April 28, 2017 at 5:53 am
Thom A - Friday, April 28, 2017 2:32 AMI really hope that's a joke...And don't worry, we've got just under a couple years before Brexit bites us in the ass. >_<
Uh, no. There is actually at least one company in the UK offering pawternity leave for up to 4 weeks.
And if there are a couple of years left, why are all the banks and several other companies going full-in on their "get a location out of London" plans?
April 28, 2017 at 6:18 am
Brandie Tarvin - Friday, April 28, 2017 5:53 AMThom A - Friday, April 28, 2017 2:32 AMI really hope that's a joke...And don't worry, we've got just under a couple years before Brexit bites us in the ass. >_<
And if there are a couple of years left, why are all the banks and several other companies going full-in on their "get a location out of London" plans?
Probably because moving a company is not something that you do in a couple of weeks. When the bank I used to work for moved offices, it was at least a year from start of planning to the actual move.
Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability
April 28, 2017 at 6:26 am
GilaMonster - Friday, April 28, 2017 6:18 AMBrandie Tarvin - Friday, April 28, 2017 5:53 AMAnd if there are a couple of years left, why are all the banks and several other companies going full-in on their "get a location out of London" plans?Probably because moving a company is not something that you do in a couple of weeks. When the bank I used to work for moved offices, it was at least a year from start of planning to the actual move.
That actually seems quite quick to me, for an office move.
It makes sense to plan for the worst, so I'm not surprised that it seems like a mass exodus is on the cards right now, but whether all of these planned moves actually materialise is another question.
The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Martin Rees
You can lead a horse to water, but a pencil must be lead.
Stan Laurel
April 28, 2017 at 6:38 am
Phil Parkin - Friday, April 28, 2017 6:26 AMGilaMonster - Friday, April 28, 2017 6:18 AMProbably because moving a company is not something that you do in a couple of weeks. When the bank I used to work for moved offices, it was at least a year from start of planning to the actual move.
That actually seems quite quick to me, for an office move.
It makes sense to plan for the worst, so I'm not surprised that it seems like a mass exodus is on the cards right now, but whether all of these planned moves actually materialise is another question.
Gail's right, it's a big move going to the continent. It's not quite the same as say moving from the East coast to the West coast of the USA, which at least is the same country (although laws from one state to another can vary heavily).
Simple things it's unlikely that you'll be able to keep many of your staff, and language is going to be an obvious barrier, as English not going to be the native language. That means any employees that do move will need to learn the language, and you might well need to recruit people in your new/additional location that not only have the right qualifications for the job but are multilingual, which never comes cheap.
Some of the companies that are already setting up have surprised me a little. For example, Lloyd's of London are already in the process of setting up a branch in the continent. I know that Brexit was a big blow for them, but without anyone knowing what the outcome is going to be in 2 years (or even who the ruling party is going to be; although if the Tories don't win the election in June I'll eat our SQL Server), it seems quite the risk to already be planning to head over, or at least form a presence. In my mind, it's a massive gamble at the moment.
Thom~
Excuse my typos and sometimes awful grammar. My fingers work faster than my brain does.
Larnu.uk
April 28, 2017 at 6:48 am
Thom A - Friday, April 28, 2017 6:38 AMSome of the companies that are already setting up have surprised me a little. For example, Lloyd's of London are already in the process of setting up a branch in the continent. I know that Brexit was a big blow for them, but without anyone knowing what the outcome is going to be in 2 years (or even who the ruling party is going to be; although if the Tories don't win the election in June I'll eat our SQL Server), it seems quite the risk to already be planning to head over, or at least form a presence. In my mind, it's a massive gamble at the moment.
I disagree that it's a massive gamble. The cities they are looking at are already banking hubs, so they are placing themselves strategically where the proper infrastructure services and the labor already exists. From what I understand, the EU doesn't have a way to cancel the exit process once it's triggered. So the main issue is whether or not the UK will come to an agreement with the EU on exit terms. Whether they do or don't, the banks have covered their butts by opening these other branches and can adjust to the situation accordingly. At the very least, they will know the rules in the EU countries and won't have to change processes to account for it. The only process changes will come from those locations staying in the UK.
April 28, 2017 at 6:54 am
Brandie Tarvin - Friday, April 28, 2017 6:48 AMI disagree that it's a massive gamble. The cities they are looking at are already banking hubs, so they are placing themselves strategically where the proper infrastructure services and the labor already exists. From what I understand, the EU doesn't have a way to cancel the exit process once it's triggered. So the main issue is whether or not the UK will come to an agreement with the EU on exit terms. Whether they do or don't, the banks have covered their butts by opening these other branches and can adjust to the situation accordingly. At the very least, they will know the rules in the EU countries and won't have to change processes to account for it. The only process changes will come from those locations staying in the UK.
True Brandie, I'll be honest, I was thinking more along the lines of where they are setting up a presence than moving. Not sure anyone knows how things will work for a British company that has an office based in Europe right now 🙂
Thom~
Excuse my typos and sometimes awful grammar. My fingers work faster than my brain does.
Larnu.uk
April 28, 2017 at 7:12 am
Thom A - Friday, April 28, 2017 6:54 AMBrandie Tarvin - Friday, April 28, 2017 6:48 AMI disagree that it's a massive gamble. The cities they are looking at are already banking hubs, so they are placing themselves strategically where the proper infrastructure services and the labor already exists. From what I understand, the EU doesn't have a way to cancel the exit process once it's triggered. So the main issue is whether or not the UK will come to an agreement with the EU on exit terms. Whether they do or don't, the banks have covered their butts by opening these other branches and can adjust to the situation accordingly. At the very least, they will know the rules in the EU countries and won't have to change processes to account for it. The only process changes will come from those locations staying in the UK.True Brandie, I'll be honest, I was thinking more along the lines of where they are setting up a presence than moving. Not sure anyone knows how things will work for a British company that has an office based in Europe right now 🙂
I don't see this as a huge deal it's not like there's no precedent for companies doing business and having offices across country barriers. I can see a problem for companies that formed after the EU and did business primarily in the EU having issues but this shouldn't be new ground.
April 28, 2017 at 8:21 am
Ok, I know SQLShare changed names, but I can't find what it changed to, been out of touch for a while. Little help?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please follow Best Practices For Posting On Forums to receive quicker and higher quality responses
April 28, 2017 at 11:00 am
Brandie Tarvin - Friday, April 28, 2017 6:48 AMI disagree that it's a massive gamble. The cities they are looking at are already banking hubs, so they are placing themselves strategically where the proper infrastructure services and the labor already exists. From what I understand, the EU doesn't have a way to cancel the exit process once it's triggered. So the main issue is whether or not the UK will come to an agreement with the EU on exit terms. Whether they do or don't, the banks have covered their butts by opening these other branches and can adjust to the situation accordingly. At the very least, they will know the rules in the EU countries and won't have to change processes to account for it. The only process changes will come from those locations staying in the UK.
The UK has triggered Article 50 which means it has informed the European Council of its Intention to leave. This allows the negotiations to being. Only once an withdrawal agreement has been put in place or two years have passed since article 50 has been triggered does the UK stop being a member of the European union.
There is nothing in Article 50 that states it is irrevocable and most articles I have read by legal people seem to indicate that it is possible for the UK to remove it's "intention" to leave prior to an agreement being reached.
April 28, 2017 at 11:55 am
<rant>
Have you ever encountered a situation where your company defines certain authorized software and you need to change what you've been using for so long that it's an essential part of your tool set? Or when you need to migrate your process to use a new software and once you complete the migration you need to start a new migration for a different software?
I just can't understand the need for keep changing things just to get the new shiny object/buzzword.
</rant>
April 28, 2017 at 12:09 pm
Currently feeling your pain, Luis. Corporate is on a Common Tools kick and not taking into consideration specialized tasks that need specialized tools. Everyone needs to get on board with the new stuff.
Though, to be fair, my bosses are pushing back on a few items where Corporate is demanding something that just doesn't fit with our local business model (which is completely different than Corporate's model).
April 28, 2017 at 12:30 pm
Luis Cazares - Friday, April 28, 2017 11:55 AM<rant>
Have you ever encountered a situation where your company defines certain authorized software and you need to change what you've been using for so long that it's an essential part of your tool set? Or when you need to migrate your process to use a new software and once you complete the migration you need to start a new migration for a different software?
I just can't understand the need for keep changing things just to get the new shiny object/buzzword.
</rant>
Could go either way, but often this is because there's a great salesperson somewhere.
I get torn on this. sometimes having everyone work with the same toolset is good. Sometimes it's disruptive and slows things down. Ultimately, there should be rationale and it should make cost sense.
April 28, 2017 at 8:48 pm
Luis Cazares - Friday, April 28, 2017 11:55 AM<rant>
Have you ever encountered a situation where your company defines certain authorized software and you need to change what you've been using for so long that it's an essential part of your tool set? Or when you need to migrate your process to use a new software and once you complete the migration you need to start a new migration for a different software?
I just can't understand the need for keep changing things just to get the new shiny object/buzzword.
</rant>
Yes. Been there and done that many times. Even MS has run us through the coals many times since the inception of SQL Server. It's simple positive proof that "Change is inevitable... change for the better is not". Sometimes the change is very good... sometimes it's a horrible regression in features and a horrible advancement in complexity. "Shiny" new objects are sometimes proof positive that you can, indeed, polish a turd. You just can't get rid of the smell especially if it's gets wet. 😉 That's when they decide to change turds on you and they make the same mistake because they still haven't checked it out well enough to know they're buying or implementing yet another turd.. 😉
The bad part is that DBAs frequently don't get much of a say so because there's usually a much smaller number of them than the rest of the people.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 28, 2017 at 10:12 pm
Luis Cazares - Friday, April 28, 2017 11:55 AM<rant>
Have you ever encountered a situation where your company defines certain authorized software and you need to change what you've been using for so long that it's an essential part of your tool set? Or when you need to migrate your process to use a new software and once you complete the migration you need to start a new migration for a different software?
I just can't understand the need for keep changing things just to get the new shiny object/buzzword.
</rant>
I'm there now. I'm trying to migrate to a new office computer and I can't get some of the older software I'm used to using. This isn't a big deal.
The big deal comes into play when I can't install software that's been paid for on the new machine. I've for one where it isn't taking my license key and the company hasn't emailed me back after 2 weeks. I think I'm pretty much screwed on that one and the bureaucracy that's now in place for any software purchase almost requires an act of Congress to get through. I'm probably going to have to learn to live without it.
May 1, 2017 at 4:05 am
Ed Wagner - Friday, April 28, 2017 10:12 PM... and the bureaucracy that's now in place for any software purchase almost requires an act of Congress to get through.
And, as we all know, anything that requires an act of Congress is never going to get done these days, no matter how many "congressmen" we have in our pockets.
:ermm:
Viewing 15 posts - 58,366 through 58,380 (of 66,738 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply