Call center job salaries in the area range from $23,000 to $38,000 a year, according to analysis by the Longmont Times-Call. ...
IBM has taken a lot of heat in 2009 from its union and former employees after shedding an estimated 10,000 jobs. The exact figure of layoffs this year is not known, as IBM does not publicly announce its restructuring or job cuts, but former employees have well documented the occurrence of layoffs. Many workers have been forced to train employees in Asia and other countries who replaced many employees in North America.
Longseth wouldn’t comment on the jobs’ pay scale, but according to Salary.com, such positions in this area pay from about $23,000 to about $38,000. The majority of workers fall into the $30,000-a-year range, according to the site, which tracks salaries both on job description and locale.
Editor's note: Selected reader comments concerning the above article follow:
For example, if you lived in Nevada and got paid 70k a year, you might be given an offer in Dubuque IA for 30k a year or you might be given an offer in New York for 70k a year. If they turned down the offer, they were given approx 2 months to find a job within IBM before they are placed on the RA list. Once they are on the RA list, they are essentially black balled and cannot transfer to other parts of the company.
This is actually pretty insulting if you think about it. The jobs average 30k per year, that means that you could only qualify for a $625.00 a month house/apartment rent (30k/25%/12). So the technicians working at the IBM facility will either be living on Colfax or if they lived closer to Boulder they would have to be living with a few room mates. This is basically a wolf in a sheep's disguise.
IBM has actually patented processes on how to outsource people overseas and how to reduce headcount without affecting the bottom line. A few years ago, IBM employees sued IBM over unfair overtime practices and they won, sort of. Within a month after IBM paid out the penalty, everyone who participated in the lawsuit got a 15% salary reduction.
Oh, I forgot to mention that if your job is moving to a global delivery center and you decide not to relocate, IBM considers that a voluntary resignation. So basically if you decide that you don't want to uproot your entire family, move to Colorado on your dime (with no guarantee of retaining your job)and take a 40k a year pay cut (or more), you quit. You get no severance, no unemployment benefits, nothing.
Frances Draper, executive director of the Boulder Economic Council, said the expansion shows IBM's stake in staying in Boulder. "What it really indicates to us is that IBM corporate is feeling like Boulder is a key site for their operation," she said. "That says that IBM supports this site in the long run." Draper said the 500 jobs being created "probably aren't going to be the highest-paying jobs in the county by any means," but they will still be good jobs that come with training and stability.
Editor's note: Selected reader comments concerning the above article follow:
Nearly one-third of IBM's global workforce is now in India, and it's no joke that IBM is now referred to as the "India Business Machines" company. The public never heard about it because the company carefully kept the numbers below the WARN letter reporting threshold. A WARN letter (Worker Adjustment & Retraining Notification) is required by law to be sent if a given number - or percentage - of workers at a site will be cut. And of course, the media has been laying off reporters right and left so there is nobody left to cover the news in depth anyway.
Make no mistake, IBM is NOT committed to Boulder. The company is committed to nothing but itself and the stock price. Anyone that thinks otherwise is delusional or stupid.
Here's a little bit of history. It was only 9 or 10 years ago when IBM had about 6000 employees working at the IBM Boulder site. In those last 10 years, IBM has sold it's PC division to Lenovo, a Chinese company, and also sold the Printing Systems division to Ricoh, a Japanese Company to name a few. Did these sales affect the work force at Boulder's site? Well, not so much since the PC division was in Raleigh (they did lose a lot of jobs there), and Ricoh's purchase was more of an addition to their business with Infoprint being another one of their brands. It was all based on IBM's model of outsourcing hardware divisions that incur higher operating expenses. regardless of profit ratio. It was real tangible expense, but also kept many americans employed.
Now here's the kicker, Global Services division. In the hey day 10 years ago, Global Services was HUGE, and had lot's of help desk jobs that were created through IBM business outsourcing programs and services for other companies. This division is where the job cuts mostly occurred, and IBM Boulder's site saw close to 2000 jobs go to India. When I left their were less than 3500 employees at the IBM Boulder site, that's 2500 jobs gone from Boulder County in less than 10 years.
There's a lot of irony to be noted here. First of all, IBM's stock is now trading around $130 per share, a definite high point in the last 10 years, and a low point was $64 rr $66 a share after the dotcom bomb and 9/11/01 attacks. And this is the irony the executives wont admit to, they are getting bitten in the ass by all this outsourcing on two different fronts: One, there's not one non-Indian american customer that enjoys talking to someone on a helpdesk in India, and it's been brought up repeatedly and even impacted IBM's new and existing business. (Nothing against India, but the communication is less than effective, and I'd rather see my neighbor be gainfully employed.)
Two, the new white house administration is putting the clamp down on companies who outsource american jobs to other countries, got ya Salami Sam Palmisano (IBM's CEO). It's just a hidden knee jerk reaction not to incur the wrath of the US Gov and more importantly the IRS!
Lastly the real irony is people who were making $18-25 an hour with benefits can get their old jobs back with no benefits for half their previous wage 5 or 10 years ago. Oh yeah, let's not forget this either, not too many living in Boulder can do so on these meager wages. The entire time I was an IBM employee, I was always below the median income of Boulder. So yeah these people will be driving longer distances and bumping up pollution emissions, was that really worth $35,000 to City of Boulder considering the new jobs will be for people who can't afford to live or shop here? Way to improve our quality of Life City of Boulder!
One very last note. Wouldn't it be nice if the DC editors and writers wouldn't take the words of City of Boulder and big business as truth, but instead do a little bit of their own research into the dynamics and history of the stories they report on? This story definitely needs a published rebuttal as it's a misleading disservice to the community. Everything isn't as rosy as reported here.
Some in the U.S. Senate, led by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R) of Iowa, have introduced legislation that would impose limitations on H-1B visa usage. In a year of major job loss in information technology, Grassley, along with Sen. Dick Durbin (D) of Illinois initiated a bill that seeks to insure that U.S. companies look to hire American workers before using H-1B visas.
"The H-1B program was never meant to replace qualified American workers. It was meant to complement them because of a shortage of workers in specialized fields," Grassley said in a statement. "In tough economic times like we're seeing, it's even more important that we do everything possible to see that Americans are given every consideration when applying for jobs."
This $12 trillion package gifted a goldmine to Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase while granting Citigroup, AIG, Bank of America and Wells Fargo time to come back from the precipice for renewed fortune hunting. Washington public policy transferred an agglomeration of wealth so magnificent that one investment banker in a high position likened it to the way Putin transferred Russia's wealth to a handful of oligarchs.
Investors in the nation's financial institutions can thank this massive bailout for the astonishing recovery in financial shares: Goldman Sachs has more than tripled from its low, and Morgan Stanley has more than doubled. Bank of America shares are worth six times what they were at the bottom, and even Citigroup is a quadruple, going from 97 cents to around $4. ...
A final lesson, or perhaps admonition, is that Goldman Sachs is getting too smug, arrogant and selfish for its own good. It is intending to spend about 50% of its net revenues on bonuses, come hell or high water. That's $20 billion, more or less. It doesn't change the magnitude of the wealth transfer if the top 30 Goldman executives will not get cash but stock over a five-year period. This will set off a firestorm across the nation. Goldman is awash in money because Bear Stearns and Lehman are no more, and Citi, Bank of America, Wells Fargo and Morgan Stanley--not to speak of several European financial giants--have been wounded. Goldman's largesse to its employees is a function of immensely reduced competition. Let's see if Goldman can maintain its advantage.
But from an economic point of view, I’d suggest that we call the decade past the Big Zero. It was a decade in which nothing good happened, and none of the optimistic things we were supposed to believe turned out to be true.
It was a decade with basically zero job creation. O.K., the headline employment number for December 2009 will be slightly higher than that for December 1999, but only slightly. And private-sector employment has actually declined — the first decade on record in which that happened.
It was a decade with zero economic gains for the typical family. Actually, even at the height of the alleged “Bush boom,” in 2007, median household income adjusted for inflation was lower than it had been in 1999. And you know what happened next.
It was a decade of zero gains for homeowners, even if they bought early: right now housing prices, adjusted for inflation, are roughly back to where they were at the beginning of the decade. And for those who bought in the decade’s middle years — when all the serious people ridiculed warnings that housing prices made no sense, that we were in the middle of a gigantic bubble — well, I feel your pain. Almost a quarter of all mortgages in America, and 45 percent of mortgages in Florida, are underwater, with owners owing more than their houses are worth.
Last and least for most Americans — but a big deal for retirement accounts, not to mention the talking heads on financial TV — it was a decade of zero gains for stocks, even without taking inflation into account. Remember the excitement when the Dow first topped 10,000, and best-selling books like “Dow 36,000” predicted that the good times would just keep rolling? Well, that was back in 1999. Last week the market closed at 10,520. ...
What was truly impressive about the decade past, however, was our unwillingness, as a nation, to learn from our mistakes.
Even as the dot-com bubble deflated, credulous bankers and investors began inflating a new bubble in housing. Even after famous, admired companies like Enron and WorldCom were revealed to have been Potemkin corporations with facades built out of creative accounting, analysts and investors believed banks’ claims about their own financial strength and bought into the hype about investments they didn’t understand. Even after triggering a global economic collapse, and having to be rescued at taxpayers’ expense, bankers wasted no time going right back to the culture of giant bonuses and excessive leverage.
Then there are the politicians. Even now, it’s hard to get Democrats, President Obama included, to deliver a full-throated critique of the practices that got us into the mess we’re in. And as for the Republicans: now that their policies of tax cuts and deregulation have led us into an economic quagmire, their prescription for recovery is — tax cuts and deregulation.
So let’s bid a not at all fond farewell to the Big Zero — the decade in which we achieved nothing and learned nothing. Will the next decade be better? Stay tuned. Oh, and happy New Year.
The first study, led by corporate-governance expert Lucian Bebchuk of Harvard Law School, looked at more than 2,000 companies to see what share of the total compensation earned by the top five executives went to the CEO. The researchers call this number—which averages about 35%—the "CEO pay slice." It turns out that the bigger the CEO's slice of the pie, the lower the company's future profitability and market valuation. "These CEOs," says Prof. Bebchuk, "seem to be trying to grab more than they should." ...
Surely the financial crisis should have taught us all that we must acknowledge the extent of our ignorance. What's urgently called for in the CEO pay process, says Prof. Yermack, is "a great deal of humility." It's high time for corporate compensation committees—and investors—to start doubting whether the lavish pay packages they endorse actually work.
It's always sad come the day they are fired for profits that they realize their children are grown and being a good little work widget put food in their stomachs but no happiness in their hearts. It is the work widget mentality that prevents IBMers from organizing yet makes them the most productive self supervising employees in the world. They of course have to be self supervising because the only skill modern day first line managers have is butt kissing. They could not run the means of production by themselves for a half a day without the widgets. It is so sad. -Exodus2007-
That may be true even if you don’t like your health plan. And no one seems to agree on whether the legislation will do much to reduce workers’ continually rising out-of-pocket costs. True, there is an important advantage for the working insured: more peace of mind for people who are worried about being laid off or would like to change jobs.
But reform legislation enacted in 2010 banned insurance discrimination on the basis of medical history and also created a system of subsidies to help families pay for coverage. Even so, insurance doesn’t come cheap — but the Cratchits do have it, and they’re grateful. God bless us, everyone.
O.K., that was fiction, but there will be millions of real stories like that in the years to come. Imperfect as it is, the legislation that passed the Senate on Thursday and will probably, in a slightly modified version, soon become law will make America a much better country.
So why are so many people complaining? There are three main groups of critics. ...
There's an anesthesiologist alternating with a nurse anesthetist, an X-ray technician and a circulating nurse; there's a pair of scrub techs to handle surgical instruments; there's the surgeon, a middle-aged orthopedist who has never performed this type of operation before.
And, at the foot of the operating table, there's Chuck Bates, a guy who studied biology in college and always wanted to go to medical school but never did. Instead, he began his career selling hot dogs to grocery stores.
As the surgeon prepares to make an incision, Bates stares at the X-ray monitor. Come up one centimeter and make your incision there, Bates tells the surgeon. A little later, when it appears that the doctor is going to use his hand to push a needle into the patient's spine, Bates suggests that he try a mallet instead. Just tap-tap-tap, Bates advises. The job wholesaling hot dogs enabled Bates to get an MBA on the weekends, and then a friend told him about a career more in tune with his interests, which led to employment with Kyphon, a manufacturer of medical devices. ...
Although patients may not be aware of their presence, sales representatives have become fixtures in operating rooms across America. They come bearing artificial hips and artificial knees, cardiac pacemakers and implantable defibrillators, spinal stabilizers and mesh used to support prolapsed bladders. They deliver screws to hold bones together, and protein substances meant to make bone grow again. ...
Many medical devices could not be used -- or used safely -- without sales reps, said David Nexon, senior executive vice president of the Advanced Medical Technology Association, an industry group. Richmond gynecologist Catherine A. Matthews said that's a frightening argument. "They're not in any way motivated to recommend what might be the best thing for the patient," Matthews said. "They're there to sell their product."
"But dependency on government has never been bad for the rich. The pretense of the laissez-faire people is that only the poor are dependent on government, while the rich take care of themselves. This argument manages to ignore all of modern history, which shows a consistent record of laissez-faire for the poor, but enormous government intervention for the rich." From Economic Justice: The American Class System, from the book Declarations of Independence by Howard Zinn.
New York Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo threatened to publicize the recipients' names, prompting executives at AIG Financial Products to hastily agree to return about $45 million in bonuses by the end of the year. But as the final days of 2009 tick away, a majority of that money remains unpaid. Only about $19 million has been given back, according to a report by the special inspector general for the government's bailout program.
On Main Street, millions remain unemployed, foreclosures are rising, pain is spreading. Many of the best jobs that have gone are not coming back. The downturn has been particularly brutal on the young. As a New York Times editorial reports, the jobless rate for teenagers is the highest recorded since records began being kept after World War II. For low-income black students, only 4 in 100 found jobs this fall. ...
The economic challenge goes beyond recovery. In fact, Wall Street's rescue, while necessary, now stands in the way of a prosperous economy. Banks are emerging from free fall more concentrated than ever, with an explicit promise that they are too big to fail. This is a guarantee of future financial catastrophe. They must be broken up or regulated like utilities. Banker's bonuses are simply a leading indicator. Their return to record levels means exactly that we are headed into another mess.
The pain on Main Street is also not sustainable. The basic promises we make to one another -- a good education for our children, an opportunity for those who work hard, security in the golden years -- depend on an economy with a broad and vibrant middle class, where prosperity it widely shared. As the middle class struggles with declining wages and increasing insecurity, those promises can't be kept.
Politically, this reality will frame the choice in 2010 and beyond. Voters will want to know: Which side are you on -- Wall Street or Main Street? The myth that Wall Street's riches benefit Main Street -- that bankers are doing, in the words of Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd C. Blankfein, "God's work" -- has been shattered.
The 65-year-old insurance-industry veteran has criticized regulators, threatened to quit over government pay constraints and used profanity in company meetings. "With me, what you see is what you get," Mr. Benmosche says he has told government officials, AIG board members and employees. ...
The government has spent about $121 billion thus far on the AIG rescue, and the company, now 80% government-owned, won't be paying back what it owes anytime soon. That has left Mr. Benmosche no option but to contend with pay czar Kenneth Feinberg.
Vault's IBM Business Consulting Services message board is a popular hangout for IBM BCS employees, including many employees acquired from PwC. Sample posts follow:
We all have to play nice-nice with our GR (global resource) peers. and when your GR team lead sends notes to IBM US mgmt that they need MORE WORK from their US counterparts, IBM mgmt. rolls over and gives them more work. Reminds me of an old CCR song: Fortunate Son.
And when you ask them, how much should we give? Ooh, they only answer more! more! more. What a sad, pathetic, f'ng company.
What's more pathetic is how India is not held accountable since they are Sam's chosen ones and how anyone who reports problems with India are considered anti-team, racist and uncooperative.
The sacred cows over in India aren't cattle, they're the "office boys" pretending to be IT professionals working for IBM. What a sad, pathetic f'ng company indeed.
This site is designed to allow IBM Employees to communicate and share methods of protecting their rights through the establishment of an IBM Employees Labor Union. Section 8(a)(1) of the National Labor Relations Act states it is a violation for Employers to spy on union gatherings, or pretend to spy. For the purpose of the National Labor Relations Act, notice is given that this site and all of its content, messages, communications, or other content is considered to be a union gathering.