Join your fellow employees who are fighting for your benefits - Join the Alliance!

Retirees, Vendors, Contractors, Temps, and Active Employees are all eligible to become members of the Alliance.

• CFO.com: The Case Against Health Savings Accounts. Asking employees to pay more for their care can be a plus on balance sheets but a minus on medical charts, say critics. By David M. Katz. Excerpts: But the strongest argument for HSAs, their advocates say, is that they encourage employees to be more cost-conscious medical consumers. Employees who lose their own money on medical care of their choice, the reasoning goes, will be more prudent about spending it than if an insurance company foots the bill. Such employees, therefore, could help shift market power from the supply side (that is, health-care providers) to the demand side (patients) and let some steam out of the relentless rise of health-care costs.
  But will short-term cost cuts be followed by larger longer-term expenses? Critics are arguing with increasing fervor that employees who control their own HSAs may be so cost-conscious that they delay medical care that they really need, only to incur greater costs when their conditions worsen. Indeed, new research confirms that ailing employees who have higher out-of-pocket requirements also end up in the hospital more often. [...]
  Another criticism is that by encouraging "adverse selection," HSAs would unravel the employment-based insurance system as a whole. HSAs "are attractive to healthier individuals, who will be tempted to opt out of company plans, leaving less healthy individuals behind," wrote Paul Krugman and Robin Wells in the March 23 issue of The New York Review of Books. Since the employees who remained in traditional plans would be less healthy, on average, insurers would have to charge higher rates to cover their increased risks.
• New York Times: Illogical Cutbacks on Cancer. By Bob Herbert. Excerpts: The federal government has a national breast and cervical cancer early detection program, run by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. It provides screening and other important services to low-income women who do not have health insurance, or are underinsured. There is agreement across the board that the program is a success. It saves lives and it saves money. Its biggest problem is that it doesn't reach enough women. At the moment there is only enough funding to screen one in five eligible women.
  A sensible policy position for the Bush administration would be to expand funding for the program so that it reached everyone who was eligible. It terms of overall federal spending, the result would be a net decrease. Preventing cancer, or treating it early, is a lot less expensive than treating advanced cancer.
  So what did this president do? He proposed a cut in the program of $1.4 million (a minuscule amount when you're talking about the national budget), which would mean that 4,000 fewer women would have access to early detection. This makes no sense. In human terms, it is cruel. From a budget standpoint, it's self-defeating. [...]
  This is just one program in a range of cancer services that rely on support from the federal government. As if immune to the extent of human suffering involved, President Bush has proposed a barrage of cuts for these programs. "What's really amazing," said Mr. Smith, "is that the president cut every cancer program. He cut the colorectal cancer program. He cut research at the National Cancer Institute. He cut literally every one of our cancer-specific programs. It's incomprehensible." A bipartisan movement is under way in the Senate to block the president's proposed cuts. How that ultimately will fare is unclear.
• New York Times: The Doctor Will See You for Exactly Seven Minutes. By Peter Salgo. Excerpts: The problem has been sneaking up on us for almost two decades. As health-care dollars became scarce in the 1980's and 90's, hospitals asked their business people to attend clinical meetings. The object was to see what doctors were doing that cost a lot of money, then to try and do things more efficiently. Almost immediately, I noticed that business jargon was becoming commonplace. "Patients" began to disappear. They were replaced by "consumers." They eventually became "customers."
  
  This may seem a trivial matter, but it is not. You treat "patients" as if they were members of your family. You talk to them. You comfort them. You take time to explain to them what the future may hold in store. Sometimes, that future will be bleak. But you assure them you will be there to help them face it.
  You treat "customers" quite differently. Customers are in your place of business to purchase health care. You complete the transaction such a relationship suggests: health care for money. And then they aren't your customers any more. Taken a step further, you can make the case that the less time you spend with your customers, the better your bottom line will be. This gets everyone's attention.
• Chicago Tribune, courtesy of Blue Cross, Blue Shield Health Issues: Chrysler gives employees a new lease on work and life. By Jim Mateja. Excerpts: Last week we learned that the salaried workforce will pay health-care premiums according to their earnings starting Jan. 1. So executives who rake in the most dough will have to shell out the most for medical coverage, while the lowest paid workers won't pay $1 more for coverage. It's Chrysler's way to reduce health-care costs without the lowest paid having to suffer.
• Atlanta Journal-Constitution: Too many eyes on personal health data. By Bob Barr. Excerpts: The most endangered species on the planet? It's not the snail darter. Or the Calabasas County jumping field mouse. No; it's the privacy of your medical information. In one of the worst examples ever of the federal government creating a problem, purporting to solve the problem and then making it much worse, the Congress and the Bush administration have made it all but impossible for you to maintain the confidentiality of your most personal information.

• "IBM Pretty bad" by "pork". Full excerpt: I have a co-worker who recently left IBM as a band 8 and joined Towers Perrin ERP practice. The utilization target is 1600 hours per year. Any hour you bill over 1600 will be matched dollar for dollar to your hourly rate (internal) and that's your bonus. Seems pretty fair huh?
• "let's do the math" by "sapgod". Full excerpt: Based on the current BCS 90% ute target and Dose' 25% payout: in BCS, work 2000 hours, 100% ute, 5% bonus (maybe) = 5k (tip) in the other place, 400 extra hours, * $200/hr rate, * 25% payout = $20k (now that is a bonus).... nothing to brag about, but a reasonable payout for the 2000hr/year effort.
• "And from the other side" by "Dose of reality". Full excerpt: IBM gets an additional $80k in clear profit, for which it only had to pay $20k. That's a 300% return. Of course it isn't necessary, because once you've worked the extra 400 hours we have already gotten the $80k in profit. Now when you don't get rewarded for the extra effort, you will naturally leave and be replaced by another poor sap that will work on spec for a year or two.
  However, even in the short term, and presuming we can rehire like-for-like on paper, it is still not good policy, since it probably costs $20k in ramp up time, recruiting costs, salary bump, and risk that the replacement will not be able to produce like the previous employee.
  Add in what it does for the average effort of the rest of the rank and file, and the stupidity of our compensation policy is clear.
• "Well there is always cannon fodder" by "wonderaboutibm". Full excerpt: There are always the saps you talk about. These are the eager beavers who really do work insane hours to get very high utilization, without realizing there is little in it for them. But maybe the sap pool is starting to dry up.
• "Fodder quality" by "Dose of reality". Full excerpt: Unfortunately, there is a natural floor to the number of saps. There will always be ineffective job seekers, mistreated staff in other firms that are too anxious to make a move as quickly as they can, and plain run of the mill bottom feeders. We are rapidly becoming a magnet for them all. It is more likely that the quality issues provide the catalyst for change than a total drying up of the pool. All we can effectively do here is warn the otherwise employable.
• "from outside looking in" by "sapgod". Full excerpt: One thing comes to my mind frequently is why so many people know how much profit IBM is sucking out of them and yet they are so dependent on the comfort zone and refuse to do nothing... we all see the billing rate we put in the time sheet and it takes less than 30 seconds to figure out IBM takes a BIGGER cut than anybody else out there.... The other big shops pay better, the smaller shops pay better, and contracting middlemen pay much better (i.e. takes a much smaller cut).
  With the posted Towers Perrin payout structure, $ for $ (how much is the "internal" rate for a band-8 equivalent?) The total payout is reasonable considering the today's environment with no corporate loyalty and job security.
• "More thoughts" by "Dose of reality". Excerpts: Problems at BCS are not isolated to compensation. Our utilization rate targets (% of annual work hours that you should charge to clients) are at 90% or above and well above the industry norms. What that means is that there is always tremendous pressure for you to take whatever project that needs you when you become available, regardless of career fit, or geography. After a few weeks of bench time, you will never be able to make your targets. At those utilization levels, there are generally very few staff on the bench, so the odds of finding a good fit are very slim.

• Alliance@IBM: Attention IBM employees: IBM is blocking e-mail to and from the Alliance@IBM e-mail address endicottalliance@stny.rr.com from inside the company. Please send your job cut information and other correspondence from your home e-mail. You can also contact us the following ways: Phone 607 658 9285 or Fax 607 658 9283.
• From the Job Cuts Status & Comments page:
  • Comment 3/17/06: Lenovo has announced that it is making layoffs. According to an article in the News & Observer, "Lenovo will start notifying the affected employees next week and will finish by the end of the month" and "Some of the layoffs will be effective immediately". This means that at least some of those who will be laid off will go without their March 31st bonuses, too - as an extra slap in the face. -Anonymous-
  • Comment 3/18/06: I worked for IBM Endicott when it was sold off to EIT. If you were not with in a year of being 55 or with 30 years of service, you did not get the full IBM pension. What make you think it will be different with the Qualfuserve deal? -Anonymous-
  • Comment 3/18/06: There is a planned cut in ITS United States, because Delivery is not making its numbers. Microsoft practice is consistently brought up in conversations as a group with low utilization that will be hit hard. Does anyone have more info into ITS cuts, and in specific the Microsoft Practice? It used to have the highest utilization few years ago and seems like it is out of favor now. Any Layoffs? -Anonymous-
  • Comment 3/21/06: Dear Future Alliance@IBM Dues Paying Members: I've been researching the IBM/Lenovo deal since 12/8/04. I hope that at least one current Lenovo employee will send in to the Alliance@IBM a copy of the severance package, resource action or whatever it will be called. IBM has retained at least an 18% share in Lenovo unless that interest has been sold. Please let the Alliance know or me if that has changed. "As a company, we must continue to ensure that our business conduct and relationships remain consistent with what we write and say." Quote from IBM Executive. Steven Bergeron Alliance@IBM. uvm2000@aol.com. MA Rep @ Large
  • Comment 3/21/06: I am requesting that an IBM employee affected by the QUALxSERV transfer, please send in to the Alliance, any paperwork you've received from IBM. Are you being allowed to look for jobs internally? Given options to retire or bridge, how are your benefits affected with the transfer? The Alliance needs to study this transfer of IBM jobs. Steven Bergeron Alliance@IBM. uvm2000@aol.com. MA Rep @ Large
• From the General Visitor's Comment page:
  • Comment 3/19/06: Good luck to Sam, for surely there will be justice on this earth. What a person sows so shall he reap. As one who was suddenly marched off the premises after a PBC of 2 and 25% annual bonus for good performance, I can only say I hope Sam has nightmares over the thousands of desperate families whose children, possibly parents, and entire lives have been ruined by IBM (eating cheap food with no nourishment, staying sick with no money to pay doctors, committing suicide due to no money to pay mortgage, divorced due to stress and being away from home whilst employed by IBM). I hope the "happy shareholders" are aware of these devastated families. For the current IBM employees, please try very hard to pay off your debt and save - you could be thrown out as trash at any time. Sometimes I wonder if the drainage of finances from the "Christian" countries to the non-Christian ones, is a precursor to the microchip and Armageddon! -Anonymous-
  • Comment 3/20/06: If you are planning to retire at the end of the year, you might want to take advantage of going into the next year and front loading the 401k. You are allowed to put as much as 80% of your salary into the IBM Savings Plan (TDSP). If you can afford to do that, you can make a big contribution in a short time early in the year, and then retire. You would not maximize the employer match, but you could make one last big splash before leaving. In addition, be aware that a rollover to an IRA means converting all your holdings to cash (inside the plan) first. Since you have no control over the actual timing of this conversion, you might force it ahead of time by moving funds from (say) the large cap stock fund to money market. Do it on an up-market day and the stock fund is likely not to drop. You have to submit the move before one PM eastern; and you can see the result around 9 or 10 the same night. It might be smart to move 10% at a time to protect yourself against an afternoon market drop. -Anonymous-
  • Comment 3/20/06: I am leaving the company because of the travel. While she may not be a trophy wife, my spouse takes care of the kids and me pretty well. Because of my being away, she has added extra locks and barricades to the doors. After too many times leaving home on Sunday afternoon and returning late Friday night; and getting phone calls from the kids on weeknights asking for help with their homework, I realized that I was doing something wrong. I was preferring the lure of money over time with my family. We won't be able to travel to Europe like we used to, but we will deal with that homework face-to-face every night. -Anonymous-
  • Comment 3/21/06: I'm tired of giving more and more to this company and getting less and less. How come the executive compensation keeps increasing and mine keeps decreasing? I feel I am lucky to still have a job considering all the layoffs but how much abuse should we take while the executives earn more? I'm just about fed up with this poor excuse for a company. -Anonymous-
  • Comment 3/23/06: I've been reading the comments on this message board and feel like I am not alone in the abuse I've had with IBM. I feel like this company has abused me beyond belief. This company needs a union to fight back. I am joining the Alliance and urge all IBM employees to do the same. Let's get the IBM that we all love back into the employees hands and out of the abusive executives. -Anonymous-
  • Comment 3/23/06: IBM seems to have major issues in the hiring department when it comes to entry level positions. Any horror stories that can be used in defense of major ongoing trial please email to jed@consultant.com
  • Comment 3/24/06: Employees can't talk to Media?!?!?! Pardon my English, but F*$K that. Who do they think they are? -Anonymous-
• Pension Comments page

• BusinessWeek: A Rich Market for Decadent Digs. Wealthy buyers are snapping up trophy homes at a record pace -- and now, they're looking beyond the sunny states. By Janie Ho. Excerpts: Imagine this: You're bored with the pristine white terrace of your New York loft and flee to a historic villa on the French Riviera. Or maybe you've got your heart set on a glass-enclosed penthouse in Australia -- or a waterfront mansion in Barbados. Can't decide? Such is the enviable plight of many people around the world: They can't decide which luxury home to buy. "There's an extraordinary amount of wealth out there," says Corcoran Group CEO Pamela Leibman. According to Liebman, there's "no limit on what people will spend on trophy real estate."
• New York Times Magazine: Vacation-Home Hunter: Club Med for the Multimillionaire Set. By Susan Dominus. Excerpts: Yellowstone Club World, as Blixseth envisions it, will provide housing and staff at nine luxury resorts for the several hundred members whom he hopes to start signing up in August. As many as 150 members of the club will pay initiation fees ranging from $3.5 million to $10 million; in addition, current members of the Yellowstone Club will be able to join for a lower fee. In exchange, members will have access, whenever they want, to the club's various vacation properties, all of which, Blixseth says, must have enough rooms and space to afford ample privacy if guests overlap, but also have what he calls "the wow factor" — some feature so lavish that even the extraordinarily wealthy would be impressed. A private golf club located just down the road from Scotland's St. Andrews, the historical home of the sport? That qualified for Blixseth, who purchased the club in late August. A sprawling 14th-century chateau half an hour outside Paris with amenities that include four dining areas, a fully functioning spa, a 75-foot-long pool and 1,000 acres of land? That multimillion-dollar property qualified, as did a stretch of Pacific coastline in Mexico, a resort property for which Blixseth says he paid more than $40 million. He has also purchased a resort in the Turks and Caicos islands, a famous fly-fishing lake near Cody, Wyo., and 647 acres of land near his own home in Palm Springs. [...]
  The number of Americans worth more than $30 million jumped by 10 percent last year, and according to the Mendelsohn Affluent Survey, which tracks the spending of various income groups, most millionaires splurge more on their second homes than on their first homes, frequently spending twice as much. "There's this huge appetite for families to spend quality time together and it's not happening in their primary residences," Blixseth says. Vacation, he contends, is the time when people want the home cinema, the guest house for friends, the vast common spaces and game rooms and hot tubs.
  As the number of millionaires increases, it cuts into the exclusivity of high-end, but ultimately public, hotels like the Four Seasons or the Ritz. And with privacy at a premium, the desire for a truly secluded spot has only grown. Perhaps as a result, the number of people owning three or four homes has increased in recent years, as has the number of exclusive private residence clubs like Yellowstone Club World, although Blixseth's is by far the most extravagant one formed yet. (A club called Legendary Retreats, for example, charges a membership fee of $1.5 million and offers members access to homes worth an average of $8 million.)