Our solution is the trueBLUE Association. Together, as affiliates of the trueBLUE Association, we will deliver your talent to the companies who are looking for, not just a person, but a team; a team of trusted IBM knowledgeable professionals. As IBM alumni, you have a special talent for collaboration and teamwork. As "freelance" professionals, we have the ability to group together in the trueBLUE Association as a community. Together we can offer our services to much larger projects than a typical freelancing business. With this community vision in mind, we are establishing a critical mass of x-IBM professionals on oDesk to meet the demand that companies have been asking for. oDesk offers a managed solution to ensure that workers are guaranteed payment for their work while clients' projects are completed satisfactorily. It is a win-win opportunity!
Selected reader comments concerning the above article follow:
You see HR in the UK had/has a problem: turnover was/is too high for new grads, but too low for people with longer service. Now, you may be saying, "Wooohoo I'll be at the front when it comes to pay raises etc, keeerrrrrching." Well consider this: I would desperately like to work somewhere else, however, I have a mortgage and a family to support. Because of all the pay rises I received I cannot take a job anywhere else as I cannot afford it -- essentially I'm paid too much. Sounds like a stupid question but, is that a position you want to be in?
So, the advice that people have given about staying a couple of years and then moving on is right. Do not fall into the IBM trap that I did. (Oh and we could talk about the possibly illegal enforced PBC rating percentages, but that's for another day).
One final thought......do you want to work for a company where the Pensions' Trustees are taking them to court, and a large number of recent "retirees" are launching a series of industrial tribunals for constructive dismissal/age discrimination?
I'm hearing all kinds of numbers out there that range from $400 a month (out of pocket) to pay for COBRA to $800-1000 for the IBM policy coverage. I'd appreciate hearing of your experience and please don't be bashful about pointing out the holes in the pavement, since I'm sure there are quite a few. Also, any other lessons learned that you're willing share are most welcome. Thanks to all that reach out to help. Ruth
Even without the COBRA subsidy, COBRA insurance will still be less expensive than the FHA retiree coverage. If you plan on retiring and using the FHA, you will be paying out of pocket eventually when the FHA money runs out. So you may want to first take advantage of the cheaper COBRA prices (and better coverage) while it is available.
Armonk, N.Y.-based IBM does not expect to add any jobs at the site.
The 56,000-square-foot facility will be built inside an existing structure at IBM's 400-acre site in Poughkeepsie. The company says it features innovations to conserve energy and improve the manufacturing process.
Today many whose goal once was the discovery of truth are now paid handsomely to hide it. “Free market economists” are paid to sell offshoring to the American people. High-productivity, high value-added American jobs are denigrated as dirty, old industrial jobs. Relicts from long ago, we are best shed of them. Their place has been taken by “the New Economy,” a mythical economy that allegedly consists of high-tech white collar jobs in which Americans innovate and finance activities that occur offshore. All Americans need in order to participate in this “new economy” are finance degrees from Ivy League universities, and then they will work on Wall Street at million dollar jobs. ...
As an economist, I am astonished that the American economics profession has no awareness whatsoever that the U.S. economy has been destroyed by the offshoring of U.S. GDP to overseas countries. U.S. corporations, in pursuit of absolute advantage or lowest labor costs and maximum CEO “performance bonuses,” have moved the production of goods and services marketed to Americans to China, India, and elsewhere abroad. When I read economists describe offshoring as free trade based on comparative advantage, I realize that there is no intelligence or integrity in the American economics profession. Intelligence and integrity have been purchased by money. The transnational or global U.S. corporations pay multi-million dollar compensation packages to top managers, who achieve these “performance awards” by replacing U.S. labor with foreign labor. While Washington worries about “the Muslim threat,” Wall Street, U.S. corporations and “free market” shills destroy the U.S. economy and the prospects of tens of millions of Americans. Americans, or most of them, have proved to be putty in the hands of the police state. ...
I was associate editor and columnist for the Wall Street Journal. I was Business Week’s first outside columnist, a position I held for 15 years. I was columnist for a decade for Scripps Howard News Service, carried in 300 newspapers. I was a columnist for the Washington Times and for newspapers in France and Italy and for a magazine in Germany. I was a contributor to the New York Times and a regular feature in the Los Angeles Times. Today I cannot publish in, or appear on, the American “mainstream media.” For the last six years I have been banned from the “mainstream media.” My last column in the New York Times appeared in January, 2004, coauthored with Democratic U.S. Senator Charles Schumer representing New York. We addressed the offshoring of U.S. jobs. Our op-ed article produced a conference at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C. and live coverage by C-Span. A debate was launched. No such thing could happen today. ...
With over 21 per cent unemployment as measured by the methodology of 1980, with American jobs, GDP, and technology having been given to China and India, with war being Washington’s greatest commitment, with the dollar over-burdened with debt, with civil liberty sacrificed to the “war on terror,” the liberty and prosperity of the American people have been thrown into the trash bin of history. The militarism of the U.S. and Israeli states, and Wall Street and corporate greed, will now run their course. As the pen is censored and its might extinguished, I am signing off.
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?
According to our management, this was the way of the world and it was much better to use folks @ 105% then let them sit idle on the bench. Now, I’m no math major, but seems to me that $375K is MORE than $250K? Hmmm, perhaps the model they are using is flawed? NO WAY, IBM never makes Management decisions that are flawed – therefore, we need cheaper staff to get the margins we need, so off-shoring we go. Until the model above changes, guess what, you cost too much! And from what I was told by some more candid managers, there is a lot of pressure to reduce the hourly rates further to get more clients and increase sales, so if I were in India I’d start to worry as well – some emerging markets are cheaper than India these days. -RA'd in 2009-
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.
One of the reasons so many conservative Republican absurdities became actual U.S. policy was the intellectual veneer slapped upon them by right-wing think tanks and commentators. The grossest nonsense was made to seem plausible to a lot of people — people who wanted to believe in a free lunch. When Mr. Reagan told the country that “government is the problem,” the intellectual handmaidens of the corporate and financial elite were right there to explain in exhaustive detail why that was so.
The result, in addition to the terrible consequences of Iraq and Afghanistan and the damage to America’s standing in the world, was the tremendous (and tremendously debilitating) transfer of wealth from working people in the U.S. to the folks already in the upper echelons of wealth and income. The elite made out like bandits — often literally. ...
In 2006, Tamara Draut, Demos’s vice president of policy and programs, wrote a book called “Strapped: Why America’s 20- and 30-Somethings Can’t Get Ahead.” Ms. Draut made the case that the hallmarks of adulthood — from getting an education to buying a home to finding a good job with decent benefits to raising children and beginning to save for retirement — had been eroded by the shortsighted public policies that have prevailed in recent decades. What has been left are just the remnants of the American dream.
The loss of life at Upper Big Branch happened in one horrific instant. The economic collapse has not killed people, but it has gradually destroyed millions of lives. Both calamities occurred because elected officials who should have been creating a regulatory system that protects working families instead created a system that protects the corporations it was meant to watch over.
Just look at the ways in which the New York Times describes the regulatory agency that so atrociously failed the Upper Big Branch miners:
Sound familiar? Most of these conditions were the same ones that led to the housing bubble, credit default swaps, toxic derivatives -- and, by extension, the bank bailout, long-term unemployment with no end in sight, and the rapid acceleration of the decline of America's middle class. The "fundamentally weak" state of America's watchdogs is the deliberate end product of massive amounts of corporate lobbying. In the case of the mining industry, the amount spent by mine owners on lobbyists intent on weakening regulations and widening loopholes has skyrocketed from under $2.5 million in 2003 to $14 million today, with predictable results: profits up; dead miners up.
O.K., I fibbed a bit. Mr. McConnell said almost everything I attributed to him, but he was talking about financial reform, not fire reform. In particular, he was objecting not to the existence of fire departments, but to legislation that would give the government the power to seize and restructure failing financial institutions. But it amounts to the same thing. ...
And let me assure you, Wall Street isn’t lobbying to prevent future bank bailouts. If anything, it’s trying to ensure that there will be more bailouts. By depriving regulators of the tools they need to seize failing financial firms, financial lobbyists increase the chances that when the next crisis strikes, taxpayers will end up paying a ransom to stockholders and executives as the price of avoiding collapse.
Even more important, however, the financial industry wants to avoid serious regulation; it wants to be left free to engage in the same behavior that created this crisis. It’s worth remembering that between the 1930s and the 1980s, there weren’t any really big financial bailouts, because strong regulation kept most banks out of trouble. It was only with Reagan-era deregulation that big bank disasters re-emerged. In fact, relative to the size of the economy, the taxpayer costs of the savings and loan disaster, which unfolded in the Reagan years, were much higher than anything likely to happen under President Obama.
To understand what’s really at stake right now, watch the looming fight over derivatives, the complex financial instruments Warren Buffett famously described as “financial weapons of mass destruction.” The Obama administration wants tighter regulation of derivatives, while Republicans are opposed. And that tells you everything you need to know.
So don’t be fooled. When Mitch McConnell denounces big bank bailouts, what he’s really trying to do is give the bankers everything they want.
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.