Anyone else reporting July rollover problems? : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Last night's (thursday, 7.8.1999) television news here in southern Maine carried a long report on computer problems at the state Department of Labor. Seems the entire computer system there crashed earlier this week and they're having trouble getting it back up again -- which means unemployment compensation claims haven't been processed and the checks haven't gone out yet. Supposedly, workers were coming in at 5 a.m. today and they're gonna go straight through until all the claims are processed by hand if necessary. The checks, we are assured, will go out tonight "or Saturday at the latest," but that still means some people won't get their money until sometime next week. Oddly, I can find no mention of it in this morning's papers, so can't offer a URL yet. No mention of y2k that I heard, but the coincidence is a little too strong to accept.

1.) Can someone else confirm the problems in Maine? All I saw was a tv report, albeit a long and rather extensive one, and I have an inherent distrust of tv news.

2.) Have there been problems this week in other states that anyone here is aware of? Thanks in advance -- Cash

-- Cash (, July 09, 1999


I saw that report also but have not details from other sources.

-- ..- (dit@dot.dash), July 09, 1999.

Does anybody know whether the default termination of unemployment eligibility varies from state to state?

Seems it's 6 months some places, 1 year elsewhere?

-- Lisa (, July 09, 1999.

The only July 1st glitches I've seen reported and that can be linked to are in this article in The Boston Globe: rted_in_major_Y2K_test+.shtml

-- Linkmeister (, July 09, 1999.

[Fair Use: For Educational/Research Purposes Only]

[added bold emphasis mine]

Few computer snags reported in major Y2K test

By Ross Kerber and Heather Kamins, Globe Staff and Globe Correspondent, 07/02/99

Massachusetts state computers suffered a few glitches yesterday as fiscal year 2000 got under way, but officials said they remain comfortable with the progress of work to overcome the software problem known as the Y2K bug.

The start of the new fiscal year in Massachusetts and 45 other states yesterday was seen as a key test of progress in work to protect against disruptions come Jan. 1, 2000.

But the date change seemed to go unnoticed in most states and many municipal agencies.

In Boston, information systems director Bill Hannon said city computers worked without a hitch despite a new software package that had just been installed.

''We fired it up at 8 a.m. and it's been fine,'' Hannon said. Cambridge and Quincy city officials also reported smooth operations, and errors seemed rare nationwide as well.

''Nobody had any issues at all, that I know of,'' said Gloria Timmer, executive director of the National Association of State Budget Officers, which surveyed many members yesterday afternoon. ''It was a good sign'' that most state remediation plans are on track, she said.

The so-called Y2K problem relates to software applications that use only the last two digits of each year to keep track of the date. Left unrepaired, such programs might misinterpret the last two digits of Jan. 1, 2000, and cause systems to malfunction or shut down.

To prevent that outcome, Massachusetts state agencies are spending $103 million to upgrade programs. Mostly those efforts prevented major problems yesterday, said Val Asbedian, an official in the state's division of information technology who is monitoring Y2K preparations.

But exceptions were discovered at a state computing center in Chelsea, Asbedian said. One application used to track legislative action on a mainframe apparently misinterpreted the ''00'' of the new fiscal year as a previous date. In a second case, Asbedian said, a mainframe program wasn't able to allocate costs properly because of the unfamiliar year.

Asbedian said he couldn't provide more specific descriptions of the problems, but said they were quickly spotted and repaired.

The glitches were troublesome because they appeared in large mainframe applications that had already been certified as ''Y2K- compliant,'' meaning they were already thought to be prepared for the date change.

But Asbedian said he was satisfied the two problems didn't indicate broader weaknesses in the state's remediation work.

This story ran on page C2 of the Boston Globe on 07/02/99.

) Copyright 1999 Globe Newspaper Company.


-- Linkmeister (, July 09, 1999.

Are fiscal year rollovers in accounting software a reliable indicator of what will happen in January 2000? See this thread:

"Significance of States Fiscal Start"

-- Linkmeister (, July 09, 1999.


A very important issue to keep in mind is the perspective from the point of view of the business owners, directors, managers, and of course, their lawyers.

Think about it - Congress just passed new legislation which basically allows companies to now wait until January to find out what fails, before they have to spend any more time and money to fix it. Do you think it is just a coincidence that this bill was passed on the very same day when many businesses had promised they would be "Y2K ready"? Hah! Not likely.

b usinesses get off the hook, consumers get screwed

So the majority of the public continue to live in their little dream world thinking, "I'm not hearing many stories of problems so everything is going to be fine". The connection that they fail to make with this new legislation is that businesses can now continue to hide any problems until after January without any liability when they fail. They have been given another 90 days after January to fix it without anyone being able to sue them for damages, as if the last 20 or 30 years was not enough! This is a prescription for disaster. Massive failures after January 1 are now guaranteed, because our Congress has chosen to protect their interests in money before the safety of the people. Once again the consumer who relies on these companies will be victimized, in the interest of protecting the wealth of the almighty business execs and owners.

Their lawyers have advised them that they have nothing to gain by revealing failures, and everything to lose. So as Michael Hyatt points out in his recent article, the rare occasion when you hear about a problem is probably only because it was leaked or impossible to conceal.

some failures

So when you ask if we have been hearing about July rollover problems, remember that for every one that you do hear about there are probably at least a hundred more that we won't hear about until January. Then it will feel like someone dropped a bomb on us.

-- @ (@@@.@), July 09, 1999.

The problem is apparently not Y2k-related, according to y2ktoday.

-- regular (zzz@z.z), July 09, 1999.

Regular: Thanks for the link. I hope they're right.

-- Cash (, July 09, 1999.

I am not sure if this is a July rollover problem but thought I would share it. My birthday is in August and I live in Ca. Here you can renew your driver's license by mail. I returned my notice I received from them the first of June. Two days ago I got a piece of paper in the mail that said it was my temporary license instead of a real license with bar code and picture. At the bottom was this note "The department has experienced some production problems in our renewal by mail process, which has resulted in a minor delay in issuing your photo license. Please accept our apology for this inconvenience" I thought the timing on this was interesting. Marcy

-- marcy Sawyer (, July 09, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ