Conference 7.286::digital

Are they saying that they are going to _retroactively_ change the
1992 matching United Way contribution to 1/2?

I hope I've misread that.  If not, who's our new VP of ethics again?

- greg

       It says "beginning with the current 1992 campaign". Seems clear they
    mean the one going on right now, and not retroactive.
                           Denny

Oddly, I think I'd have a whole lot more respect for a decision that cut
out the matching gifts program altogether. (It's not a mandate, afterall,
and I've worked at plenty of places that had no such program.) Somehow
this 50� on the dollar business seems chintzy and insulting to me.

-Jack

    re: .3  Actually, this is a much better way to handle it than to just
    cut matching gifts.  I am the treasurer for a non-profit organization
    that benefits from Digital matching gifts.  We had to generate a budget
    last July and are having to stick with it through the fiscal year.  Were
    Digital to suddenly stop contributions, we would be facing a much more
    painful situation because we already worked matching funds into our
    budget.  We're already strapped and having to do all we can to make do
    with smaller government funding and limited funding from other sources.  
    We enjoy tremendous support from the people of the communities we
    serve, but no one source can sustain us.  We need to gather what we can
    from as many sources as we can.  Most of us are already donating much of 
    our time to make the organization successful and add value to local 
    communities in the region.  Having funding slowly cut off is a lot easier 
    to deal with than having it whacked off in the middle of the fiscal year.
    
    Steve

    
    	At least they got a notice. DEC employees had their service award
    	dinner invitations yanked right out of their hands. 
    
    	John

    
    Rathole alert with a moderate flame attached!
    
    It would seem that the new administrative philosophy at DEC is to cut 
    costs wherever possible including employee events and now charitable
    contribution matching.  Perhaps none of these will glean any great 
    amounts of money but they are gestures that things really are dire for
    this company and we really are trying to pinch every penny.  If that be
    the case they why not a gesture that would contribute a bit to the 
    coffers and also show that the pain of these economy measures is spread
    evenly.  I am referring to some kind of pay cut from those making over
    so much money; perhaps anyone making six figures or over could take a 
    five to ten percent decrease.  
    
    Very early on in the TFSO process I saw this proposal and it supposedly 
    was presented before Bob Palmer's staff long before Mr. Palmer attained
    his current position.  I wonder what would be the monetary and
    psychological impact of such a move.  I wonder if this has been tried 
    at other high tech/computer companies.  
    
    Comments, opinions, etc.....??
    
    Moderator, if this note is too far of the subject would you prefer me 
    to start another topic?
    
    

	1) I can understand that since the UW campaign is near the end, that 
	   many folks have already pledged money based in part on the 
	   understanding the Digital would match the pledge dollar for dollar.
	   Like the anniversary dinners that were yanked out from under
	   employees earlier this year, this move has the appearance of
	   a broken promise.

	2) I'd be in favor of moving to the following policy:

		a) Matching gift forms are collected throughout the year.

		b) At the end of the fiscal year, if we have not made a profit
		   of $xM, then the collected forms go in the round file,
		   saving not only the cost of the donation, but the bulk of
		   the processing costs as well.

		c) If we made a profit of at least $xM, then we process the
		   forms and mail the checks. I'd prefer 1-1 but on whatever
		   basis.

	   The bottom line being, if we are not making money, we cannot 
	   afford charity.

					Tom_K

    re:.6 salary cuts
       We wouldn't wanna lower morale in the 6-figure club, would we?
                                       Denny

    
        There can be a thin line between what appears to be funding to do
    production and funding for charity. DEC supports some major entities in
    both fashions and to most people there is no apparent difference.
    
    Many non-profits also have a for-profit organization that by charter
    must return all profits to the non-profit. [But they are separate.]
    
    Matching gift programs allow employees to help direct when the
    donations will go. If you are in an area outside of the "home office"
    you as an employee can work to get some of the money directed to your
    community.
    
    For folks that contribute in the last days of December, remember the
    money will be .50 on the $1.00

re .6:

Salary cutting at the top has been done in other high-tech companies.
I believe Dell has done it.

Re:     <<< Note 2213.5 by TEXAS1::SOBECKY "It's all ones and zeros" >>>

>    	At least they got a notice. DEC employees had their service award
>    	dinner invitations yanked right out of their hands. 
    
Hardly a comparison -- a few (at present) fully employed people losing out on
one meal vs. whole charitable organizations losing up to 25% of their funding. 

-  David

    D'ya suppose they were waiting until after this announcement sank in
    (LIVE WIRE, 28-Oct)?

    
Digital wins Wessel Award for Corporate Social Responsibility 
 
  Digital has won the Milton R. Wessel Award for Corporate Social 
  Responsibility from the Information Technology Association of America 
  (formerly ADAPSO), the largest IT trade association in the U.S.

  Eli Lipcon, vice president, CPG Business Unit, accepted the award on behalf 
  of the company at the ITAA's annual management conference.
	
  Digital was honored for its "multitude of socially responsive educational 
  and philanthropic programs" in the areas of health care, independent living 
  for people with disabilities, education, support for the homeless, employee 
  volunteerism, and programs for minorities and women.

    RE: various about cutting the pay of the 6 figure guys...
    
    This would only be a first step to cutting the pay of everyone!!!
    
    I would much rather see us cut the jobs of 40% of the 6 figure club.
    
    Instead, they just hang around.
    
    Ken Slattery

    re: .12
    
    When I first read that in Livewire, I thought it said "Weasel" award.
    
    Bob

    
    Does anyone have the figure that DEC actually spent on the Matching
    Gift Program for last fiscal year?
    
    -JJM

================================================================================
re Note 2213.11 by BSS::CODE3::BANKS "David Banks -- N�ION"              
 

>Hardly a comparison -- a few (at present) fully employed people losing out on
>one meal vs. whole charitable organizations losing up to 25% of their funding. 

>-  David
============================

	You totally missed the point. I'm not referring to dollar value..
	I'm referring to the rather shabby way that DEC employees, the
	people that make these matching contributions possible to begin
	with, have been treated when their perks have been cut. We (DEC
	employees) should be accorded the same consideration as outsiders
	are given. At the very least.

	John                         

    
    In FY 91 I called Celia (DTN 223-7256) in the Matching Gift
    program and received the following information.
    
    In FY90 Corporate Matching Gift program gave out $2.9 million
    with 34,000 forms processed from 12,600 (~10%) employees, 
    which benefited 8,079 organizations.
    
    35% of the orgs were educational
    31% "   "   "    "   social
    17% "   "   "    "   cultural
    17% "   "   "    "   health-related
    
    signed,
    Lisa_a_heavy_user_of_MG_program

  I have some thoughts on the reduction in the matching gift program, now that
it has been in effect for a while.
  I think it was a mistake to go to 50 cents on the dollar. This apparently is
a very rare practice. Both WGBH (the Boston PBS station) and my alma mater have
a list which says these companies match donations dollar for dollar. There is
no separate list for companies that match 50 cents on the dollar. If recipients
eventually revise their flyers to say that Digital matches 50%, it will make us
look cheap because there will be few or no other companies on the list. 
  I think it would have been better to suspend the program altogether for a
fixed period of time, such as Q3 and Q4. This would have saved us the labor of
processing the forms as well as the cost of the donations themselves. Of course
we would not have realized six months of savings because there would have been
a higher volume of donations before and after the freeze, but we would have
improved the bottom line for two quarters, and that's the real reason for doing
this at all.
  I'm very concerned about the fact that this and similar cost-cutting measures
are open-ended. Some measures, of course, make sense as permanent measures. I
hope this 50% thing is not permanent.
  During WGBH's recent pledge drive, they asked people to raise their donations
to offset the loss of corporate donations. The idea that individual donors can
make up this shortfall is preposterous. 
  I realize that a temporary suspension of the matching gift program on two
month's notice would have been quite disruptive to many non-profit organiz-
ations, but I still think this would have been a better way to go.

    Does the figure that Digital spends on matching funds show up
    somewhere?  I'd be interested in knowing what effect the change from
    100% to 50% matching has had on the individual contributions.
    
    I for one, am less inclined to take advantage of this program now that
    Digital only matches 50 cents on the dollar.  I wonder how much
    donations have slipped, or are individuals donating more to make up for
    the loss.
    

Why should DEC's match percentage affect your using the program?  If you use it, your
charity gets 50% more money! Sure its not 100% more any longer, but still its more
money.

	Dave

           <<< HUMANE::DISK$DIGITAL:[NOTES$LIBRARY]DIGITAL.NOTE;1 >>>
                          -< The DEC way of working >-
================================================================================
Note 2213.20            Matching Gift Program reductions                20 of 20
BJ6000::DAVE "Outlanders MRO D Division Champs, Again"  5 lines  20-APR-1993 08:51
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why should DEC's match percentage affect your using the program?  If you use
it, your charity gets 50% more money! Sure its not 100% more any longer, but
still its more money.

	Dave

I just got one of the "new" matching gift forms, and was disturbed to see
that there is now a space where I am asked to fill in my Social Security
Number.  I don't give out my SSN unless I absolutely have to, and this
was certainly a case where I didn't feel I have to.  I called the Matching
Gifts office and was told that they had put this on the form because they
might be outsourcing the Matching Gifts program and wanted to use the SSN
for "identification", but that they currently were not using it and it could
be omitted.  (I was also told that they have been crossing out this space
in some of the forms.)

I complained that the SSN should NOT be used for "identification" and that
if it somehow became necessary to provide some additional validation that
the employee was who they said they were (though there was no such validation
before) that they find some other method.  I was told that they had received
four calls on this so far, but that the reality seemed to be that they'd
not bother with outsourcing anyway so it didn't matter anymore.


I also note that the new form has a quote from Bob Palmer on how "Digital
continues its commitment to those employees where its employees live and
work."  This, of course, is contradicted by the halving of the match amount
and Digital's withdrawal from other corporate contribution activities.

					Steve

    
    From .22:
    
    >>This, of course, is contradicted by the halving of the match amount
    >>and Digital's withdrawal from other corporate contribution activities.
    
    It should also be noted that Digital now only matches gifts of $25
    or more ($1000 max still applies).  Used to be $10.  Then it went to
    $15.  Oh well......
    
    Chet

    Has any caller asked why they cannot use Badge Number for
    identification, as this pertains to employees of Digital and not the
    world at large?
    
    Bill
    

        .24

    > Has any caller asked why they cannot use Badge Number for
    >    identification, 
    
    my understanding is that badge number are recyclable in nature while
    the said SS numbers are not, which might lead to the scenario of
    having 2 similar badge numbers separated in time which might lead
    to confusing the system thus in use, in considering they might be using
    an automated data base system where the unique key in question happened 
    to be the badge number.

    SS numbers are guaranteed to be unique in nature, and hence for there
    the responsibility of their uniqueness lies with the federal government
    and not within Digital, this leads to issues concerning legal
    implications that will make Digital un-liable in case of an error
    in the said abone process to occur based on the number if the number used
    was to be the SS number and not the digital badge number.
                                                          
    \nasser

Re: .25

As far as I'm aware, Digital badge numbers are not recycled. Once someone's
been assigned one, it won't be reassigned to anybody else, even if said
person leaves the company. 

And I know people who have left and come back, who have received their old 
badge number (instead of being assigned a new one). 

...petri

Are "Matching Gifts" only used in the United States?  If not, I don't see how 
they could require a SSN.  The HMO I went with a few years ago requested a 
SSN and I refused on the basis they were going to use it for ID and it was
the only they would track us.  SS says that is an illegal use of the SSN.
The HMO did not get my number.  

    .26 is correct. Your badge number stays with you for life, regardless
    of your employment status with Digital. Personnel had mistakenly issued
    me a new badge number the day that I started at Digital for the second
    time. They quickly corrected their mistake when I pointed out that I
    had previously been a Digital employee. They told me that they keep
    track of your pension accounts by your badge number. Having more than
    one number (or more than one person using the same number) would wreak
    havoc on their system I'm sure. :-)
    
    Harry
    

re. .22:

Steve, I am curious as to why you are so reluctant to reveal your 
Social Security Account Number. I have seen this mentioned before by
you and a few others in various note files. The gov't has it - Digital
has it - TRW has it; What is compromised that isn't already at risk?

/Bob

    Bob,
    
    Steve's just reducing the possibility(probability) of someone misusing
    his identity by limiting the amount of personal information that he
    gives out.
    
    Mark

    
    > Note 2213.25 by STAR::ABBASI "only 35 days to graduation bash ...!"
    
    
    I've heard of education improving one's life, but nassar, This is one
    heck of a jump. This note is very well writen and extremely eloquent.
    
    I've always suspected you've been yanking our chain, But I never
    suspected you where yanking so darned hard. (Up until reply .25, I would
    have expected nassar to have a little trouble with this backwoods
    phrase, but not anymore ;^) )
    
    Oh well, gone are the innocent days. We can never get them back. 
    
    What's your major?....   Legal-eze?   :^)
    
    
    Wonderfully writen /nassar, great job.
    
    
    jim
    

    
    
    	Re .31, have you ben taking lessons from Nasser? "Written" has two
    	"T"'s in it last I knew.  I usually don't mention spelling errors
    	as I have fat fingers but since we are on Nassers' case everyone is
    	fair game! (Nasser- "fair game" is an expression that means no one
    	is exempt from criticism!.  Nasser- "Exempt" means omitted or left
    	out!  Nasser- "omitted" means not included)...  8^)   8^)
    
    		I had FUN with this one...!
    

    
    
    	Hmmmm...Are there one or two "E"'s in been (or is it ben???)
    		Trying real hard...
    

      re .32
    
    	My attempt was a little light hearted fun. No criticism intended.
    I truely enjoy nasser's responses. I make every effort to locate them
    for the bright spot they bring me. I'm truely sorry if I offended him.
    
    jim
    
    
    

                hi \jim,

    i just want to take a point and thank you very much for the kind
    words you bestowed upon me, iam glad you noticed that i  have been trying 
    to improve my vocabularly and make my words longer, when i wrote .25 
    i imagined myself in sheekpaire cloths, and i tried to write very 
    proper and upper up, i took a lot of effort but this shows that 
    preserving pays off at the end.

    thank you very much for lifting my morals up and giving me the
    confidence to proceed in noting.

    having the above said, i concur with you, for thee shall see more
    of the new me, an improved me, and with more advanced writing skills.

    and please remember, communications skills is very important to
    each and every one of us, in DEC , family life , and far beyond, i
    hereby encourages every DECeee to take few minutes from their busy
    schedule every day and read a well written poem or a poet and reflect
    on the words and their deep meaning.
    
    well, that's all for now.
    
    \bye and take care.
    \nasser

    
    But Nasser, did you spell check? :')

    .36
    
    yes \mikey, i spell check every time.
    
    thank you very much for asking.
    
    now please go fry an egg for all i care.
                                            
    \bye
    \nasser

Re: .24

They do (and always have) asked for the badge number on the forms.  The new
form additionally asks for the SSN.  I presume their (misguided) thinking
is that "only the real employee would know the SSN so this prevents some
unscrupulous organization from forging matching gift forms".  Why they
tie this notion to outsourcing is perplexing.

If they really wanted to double-check this, the cheapest way would be to
send a notification to the employee (via e-mail if possible) that the form
had been received, asking the employee to notify Corporate Contributions if
it was unauthorized.  But I have to wonder how much of a problem this really
is.

The SSN was never designed as a national ID number; it has no check digits
or other self-verifying features, thus making errors in transcription
undetectable, there are many reported cases of the same number being issued
to multiple people, and it is used as a key in thousands of databases, most
of which are unavailable to the individual to verify.   I can't stop all
invasions of my privacy, but I can slow it down by not volunteering something
that is nobody's business but mine, the US Government's and my employer's.

				Steve

    RE: .37 Why would I want to find a fly and beg Ressan?  I don't
    unnerstood?

    
    		On the rathole that the SSN is requested for the 
    	form...just say no! I found here in New Mexico that the 
    	Dept. of Motor Vehicles added a field for SSN on the 
    	liscense. In this State there are more than a few illegal
    	aliens, and the chance  that my SSN copied from my 
    	liscense while writing a check may fall into the wrong
    	hands and be mis-used is too great a chance for me to
    	take. So I just said no. Maybe an increase in paranoia
    	to some , but I'd rather not have to explain to the
    	IRS and State Taxation why I didn't include my earnings
    	from that second and third job on my tax forms.
    
    				Pablo
    
    

    FWIW, in Massachusetts, although one's SSN is normally used
    as one's driver's license number, one can request that a
    different number be used.  Remarkably (for the registry), 
    it's actually easy to do - just ask for a different number 
    when you renew your license...and they DO it, right then,
    no big deal, no going to stand in another line....

    RE: .26 & .28
    
    	Digital Badge numbers were re-issued "way back when".
    	Employess that left Digital for "greener pastures" 
    	came back after finding out why they were so green ;^)
    	They requested original badges already re-issued.
    	The policy of re-issuing old badges stopped quickly
    	as it caused a cross reference nightmare.
    
    	Dick

    
    
    	Huh?  I left for more than 7 years and still retained my old
    	badge  number...

    
    		re.43 .. yeah, what .42 said, sorta.
    
    		I think what they said was that "Digital" realized
    	that if they re-issued a previously held Badge No. to any
    	one other than the origional recepient, their data base 
    	would be just a little skewed...so at least since Harry and
    	I were re-hired, they issue us the same badge number again.
    	I was re-hired in Jan. 88 , after a leaving to greener 
    	pastures, and realizing why ours had died, two years before.
    
    				Pablo

>   and i tried to write very 
>    proper and upper up, i took a lot of effort but this shows that 
>    preserving pays off at the end.


	Thanks Nasser, I hope your notes are preserved for ever!

	Heather
 

    Rising above the issues of vocabulary and writing style, Nasser is
    incorrect in .25 when he says that SS numbers are guaranteed unique.
    They do try to make them unique, but there have been numerous examples
    of duplicate numbers being issued.  Which shouldn't be surprizing.
    
    As I understand it, it is illegal to use SS numbers as an identifier,
    with just a few exceptions.  Digital's matching gift program is not
    one of them.  The fact of people using SS numbers as identifiers
    (and of believing such matches in spite of evidence to the contrary)
    has caused lots of people a great deal of grief regarding their
    credit histories, etc.
    
    Anyway, if Digital wants a code that helps confirm that someone is
    who they say they are, either the badge number or the last four
    digits of the SS number would do nicely.  No one is likely to match
    those numbers by guessing.  Asking for the whole SS number reveals
    it to a wide variety of people, any of whom can call a credit bureau
    and get your entire credit records, simply by saying that they have
    a business need to know.  THAT'S why some of us refuse to disclose
    the number to any more people than we have to.
    
    		Enjoy,
    		Larry

Originally, badge #'s were 'for life'.  I had heeard recently that anything
above 99999 (ie: 6 digits) will be recycled, but 5 or less will not be...

    Re .46:
    
    > As I understand it, it is illegal to use SS numbers as an identifier,
    > with just a few exceptions.
    
    There is no such federal law.  Public Law 93-579 regulates use of the
    Social Security number by federal, state, and local government agencies
    but does not limit private use in any way.

    
    				-- edp
    
    
Public key fingerprint:  8e ad 63 61 ba 0c 26 86  32 0a 7d 28 db e7 6f 75
To get PGP, FTP /pub/unix/security/crypt/pgp23A.zip from nic.funet.fi.
For FTP access, mail "help" message to DECWRL::FTPmail or open Upsar::Gateways.

    i agree with \EDP, at school they all use SS numbers as identifers,
    as a matter of fact just last tuesday the teacher showed on the
    projector up on the black board a list that has on it the SS of each 
    student and next to it the grade they got on the test.
    
    they use SS number instead of names becuase of you get a bad grade
    you dont want others to know about it, and this way SS numbers
    are used.
    
    my school id is my SS number. 
    
    \nasser
    btew, i did ok in the the test in case you wondering, i could have done 
    better i guess but it was a tough exam and iam taking 2 courses at the 
    same time, so i have good execusess.

    I'm not arguing with .48, but Nasser, surely you have figured out 
    that just because something is done doesn't mean that it is legal!
    
    My school had SS number ids, too -- but you could have them assign
    you a different number if you wanted to, so it wasn't *really*
    the SS number, it just happened to match in most cases.  It's the
    same for Mass. drivers licence numbers.
    
    Ok, I'll go out on a limb again.  I think there is a law regulating
    the situations in which you can be required to give your SS number.
    Am I right this time?
    
    		Enjoy,
    		Larry
    
    PS -- Nasser, you say that your SS number is your school id and that
    the teacher showed your whole class the matchup of grades and SS 
    numbers.  Are you happy that anyone who knows your school id also
    could see what grade you got?  

      >PS -- Nasser, you say that your SS number is your school id and that
    >the teacher showed your whole class the matchup of grades and SS 
    >numbers.  Are you happy that anyone who knows your school id also
    >could see what grade you got?  

    hi \Larry,

       why would be a problem if someone knows my grade assuming
    they know my SS number? i dont think it is a big deal, but
    people dont usually know other peoples SS number, i have hard time
    just remembering my SS number never mind another dudes SS number, plus
    using the SS number is a good idea because i dont have to remember an ID
    number for this and a different ID number for that and so forth, one
    number (SS number) should be used for every thing, makes life so much
    easier.

    i think our badge numbers should be our SS numbers, our bank account
    number should be our SS numbers, etc..

    this way if you lose something or whatever, you dont have to remember
    zillions numbers of your head, just one number will do it.

    life is too complicated as is, and we go through life wondering what is
    going on and we just give new id number for every thing, but we should
    instead simplify our life, use one number and spend the extra time to
    enjoy life and with your loved ones and your neighbours and the
    community instead.

    i know you might not agree with me on this, but iam for a universal
    number id at work and in the outside world.

    thank you
    \nasser 

Re 2213.51  and previous notes

>   -< my views on the SS number and that badge numbers shoyuld be SS number >-
>
>      >PS -- Nasser, you say that your SS number is your school id and that
>    >the teacher showed your whole class the matchup of grades and SS 
>    >numbers. 

Boy, oh boy, you guys really shake me up some times.  You had me believing that
some of you went to school in pre-1945 Germany, and that you wanted all Digital
employees to be tattooed under their armpits with their badge #s!  

Seriously, I do not often read these strings of notes, but when I see the
notorious initials "SS" in a heading I jump in my seat and have to spend the
time finding out what it is about.  Maybe you can find a new abbreviation for
your social security numbers in the USA?  

Shalom
Baruch

ps For those who may be too concerned by the above note, here is a   :-)
                                                                   

>    i think our badge numbers should be our SS numbers, our bank account
>    number should be our SS numbers, etc..

>    i know you might not agree with me on this, but iam for a universal
>    number id at work and in the outside world.

	OK. in the UK, we have "national Insurance" numbers, they have a similar
	uniqueness to the US Social Security number, and used for many things 
	in the same way.

	So, could Digital handle a badge number of.....  YW 31 42 01 B FZ

	And more to the point, could American banks????.......after the problems
	I had with an alpha numeric 7 digit post code, instead of a 6 digit
	numeric zip code..........I doubt it!	
 
	Heather

And just try telling them about variable-length phone numbers!

(which now, sadly, seem to be being replaced by programmer-with-
 no-brain fixed-length identifiers).

    
    >	And more to the point, could American banks????.......after the problems
    >	I had with an alpha numeric 7 digit post code, instead of a 6 digit
    >	numeric zip code..........I doubt it!	
    
    I've never had any problem getting US businesses to include
    addresses, post codes and telephone numbers from the UK, where
    my parents were designated as my executors and proxy signatories.
    
    
    
    
    
    

	The only ones I didn't have a problem with were the IRS, the rest had 
	a very small space for a small name and address and zip, which they
	could not put in a house name (with no number) street name, village,
	postal district, county, postcode, and England.  
   
	So I gave  up, had the stuff sent to a friends in the US, who posted the
	stuff to me, until I closed my affaires in the US, and cancelled the 
	lot.


	So.................How do I go about finding my social security number?


	Heather

    One of the problems with using SSANs (Social Security Account Numbers)
    is that they are not always unique in every situation. An example is
    that here in the People's Republic of Massachusetts, the Welfare office
    gives out whatever SSANs they want to illegal aliens so they can get
    welfare, food stamps, etc. This was because the system required SSANs
    and the illegal aliens didn't have them so the simplest answer is to
    just give them one - any one. This is one reason why the Social
    Security people advise that you check your account every couple of
    years or so. 
    
    I pulled a Social Security Number FAQ off misc.legal (Internet) and it
    explains a lot of the problems with these kinds of issues. It's close
    to 500 lines long so I won't post it here but if you're interested, I
    could mail it.

    r:.57
    Besides the obvious flamage, it simply isn't true that a state can
    issue SSNs.  They can issue numbers which have a 3-2-4 digit format
    LIKE SSNs, but they can't issue SSNs, and SHOULD have a way to tell the
    two apart.  The Registry of Motor Vehicles uses, I think, "S" in the
    first digit position for numbers IT assigns to people who prefer to not
    give their SSNs.
    
    The school I teach at uses SSNs for student ID.  One student last
    semester had "999-99" in the beginning of his student ID, because they
    use that space for students who won't give a real SSN.  If the fifth
    digit is ODD, then it's NOT a real SSN, by current definition.
    
    SSNs are sometimes used fraudulently, so it's often wise to keep them
    private.  You must give them to your employer, and are basically
    penalized if you don't give them to your bank, but the list is pretty
    short beyond that.

    Apparently I wasn't clear about what happens: the state isn't issuing
    new SSANs, it's using existing ones - that's the problem. If they made
    up their own numbering system it wouldn't be a problem. But they use
    existing SSANs - and this can cause problems as can well be imagined.

RE:      <<< Note 2213.59 by AWECIM::MCMAHON "Living in the owe-zone" >>>
    
>>    Apparently I wasn't clear about what happens: the state isn't issuing
>>    new SSANs, it's using existing ones - that's the problem. If they made
>>    up their own numbering system it wouldn't be a problem. But they use
>>    existing SSANs - and this can cause problems as can well be imagined.

     If they are just jamming bogus digits into their system, only their
     systems will be affected.  The people who have been "given" these 
     numbers do not really have SSN's.  The Social Security Administration
     won't recognize a number just because 'somebody' decided that it was
     a good one to use.  For that reason, the SSN's will still be unique.

                                      Greg

    >>the SSN's will still be unique.
    
    Social Security Numbers *are not* unique!
    
    Chet

>    Social Security Numbers *are not* unique!
    
    Finally, a statement that agrees with what I was told by programmers
    who do Government work in the Wash. DC area.  The statement was
    something like:
    
    "The SS Administration does not guarantee that SS numbers are unique,
    since they issue duplicates unintentionally occassionally.  They do,
    however, guarantee that SS numbsers and names are unique - if they find
    a duplicate name-SS, they will issue a new one.  Programmers that
    do work on large databases must be aware of this."
    
    Wayne
    
    

    I recently got telephone service, and the provider (NYNEX) had only a
    little trouble dealing with my absolute policy of NO SSN NUMBERS GIVEN
    OUT.  It took them a whole twenty minutes longer to do the credit check
    because they needed to find the command to access TRW by name instead 
    of by SSN.  
    
    Same thing happened with AT&T.  And with Sears.  And with AMEX.  
    
    -----
    
    Another reason not to give out your SSN (less applicable now, but
    should the days of 18% interest rates ever return...)
    
    	Open a PO box with a fake SSN.  Deposit $10,000 in a medium-term
    	CD or suchlike, with that SSN, and at a high (and very taxable)
        interest rate, and decline witholding.  When the CD comes to term, 
    	withdraw the funds plus interest, and disappear.
    
    	The _real_ holder of that SSN is now left holding the financial
    	bag, as the Infernal Revenue Service and the Mass. D.O.R. will 
    	be Very Interested as to why they didn't pay taxes on those 
    	interest-bearing accounts.  The fraud artist also gets a gauranteed
    	investment at 44% higher return rates than the open market
    	supplies. 
    
    Bill.
    

    
    
    BTW, Mass. will not be using SS numbers on driver's licenses
    in the future. When existing licenses are renewed, the renewed
    licenses will have a different number on them.
    
    Ed E.

ref: Note 2213.63  AIDEV::YERAZUNIS "It works fine, provided you _want" 
                            -< SSN?  Just say NO! >-

>    I recently got telephone service, and the provider (NYNEX) had only a
>    little trouble dealing with my absolute policy of NO SSN NUMBERS GIVEN
>    OUT.  It took them a whole twenty minutes longer to do the credit check
>    because they needed to find the command to access TRW by name instead 
>    of by SSN.  
    
>    Same thing happened with AT&T.  And with Sears.  And with AMEX.  
 
The cost of doing business for these companies is passed on to who?
Oh! It's passed on to the consumer! I guess we'll have to refuse to 
give them our names cause they can look us up that way :-) 

>    	Open a PO box with a fake SSN.  Deposit $10,000 in a medium-term
>    	CD or suchlike, with that SSN, and at a high (and very taxable)
>       interest rate, and decline witholding.  When the CD comes to term, 
>    	withdraw the funds plus interest, and disappear.

Is this supposed to be an example of why some do not want their
*real* SSNs to be given out? 
    
>    	The _real_ holder of that SSN is now left holding the financial
>    	bag, as the Infernal Revenue Service and the Mass. D.O.R. will 
>    	be Very Interested as to why they didn't pay taxes on those 
>    	interest-bearing accounts.  

What bag? Nothing ties to the holder of the SSN, his name, bank account,
etc. No evidence of tax evasion by this guy on which the IRS can act.

>       The fraud artist also gets a gauranteed
>    	investment at 44% higher return rates than the open market
>    	supplies. 
    
Guaranteed? - yeah, criminals *never* think they will get caught. So these
are some reasons to 'protect' your SSN?

/Bob

    Re: .65-
    
>What bag? Nothing ties to the holder of the SSN, his name, bank account,
>etc. No evidence of tax evasion by this guy on which the IRS can act.
    
    I wouldn't want to be the victim SSN holder in this scenario. The 
    g'ummint is masterful at making the suspect individual guilty by
    requiring proof that something was NOT as it appears.
    
    My wife's Cigna life insurance papers arrived with an incorrect SSN.
    I briefly considered why they needed it at all when enrolling, but 
    I figured it's all but tatooed on everyone anyhow...now I'm wondering
    what future errors could happen if it we hadn't caught it.
    
    Phil

  I just heard that the matching gift program has been suspended, effective
Fri. May 13. I don't know for how long. I found this out when I tried to get a
matching gift form and found the rack was empty, and asked Personnel. I have
not heard this thru official channels yet. Has anyone?
  If you have a stock of matching gift forms, don't use them. It appears that
it would be a waste of time.

    	Yup, that was one of the Q4 cuts mentioned in a memo that came out
    recently. I got several copies, one was from Bill Strecker and the
    other from someone in finance. I also saw the memo somewhere in this
    conference.
    	And the money Digital contributed to this was a tax writeoff, but I
    guess when you're living from week to week, every penny matters. Looks
    like we won't be spending much money in Q4 other than for salaries. I
    hope revenues are high enough and unaffected by the cuts (like travel).

    Well, up until Friday, you couldn't get the matching gift forms from
    the forms racks here in HLO - you had to go to Personnel (excuse me,
    Human Resources) and ask for them, and it would be logged with your
    name, badge number and number of forms you received. Guess that's all
    water under the bridge now, huh.

From:	MLMAIL::MLMAIL::MRGATE::"PNDVUEA1::STRECKER.BILL" 17-MAY-1994 15:24:30.10
To:	@Distribution_List
CC:	
Subj:	EMPLOYEE MATCHING GIFTS                                                1

From:	NAME: Bill Strecker @MLO            
	FUNC: VP Engineering                  
	TEL: 223-3726                         <STRECKER.BILL AT PNDVUEA1 at MLMAIL at MLO>
To:     See Below





From:	NAME: NANCY DUBE                    
	FUNC: Corp. Comm. Relations           
	TEL: 223-2221                         <DUBE.NANCY AT A1 at POWDML at PKO>
Date:	17-May-1994
Posted-date: 17-May-1994
Precedence: 1
Subject: EMPLOYEE MATCHING GIFTS                                                1
To:     See Below


As a result of the company's decision to suspend the match for 
employee charitable contributions made through the Matching Gift and 
United Way programs, the following communication is being distributed 
to all U.S. employees.  

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Regards,
Nancy



TO: ALL U.S. EMPLOYEES
FROM: NANCY A. DUBE
RE: CHANGES IN EMPLOYEE MATCHING PROGRAMS

The Senior Leadership Team recently approved a number of actions that 
will cut costs and minimize expenses. One of those actions calls for 
the suspension of the company match for employee charitable 
contributions made through the Matching Gift and United Way programs.

The following will provide more specific information on each of the 
program areas.

    EMPLOYEE MATCHING GIFTS

    The Employee Matching Gift program will be suspended at the end of 
    business on Thursday, June 30, 1994. 
    
    Employee gifts made to Digital-approved organizations by June 
    30th will be matched at $0.50-on-the-dollar, PROVIDED THAT the 
    completed Employee Matching Gift form is received FROM THE 
    ORGANIZATION by the Digital Matching Gift office NO LATER THAN 
    June 30th at 5:00PM (Eastern Time).
       	  
    
    UNITED WAY MATCHING PROGRAM
    
    The company match of $0.50-on-the-dollar will be suspended for any 
    future employee United Way campaigns.
    
Within the next few days, the Corporate Community Relations staff will 
notify the recipient organizations of the program changes. 

If you have any Matching Gift questions, please contact Celia Allain, 
Matching Gift Coordinator at DTN 223-7256.  For all United Way 
questions, please contact Joanne Urgotis, Employee Programs 
Administrator, at DTN 223-7089.


Regards,

Nancy A. Dube
Manager, Corporate Community Relations







To Distribution List:

GRESHAM BREBACH @MLO,
CABRINETY @ROYALT @VMSMAIL,
BOBBY CHOONAVALA @AKO,
CHARLES CHRIST @SHR,
VINCENZO DAMIANI @GEO,
DICK FARRAHAR @MLO,
RUSS GULLOTTI @MKO,
WIN HINDLE @MLO,
FRANK MCCABE @MLO,
ED MCDONOUGH @BXC,
VIN MULLARKEY @MLO,
BOB PALMER @MLO,
ENRICO PESATORI @MLO,
LUCIA QUINN @MLO,
JOHN RANDO @OGO,
BRUCE RYAN @MLO,
TOM SIEKMAN @MSO,
ADRIANA STADECKER @MLO,
BILL STEUL @MLO,
BILL STRECKER @MLO,
CHARLIE HOLLERAN @MLO,
ROBERT MCNULTY @OGO

To Distribution List:

SUPNIK @HUMAN@VMSMAIL,
KOTEFF @LJSRV2@VMSMAIL,
DEMMER @MSBCS@VMSMAIL,
MAHENDRA @PATEL@VMSMAIL,
CALDWELL @SHARE@VMSMAIL,
HARBERT @STAR@VMSMAIL,
NIST @THEHUT@VMSMAIL,
COTTER @WECARE@VMSMAIL,
_LJSRV2::ZAGER AT PNDVUEA1 at MLMAIL at MLO

    Has anyone heard any rumblings about resumption of the matching gift
    program ?  (I haven't - I'm just preparing to make some charitable 
    donations and wondering whether to hold off any longer).
    
    Seems like the resumption of this shouldn't be too far off, unless
    powers that be are waiting for sustained profitability.
    
    \chuck

    You've got to be kidding....  I don't expect the resumption of
    such programs for a LOOOONG time.
    
    				Steve

    OK - time for another semi-annual survey of the peanut gallery.  Anyone
    think that the restoration of matching-gift is in sight ?  Or is this a
    bennie that is disappearing at other companies as well ?  Granted, this
    doesn't influence employment decisions to any extent (unlike the SAVE
    matching contribution).
    
    Is it worth holding off on charitable contributions until after the
    full FY results have had time to settle ?
    
    \chuck

I'd go for full SAVE matching before gift matching, but I'm expecting the 
next restoration of benefits will be something like the return of the holiday
turkeys.  ;-)

Jim

    Personally, I'd like to see the gift matching come back with some
    limit like $500 or $1000 per employee per year.
    
    				-John

    I would too, though I don't think I donate that much.  I find that I
    donate to fewer good causes than I used to, since the $5 or whatever
    that I can afford is hardly worth sending in and having the charity
    process without the matching gift - I make fewer but larger
    contributions instead.  And I send less total money than I used to,
    since it has been years and years since my last salary review.  The
    matching gift program seemed like a nice way for the company to show
    concern for society - and most other high tech companies had (or maybe
    even still have) such a program.  I think it was good positive
    publicity to see our company name listed as supporting concert series,
    museums, medical research, wildlife preservation, etc.  I feel bad now
    when it is no longer listed and the other companies are still there.
    
    /Charlotte

>    I would too, though I don't think I donate that much.  I find that I
>    donate to fewer good causes than I used to, since the $5 or whatever
>    that I can afford is hardly worth sending in and having the charity
>    process without the matching gift 

$5 wouldn't be matched.  The minimum gift the company would match was at least
$15, and I think it went to $25 some time before the program was suspended.

- tom]

The Pro Arte Chamber Orchestra of Boston still has a web link to
Digital, no doubt as a thank you for a 1994 matching gift.  Maybe
there are other examples.

\Joe