Moffat has admitted he was wrong, and according to statements by his lawyer Kerry Lawrence, Moffat is “deeply sorry for the embarrassment his conduct has caused to his family and to his former employer, IBM”. ...
The big remaining question is “why?” It doesn’t appear that greed was the motive in Moffat’s case. From what we know of the charges, he did not profit financially from any of the trading based on the information he provided. It has also been suggested that perhaps Moffat had a more-than-professional relationship with Danielle Chiesi. Indeed, she was the link between him and Rajaratnam.
We may never know the details, but I think it’s possible that the motivation behind this was neither money nor sex. I think it’s very possible that Moffat may have simply gotten carried away with the need for power and prestige – that being a Senior VP at IBM and a contender for the CEO job was simply not enough for him.
Such agreements are "very close to the line," said Melissa Maxman, an antitrust lawyer at the law firm Cozen O'Connor. "They're not agreeing on price, but they're kind of agreeing on costs." Skilled computer scientists with some management responsibilities, for instance, often make base salaries of $180,000 to $210,000. Compensation for the most sought-after workers typically soars far above that and includes bundles of stock options and bonuses. ...
"IBM is one of many companies that have been contacted by government officials in a broad-ranging inquiry of technology and nontechnology companies regarding hiring practices," said company spokesman Edward Barbini. "We are collaborating with the government's inquiry."
Scroll down through the list of files and open the file titled "IBM 2010 Retiree Medical Plan Costs." Note that these costs are for non-medicare retirees.
COBRA is about half the cost of the FHA plans, but you can't use FHA money to pay for it. With $40,000 in your FHA account, you can expect to be able to pay for your medical coverage for about 2 years for you and your spouse, or 3-4 years for just yourself.
Another strategy is to withdraw less money from the FHA account each year and pay the rest out of your own pocket. That makes the money last longer, but you should be aware that IBM could take it away at any time. So many people feel it is better to spend the FHA money as fast as you can and not risk losing it. The money you leave in the FHA account earns only trivial interest these days. You might be able to invest your own money in something better and come out ahead in the long run.
Right now I an using the FHA at 100% because of some fear it could go away. Those of us with the FHA are not the folks IBM is worried about keeping happy. Hopefully some sort of new healthcare "exchange" option will be less costly than IBM insurance. I am waiting to see options for us in 2014 since we will have to wait til 2018 for both of us to be old enough for Medicare.
But I am truly lucky to have an actual pension and healthcare. My wife was diagnosed with breast cancer and the surgeries, chemo, and drugs are very expensive. The cancer center said many women can't get their insurance to cover the best anti-nausea drugs because they are so expensive. I picked up her prescription yesterday and the co-pay was $7.43. So in IBM's defense, this could also be a case of "you get what you pay for". (But I have no trouble believing the rumor that IBM make money on retiree healthcare once the FHA is gone.)
So if you were the typical American C.E.O., you may have found some of the pay czar’s prescriptions startling. For instance, he thinks you should pay golf club dues out of your own pocket. He also would like you to take less of your pay in cash and more of it in stock. In fact, the White House set a limit on how much cash top executives of the biggest TARP companies could get as part of their annual compensation: $500,000 a year. That sum that may seem princely to the average American worker but, alas, doesn’t buy much for a crowd used to Fifth Avenue triplexes, third and fourth homes, top-drawer health care and lavish private schools for their children. ...
IF ever a C.E.O. would have seemed impervious to the administration’s calls for pay reform, it is Lawrence J. Ellison of Oracle, the highest-paid chief executive in the Equilar survey. He made $85 million last year — more than the combined pay of the second- and third-ranked C.E.O.’s, J. Raymond Elliott of Boston Scientific, with $33 million, and Ray R. Irani of Occidental Petroleum, with $31 million. Mr. Ellison took all but $6 million of his pay in stock options. A billionaire many times over, Mr. Ellison has never been afraid to flaunt his wealth. Yet he made a sacrificial gesture last year that is a sign of the times: this year he plans to decline his $1 million base salary and take just $1 instead. (Oracle declined to comment on Mr. Ellison’s pay.) ...
As usual, some C.E.O.’s in the Equilar survey seemed to have done more to earn their pay than others. For instance, Samuel J. Palmisano of I.B.M. made $21 million after he delivered a 9 percent net profit increase and helped oversee total shareholder returns of 58 percent. Jeffrey L. Bewkes of Time Warner made $19 million last year as he undid the disastrous AOL-Time Warner merger by spinning AOL off as a separate public company. Mr. Bewkes got $14 million of his pay in cash. He might wish he had received more Time Warner shares, though. The total return on his company’s stock was 21 percent in 2009.
But today in a blog posting, Andrew Bartels, the vice president and principal analyst at Forrester who is responsible for economic and IT spending modeling, didn't just make an unofficial call on the end to the downturn, but he said more emphatically that the "tech recovery of 2010 is underway."
The suit, filed in 1998, has received little attention despite the number of plaintiffs—24,000 current and former employees—and the size of the potential damages, one of the largest ever in pension litigation. Legal papers filed Monday in federal court in Newark, N.J., include the first publicly disclosed estimate for potential damages. ...
AT&T was one of dozens of big companies including International Business Machines Corp. and Xerox Corp. that changed their traditional pensions to "cash-balance" plans in the 1990s. The change saved companies money because instead of calculating benefits by multiplying years of service and salary—which produces rapid pension growth in later years—the companies converted the pension to a cash-out value. This "balance" would then grow at a flat annual rate, say 4% of pay. ...
Many companies established opening "account balances" for older employees that were lower than the cash-out amounts they had earned. For example, a worker might have earned a pension that, if converted to a lump sum, would be worth $150,000. But its opening account balance would be set at $100,000. The balance would be effectively frozen until the worker received enough annual credits over the years to restore it to $150,000. Only then would the pension begin to increase again
An app that sorts the tax and income data by state and county can be found here.
The jobs were cut all across the United States and some in Canada. What locations and communities had job cuts? Nobody knows because IBM no longer gives out that information. Now IBM has decided that it will no longer inform employees, the government, communities, the media, or stockholders how many employees work at IBM in the United States.
From now on only the global headcount number will be reported. It is clear why IBM is doing this. The US employee population is shrinking due to off shoring. IBM is also displacing US workers with foreign workers (at lower pay) brought in to work on US client accounts. Meanwhile headcount in India and other countries is increasing.
In fact, IBM India had an employee population of 94,000 in 2008. At the end of 2009 IBM USA had an employee population of 105,000, down 30,000 in just a few years. But with IBM no longer giving out headcount by country we will not know when IBM USA goes below IBM India in headcount. Is this important?
"IBM is projecting a false financial situation and going on resource actioning valuable employees. A honesty about the financial situation will help. In the Toronto lab, during the past one year, IBM has eliminated colour printer, cut the number of BW printers by 1/3, eliminated OT, eliminating pager pay, no pay raise even for those youngsters who are coming off probation, no Christmas lunches, telephone calls are being monitored with login id, minimal AC, almost anything that can be cut is being cut.
Can this be an indicator of a well managed company. If Sam were a good executive he would come clean with employees and explore ways to rectify the situation. Instead thousand of valuable employees are being resource actioned indiscriminately by poor managers. IBM's future is being mortgaged by Sam for immediate benefit to him and all those with stick options."
Now I know in US many of the cited items were gone a while ago but I do not wish to insult anyone. Plus this is something that we in Canada feel the loss immensely. -IBM Canada-
Editor's note: Many more job cut comments resulting from the March 1st firings are available in the highlights from these weeks:
"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.
I know that getting such things into the bill would be hard politically: as financial reform legislation moves to the floor of the Senate, there will be pressure to make it weaker, not stronger, in the hope of attracting Republican votes. But I would urge Senate leaders and the Obama administration not to settle for a weak bill, just so that they can claim to have passed financial reform. We need reform with a fighting chance of actually working.
There are many reasons for the price explosion, but a critical factor has been the ability of businesses to write off tickets as entertainment expenses — essentially a huge, and wholly unnecessary, government subsidy. These deductions have led to higher ticket prices in two ways. On the demand side, they have fueled competition for scarce seats, with business taxpayers bidding in part with dollars they save through the deductions. On the supply side, the large number of businesses bidding for expensive seats has driven the expansion of luxury skyboxes and a reduction in overall seats in new ballparks. ...
Ideally, Congress would get rid of business-entertainment deductions altogether — after all, they are little more than an excuse for corporate executives to consume luxury items at a discount, distorting markets and cheating the public out of substantial tax revenue. Given corporate America’s passionate attachment to sports-related perks, a blanket elimination may be unrealistic, though. A more feasible but still effective approach would be to limit deductions for luxury skybox tickets to a low, fixed amount — say, $50 per seat, per game. Such a limit would be fair, unambiguous and easy to enforce. But above all, it would help baseball return to its roots, when average folks — not corporate entertainers — were the ones filling the seats.
Meet Ms. Warren, presently the head of an independent agency set up by Congress to monitor the government bailout of Wall Street bankers. "Dang gummit," she says in her Oklahoma twang, "somebody has to stand on behalf of middle-class families." Not only has she been doing that by fearlessly grilling Gucci-clad bankers and weak-willed treasury officials, but also by conceiving of and pushing hard for a new regulatory agency that would protect us consumers against banker greed. Wall Street profiteers shudder in fear at the very mention of Warren's proposal for a totally-independent Consumer Financial Protection Agency, and they're lobbying ferociously to kill it and demonize her.
Coming from a working class family, she knows what it is to face financial crisis and feel the crushing power of uncaring banks. "I learned early on what debt means, how vulnerable it makes people," she recently told the New York Times. Despite her success as a lawyer, she hasn't forgotten her populist roots and purpose. Warren is Wall Street's worst nightmare: a middle-class champion who gives a damn about workaday people, is smart and tenacious – and can't be bought. Arrogant and avaricious bankers are right to fear her, and we're right to be cheered by her advocacy. To support Warren's push for a real consumer agency, call Americans for Financial Reform: 202-263-4533.
Business is also creeping back for hotels, yacht rental companies, jet brokers and jewelry stores — purveyors of the luxury goods that once seemed immune to a downturn but then took a megahit with the economy.
“Everybody has cut back somewhat,” Ms. Webster said. “Even people who rented a 225-foot boat are saying, ‘Can I get something that is 50 feet shorter?’ “
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.