have an elderly parent living nearby at a type-B facility. My non-compete clause expires next month with the City of Fort Worth (who offered me a permanent position while I was contracting for them.) For me this seems the best road to follow at this point. I've been contracting for too many years already, and the IRS hasn't made it lucrative of late. I'd be ensured a steady income with a Y2k-compliant institution. The work there also seemed interesting and challenging.

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), July 03, 1999.


Thanks for the E-mail, Jean. I'll pass this information along to those in my network looking for work.

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), July 03, 1999.

I have one more comment here for Andy, and then I'll drop this thread.

Somewhere along the line in the one month I've been here, Andy, I got the impression that you were a programmer. Yet the only responses I've seen from you were when I was up too late. You work nights. Programmers don't work nights....unless they've worked the day and the problem hasn't yet been resolved.

What exactly do you do for a living, Andy? Operator? Lots of those folks work nights. Programmers don't spend their working time on the internet on fora. Operators have lots of time to kill between nightly jobs finishing.

I'm just curious.

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), July 03, 1999.


Anita -- Drop it. Andy is for real. As a FYI, Cory published a piece by Andy on systems programming stuff in a WRP a while back. Nice try but no cigar.

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), July 03, 1999.

I don't why this is such a hard concept for pollies, but let's try one more time: the good news SHOULD outweigh the bad news 90 to 10 if we're gonna have a good shot at escaping major problems. At 80 to 20, we're in big trouble, especially since that is the optimum "good news" ratio projected for the U.S., not the world as a whole.

The problem is: there isn't ENOUGH good news of either the hard or the soft variety.

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), July 03, 1999.


Anita I work for a multinational, contracting, testing goes on at weekends in different time zones - capiche? I was not having a go at you, just pointing out that the "I'm alright jack" attitude is all too pervasive - once again it is a global systemic problem, and in that regard the global situation is "not good" - by default the USA will be seiously affected, that's a no-brainer. Maybe you will get plenty of tidy up work after rollover - should be plenty to go around if we don't tip over the precipice...

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), July 03, 1999.

BigDog,

I'm glad to see someone put this in perspective succinctly and simply. You are absolutely right; the good news *should* by far outweigh the bad. That the "optimists," at this late date, dance and shout, claiming this fact as somehow their own discovery, and as "proof" of their BITR theories, illustrates nothing more than short memories on their part. For two years and more, those less sanguine on the subject have been repeatedly acknowledging this outcome. The good news is encouraging, but it takes only one 4 million gallon error to drive us back ten steps. I've said before that I never experienced the various stages of "gettedness" but the types of problems *still* occurring are taking their toll. What hope that remains comes from the fact that any error found today should be one less that will occur on the appointed day.

-- Elbow Grease (Elbow_Grease@AutoShop.com), July 03, 1999.


Pardon me for joining here, as I'm not a programmer at all. However, I am a recruiter. While doing a search for some IT folks a few months ago, I noticed quite a few junior COBOL programmers on the street, all let go at the same time from National City Bank. They had been working on Y2K remediation.

I called a few to see what was going on, if the bank had finished. Universally, I was told that they were no where near done, and that a recent merger with First American bank had made the situation worse. One said something about having worked in the credit card area, and that their department had been converted to a "revenue generating" operation. When they did not make any money, they were disbanded. No, I don't understand what that meant.

-- Jon Williamson (pssomerville@sprintmail.com), July 03, 1999.


tired of all the good posts going to the bottom...

...back to the top...

-- -- (Tic@toc.boom), July 04, 1999.


Andy:

Thanks for describing your situation. If the City is still holding the job for me, I WON'T be working on remediation, yet fixing problems that have existed in their systems for years that they never had time to fix. For others, we've seen LOTS of modifications put on hold while Y2k work was done first. Mods are the bread and butter for contractors. It's a rare contract wherein we come in and start with analysis of a new system...refreshing, but rare. I've never worked for a large contracting firm unless subcontracting. I've always been an independent, and enjoyed the freedom associated with that. It could be quite a change to put on an employee "hat."

Jon:

You said:

"Pardon me for joining here, as I'm not a programmer at all. However, I am a recruiter. While doing a search for some IT folks a few months ago, I noticed quite a few junior COBOL programmers on the street, all let go at the same time from National City Bank. They had been working on Y2K remediation. I called a few to see what was going on, if the bank had finished. Universally, I was told that they were no where near done, and that a recent merger with First American bank had made the situation worse."

I don't typically work in the banking arena, but it's been my understanding that mergers would incorporate non-compliant banks into the fold of banks that were compliant. If this is true in the case you mention, there is no need for National City Bank to continue work on compliance. The need will be to hire experienced folks for incorporating National City Bank's database in with First American Bank. Junior COBOL programmers wouldn't be needed in this instance. You can also bet that First American Bank's preferred people will be the ones used.

You then said:

"One said something about having worked in the credit card area, and that their department had been converted to a "revenue generating" operation. When they did not make any money, they were disbanded. No, I don't understand what that meant."

I suspect that this person didn't EXACTLY tell the truth about this one, at least if he was of the group you mentioned above. Y2k is NOT a revenue producer in and of itself. Of course if you have lost the ability to function, ALL your revenue is in jeopardy. I suspect this person was working on another non-Y2k-related project, yet I've seen many non-Y2k-related projects correct dates in the process. I worked on a fairly long-term re-engineering project for Commonwealth Edison in Chicago several years back. We converted old assembler systems to Telon and DB2. It was a great step forward in eliminating old code and replacing it with something a bit more modern. I left the project when I moved to Texas, but found out later that ComEd had hired Arthur Anderson to oversee all the projects. The one we had worked on so long was not considered a money-maker and the team disbanded within perhaps 3 weeks of implementation.

There's also another phenomenon occuring in the IT arena...charge- backs. It used to be that users could simply send any request to the IT department and the IT department handled it. For this reason, the IT department was always a service department that provided no income for a firm, and was seen by some as a department that spent money with no apparent results. Now, however, departments that request programming work need to come up with monies to pay for their requests. It cuts down on frivolous requests, yet creates a paperwork nightmare for the IT department in some instances, as they find themselves required to charge particular departments for all work done when some of the work they do may overlap between various departments.

I hope I haven't confused you further on these issues.

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), July 04, 1999.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ