6 ms·

Throwaway for obvious reasons I work for a company belonging to Accenture. I can only agree. Shareholders get +10%. Employees get nil. It is expected that we

Throwaway for obvious reasons I work for a company belonging to Accenture. I can only agree. Shareholders get +10%. Employees get nil. It is expected that we do at least 15 - 25% overtime without compensation. Project manager promises everything the client asks for. Even if they know we cannot in any universe deliver this without massive overtime. At the same time they introduce new mandatory processes to follow costing additional time. Performance management is a joke. Employee development non existent. Promotion and raises have nothing to do with performance. If managing directors do not like you, you are out of luck as they ultimately decided on your salary, promotion and bonuses. I am still there because I can only switch jobs after Sept 2021 for private reasons. After that it is jobhunting season. If anyone is of the opinion that you do not deserve adequate pay, can be bullied by project managers or others - do yourself a favor and look for another company that does value you.

908B64B197 6y ago
> Accenture Large consulting firms seems to operate this way, being basically a pyramid with endless layers of non-programming "Enterprise Architect Solution Expert". I've had folks tell me explicitly when joining these firms post-grad that their goal was not to code in two years.
- kevin_thibedeau 6y ago
  Any company that has to change its name to avoid bad publicity is not worth working for.
  - hsuduebc2 6y ago
    Can you give us additional info please?
    - dlgeek 6y ago
      Accenture used to be Arthur Anderson but changed the name as a result of the Enron scandal.
      - cbozeman 6y ago
        Ho-lee shiiiit. I wondered what happened to AA... now I know.
      - ncmncm 6y ago
        Accenture spun off of HP. Don't know what happened to AA.
        dolphenstein 6y ago
        You're thinking of Agilent. Also Accenture didn't change their name due to Enron. It happened before the scandal (so quite lucky for them!) Arthur Andersen and Andersen Consulting were involved in a legal tussle which required them to change their name... https://www.nytimes.com/2000/08/08/business/worldbusiness/IHT-arbitrators-ruling-goes-against-accounting-arm.html https://www.nytimes.com/2000/08/08/business/worldbusiness/IH...
      - spookster 6y ago
        That’s just not true. Arthur Andersen originally spun off its consulting arm into “Andersen Consulting” under a global holding company. AA did accounting, AC consulting. AC paid AA 15% of its profits every year. But AC was growing far faster than AA, so AA started growing another consulting arm, which was against the contract. AC partners claimed contractual breach, and as part of the separation settlement had to change their name and distance themselves from the brand. This was lucky given what happened with AA’s reputation later. (Source: I worked there in that time period)
        acntr_employee 6y ago
        Correct. The separation did happen before the former parent was involved in the Enron scandal. Or at least before it became public. Not that Accenture doesn't have enough scandals on their own. So they are by far not the clean guys in this tale. I remember the German "Berateraffäre" just to state one example.
        KiwiJohnno 6y ago
    - jelliclesfarm 6y ago
      Arthur Anderson used to be one of the Big 5 accounting firms along with Deloitte and Touche, KPMG, Price Waterhouse and Ernst&Young. I was briefly at an Indian subsidiary of EY(those days, the Big 5 weren’t allowed to operate by themselves without partnering with a local chartered accounting firm) because only certain firms could do bank audits and I wanted the experience at one if the Big 5. KPMG was known for its entertainment industry accounts. I picked E&Y for manufacturing and I think I ended up with an international cement conglomerate account. The Big 5 clearly decided who gets what industry. They operate like a cartel. They also had consulting divisions. AA after Enron simply focused solely on consulting and IT. They are all ‘special’ kinds of hell. Just different flavors. AA/Enron scandal was a big deal and was the only talk for days and days and days. Slightly dated.. 2018: https://riskmagazine.nl/article/2018-03-19-how-the-big-five-became-the-big-four https://riskmagazine.nl/article/2018-03-19-how-the-big-five-... [..] Andersen was responsible for checking the accounting of energy company Enron. The energy company went down with great noise because of shoddy accounting. Trouble came for Andersen as they had approved this accounting. After learning the Securities and Exchange Commission had begun an investigation of Enron’s accounting, orders were given at Andersen to destroy thousands of documents and e-mail messages. These illegal acts resulted in a conviction, which made it impossible to act as a public accountant for American stock exchange funds. Andersen decided to hand in its licenses before the SEC would withdraw them.[..] [..] On appeal for the destruction of the files, Andersen was acquitted and there was no formal objection to the continuation of the audit practice. However, almost all employees had left due to the obscure practices. The practice had changed hands and the name would always be linked to this scandal. The few employees that stayed, worked on litigation arising from past audits, as well as pension issues and few other matters. Also there still is another firm which reminds us of the existence Andersen, namely Accenture. Accenture started off as the consultancy part of Andersen, which split off just in time, before the scandal happened.[..]
koonsolo 6y ago
> It is expected that we do at least 15 - 25% overtime without compensation Is this still a thing as a developer in the western world? If any of my managers proposed this, I would laugh, then say "ah wait, you're serious?", and then laugh some more.
- mcny 6y ago
  What are you supposed to do if your employment contract says you’re exempt (meaning no overtime pay)?
  - p_l 6y ago
    I think this is a case of culture clash between USA, where "overtime exempt" is a thing, and most of Europe, where it is required to be paid (of course, there are cases where people end up being pressured... or like me, forgot to log the overtime hours despite secretary going around with the sheet). Of course that only applies to people working on employment contracts, not those who got seduced by "B2B" :|
    - jimbob45 6y ago
      It’s supposed to work both ways - I work 60 hours this week with the implicit understanding that I work 20 next week. Sure, I don’t get OT pay, but I can abide by that as long as it all balances out to 2000 hours at the end of the year. That said, the abuse of the exemption system is arguably a pandemic in the US.
      - p_l 6y ago
        The problem is that unlike with proper overtime protection, it's just an implicit understanding that is in no way guaranteed. Overtime laws generally allow taking the hours worked back as PTO. The only thing is that usually there are limits to avoid running everyone ragged with no end.
  - cunac 6y ago
    I have a very simple philosophy `no pay no work`. It is about having self respect.

908B64B197 6y ago

> Accenture Large consulting firms seems to operate this way, being basically a pyramid with endless layers of non-programming "Enterprise Architect Solution Expert". I've had folks tell me explicitly when joining these firms post-grad that their goal was not to code in two years.

kevin_thibedeau 6y ago
Any company that has to change its name to avoid bad publicity is not worth working for.
- hsuduebc2 6y ago
  Can you give us additional info please?
  - dlgeek 6y ago
    Accenture used to be Arthur Anderson but changed the name as a result of the Enron scandal.
    - cbozeman 6y ago
      Ho-lee shiiiit. I wondered what happened to AA... now I know.
    - ncmncm 6y ago
      Accenture spun off of HP. Don't know what happened to AA.
      - dolphenstein 6y ago
        You're thinking of Agilent. Also Accenture didn't change their name due to Enron. It happened before the scandal (so quite lucky for them!) Arthur Andersen and Andersen Consulting were involved in a legal tussle which required them to change their name... https://www.nytimes.com/2000/08/08/business/worldbusiness/IHT-arbitrators-ruling-goes-against-accounting-arm.html https://www.nytimes.com/2000/08/08/business/worldbusiness/IH...
    - spookster 6y ago
      That’s just not true. Arthur Andersen originally spun off its consulting arm into “Andersen Consulting” under a global holding company. AA did accounting, AC consulting. AC paid AA 15% of its profits every year. But AC was growing far faster than AA, so AA started growing another consulting arm, which was against the contract. AC partners claimed contractual breach, and as part of the separation settlement had to change their name and distance themselves from the brand. This was lucky given what happened with AA’s reputation later. (Source: I worked there in that time period)
      - acntr_employee 6y ago
        Correct. The separation did happen before the former parent was involved in the Enron scandal. Or at least before it became public. Not that Accenture doesn't have enough scandals on their own. So they are by far not the clean guys in this tale. I remember the German "Berateraffäre" just to state one example.
      - KiwiJohnno 6y ago
  - jelliclesfarm 6y ago
    Arthur Anderson used to be one of the Big 5 accounting firms along with Deloitte and Touche, KPMG, Price Waterhouse and Ernst&Young. I was briefly at an Indian subsidiary of EY(those days, the Big 5 weren’t allowed to operate by themselves without partnering with a local chartered accounting firm) because only certain firms could do bank audits and I wanted the experience at one if the Big 5. KPMG was known for its entertainment industry accounts. I picked E&Y for manufacturing and I think I ended up with an international cement conglomerate account. The Big 5 clearly decided who gets what industry. They operate like a cartel. They also had consulting divisions. AA after Enron simply focused solely on consulting and IT. They are all ‘special’ kinds of hell. Just different flavors. AA/Enron scandal was a big deal and was the only talk for days and days and days. Slightly dated.. 2018: https://riskmagazine.nl/article/2018-03-19-how-the-big-five-became-the-big-four https://riskmagazine.nl/article/2018-03-19-how-the-big-five-... [..] Andersen was responsible for checking the accounting of energy company Enron. The energy company went down with great noise because of shoddy accounting. Trouble came for Andersen as they had approved this accounting. After learning the Securities and Exchange Commission had begun an investigation of Enron’s accounting, orders were given at Andersen to destroy thousands of documents and e-mail messages. These illegal acts resulted in a conviction, which made it impossible to act as a public accountant for American stock exchange funds. Andersen decided to hand in its licenses before the SEC would withdraw them.[..] [..] On appeal for the destruction of the files, Andersen was acquitted and there was no formal objection to the continuation of the audit practice. However, almost all employees had left due to the obscure practices. The practice had changed hands and the name would always be linked to this scandal. The few employees that stayed, worked on litigation arising from past audits, as well as pension issues and few other matters. Also there still is another firm which reminds us of the existence Andersen, namely Accenture. Accenture started off as the consultancy part of Andersen, which split off just in time, before the scandal happened.[..]

koonsolo 6y ago

> It is expected that we do at least 15 - 25% overtime without compensation Is this still a thing as a developer in the western world? If any of my managers proposed this, I would laugh, then say "ah wait, you're serious?", and then laugh some more.

mcny 6y ago
What are you supposed to do if your employment contract says you’re exempt (meaning no overtime pay)?
- p_l 6y ago
  I think this is a case of culture clash between USA, where "overtime exempt" is a thing, and most of Europe, where it is required to be paid (of course, there are cases where people end up being pressured... or like me, forgot to log the overtime hours despite secretary going around with the sheet). Of course that only applies to people working on employment contracts, not those who got seduced by "B2B" :|
  - jimbob45 6y ago
    It’s supposed to work both ways - I work 60 hours this week with the implicit understanding that I work 20 next week. Sure, I don’t get OT pay, but I can abide by that as long as it all balances out to 2000 hours at the end of the year. That said, the abuse of the exemption system is arguably a pandemic in the US.
    - p_l 6y ago
      The problem is that unlike with proper overtime protection, it's just an implicit understanding that is in no way guaranteed. Overtime laws generally allow taking the hours worked back as PTO. The only thing is that usually there are limits to avoid running everyone ragged with no end.
- cunac 6y ago
  I have a very simple philosophy `no pay no work`. It is about having self respect.