Pros
It's a job, at least for now.
Cons
Xerox/ACS used a neat little accounting trick called the "skills differential" that Conduent has apparently decided to keep. Here's how it works: The local site needs an employee with a certain skill set, but the corporation won't hire that candidate at a pay rate commensurate with those skills. Or, the company places a hiring freeze on all positions that are not revenue generating. This forces local management to hire the candidate under a revenue generating title, even though they will never perform those duties. (Here's the first hint that it's unethical -- the position title is a lie.) Let's say the site needs a web developer, for example. Somebody with a great skill set could fetch a nice salary, but instead gets hired in a production position for $10.00/per hour. Knowing that you can't get a web developer for that money, management gives him a "skills bump" of let's say 90%. He's now making $19/hr, right? Not so fast, Kemosabe. Yeah, he's making $19/hr when he's at work. But, if he's forced to take a mandatory holiday or sick time, he only gets paid his $10/hr. What about taking a vacation with his accrued PTO? Only if he can afford to lose over 45% of his pay when he does it. Do our executives lose 45% of their pay when they take a day off? Somehow I doubt that very seriously. But wait, it gets better. This web developer is in a critical position and has to work LOTS of overtime. At time and a half, you'd think he's making $28.50/hr for every hour of overtime, wouldn't you? Not so fast, Kemosabe. His overtime is ONLY paid on his base rate so HE ACTUALLY TAKES A PAY CUT from $19/hr to $15/hr when he works overtime!! Maybe this compensation method is legal, (I assume it is because it is common practice in Conduent), but there is no question it is as unethical as outright theft or fraud.