According to a filing with the SEC, Big Blue says it reduced headcount by more than 12 percent, or some 50,000, to under 380,000 from 431,000.
Rometty, who took over as CEO in January of 2012, is not finished, either. IBM has seen revenue drop for 11 consecutive quarters as Rometty restructures Big Blue in her image. "The company continues to remix its skills and resource needs to match the best opportunities in the marketplace," the filing reads. ...
How many workers remain on the IBM payroll in the U.S. and North Carolina is not known outside the company. IBM stopped disclosing by-country work totals in 2010 and also has not disclosed a work force total in North Carolina for several years. IBM cited competitive reasons for not disclosing headcount totals. Alliance at IBM, the union seeking to represent IBM workers, estimated that the company had some 7,500 employees in North Carolina before the x86 sale, which closed last fall. ...
According to the Alliance, IBM is estimated to have had 83,000 U.S. workers in 2014, down more than 5,000 from its estimate for 2013. U.S. workers fell under 100,000 in 2011 to an estimated 98,000. In 2000, IBM had nearly 154,000 U.S. employees, the company said at that time. ...
"38,000 resources" affected. In the annual report filed with the SEC, IBM disclosed the lower numbers far inside the lengthy document (page 73), the bulk of which focused on updated financial information and a lengthy narrative about Rometty's strategy for 2015 and beyond.
Big Blue lists employees as "resources."
IBM said the work force changes reflect the company's "shift" to "higher value segments of enterprise IT [information technology.]" More changes are coming, the report added, saying it "continues to remix its skills and resource needs."
It has done so - since its initial inception - with a focus on cash, culture and stakeholder mutualism. ...
2015: A cash-rich, cultural-poor corporation: Louis V. Gerstner is to be credited with financially saving IBM. He attempts in his book, though, to cast the aura of that success over his cultural changes. History should credit him with the former but discredit the later. In a watershed event for all United States based employees in 1999 he enforced his shareholder-first philosophy with changes in the IBM pension plan (these changes would eventually roll out worldwide and broaden to impact upper-level executives). At the IBM 2000 shareholder meeting he reflected his single-minded shareholder-only perspective to his audience, "We cannot do any more without putting IBM's competitiveness at risk."
Samuel J. Palmisano, his successor, took the next logical step. Where Tom Watson Jr. spent $5,000,000,000 - almost 10 times IBM's 1964 profits - on people, products and processes, the 21st Century IBM has spent an equivalent 10 times its 2013 earnings on paper - $158,000,000,000 on its own stock. Mr. Palmisano just extended Mr. Gerstner's shareholder-first strategy to shareholder-only.
IBM is in cultural trouble. It knows this but refuses to acknowledge it and take action. In its 2010 Corporate Responsibility Report its marketing organization turned a negative into a positive - making a Global Pulse Survey result of 65% employee satisfaction sound good while ignoring its 30 point drop since 1986. It failed to publish the most negative aspects or even compare itself with the industry's best. That is an interesting approach for a responsibility report.
Instead, in the same report, IBM announced it will begin, "implementing a more contemporary approach" to employee surveys. Although IBM is gathering metrics, it has yet to elaborate - now, four years later - on this methodology. Only Glassdoor holds it accountable. Unfortunately, there are few methodologies short of not asking that could put a positive spin on the IBM employee-owner morale. So, maybe it is better that they not ask.
As Opel did Akers no favors, neither did Palmisano, Rometty. But she, like Akers, has continued the body blows to IBM's culture: the resource actions of Gerstner and Palmisano continue, extracting the final vestiges of value from IBM's retirement plans continue, and - ever so reminiscent of Akers - blaming poor revenue growth on her salesmen rather than on IBM's executive leadership and the poorly prioritized investments of her predecessor.
Today consumer man, worker man, investor man, and the community of man fight over scraps left by the antithesis of service-to-man: the me-first and -only man. The Watsons' ecosystem of mutualism - finding that difficult balance between the varied needs of all aspects of man to their mutual benefit - is long dead.
Selected reader comments follow:
I think you misunderstand how software companies operate and generate earnings. It is not only because there is a messiah called CEO making good decisions. It requires a cast of characters functioning at 100% or as close as possible. And don't let me start on IBM's application infrastructure.
They have the most antiquated internal systems, with constant failures. When our company was first acquired we continued using most of our own systems for a while email and instant messaging functions were almost never down. Once we were integrated into IBM systems, we started having all kinds of outages, sometimes lasting more than one day.
We also discovered that the same systems, Lotus specifically, were the butt of internal jokes amongst the long-time IBM employees, and worse yet, amongst some upline managers and program directors.
That is not counting moving from reliable HP laptops to Lenovo's with everyone on my team and other manager's teams having at least one complete failure of their laptops, having to wait for days at a time waiting for replacement until management agreed that we needed to keep a number of spares around. In my 40+ years in the computer industry, I had never witnessed such a disaster.
Our software technical customer support used an app form Salesforce to work with customers. Once converted over, we went to an antiquated IBM app that dated back to the 1970's, with multiple face lifts and now running under Lotus. Every time Lotus was down which was often, employees had to use a very inefficient "green screen" CICS interface to "try" to serve customers. One reason we were given for this lack of progress in improving these internal systems was that it would be nearly impossible to maintain current monthly-quarterly operations reports that the execs liked. Still with the current systems, there are people assigned to manually consolidate a lot of data from several apps to produce the said reports. Ever heard of being caught in the mud and being unable to change.
So you are correct in saying that giving an increase and additional vacation will not resolve IBM's morale problems. Because employees unlike many shareholders are not only focused on the immediate return but on the ability to do the best job they can.
I can give you another story about the employee environment. IBM supplies laptop to employees, because they come with a built in monitor, IBM does not provide a monitor. It is up to the employee if he/she wants to purchase a monitor. When you work all day in front of a monitor, sometimes have to use multiple sessions... a laptop monitor is inadequate. Now, I will give you that some department managers will buy monitors, but not all. Is that enough caring about employees on the part of the corporation?
As for all the tooting of the patents, I heard from some developers that were working on apps that are about 15-20 years old, still in much use, being given goals in their PBC (performance evaluation system used at IBM) to generate at least one patent in 2013. To keep their job, I am sure they did, but I question the value of such patents. As a matter of fact, for all the patents IBM is creating, very little new organic revenue has been generated.
After we were fully integrated into IBM, we continued to provide free coffee to our employees, to save them the time to go get coffee at the cafeteria. After about a year, this was cancelled as it was not offered in other IBM locations. Instead of taking 5 minutes to grab coffee, it now became a 15-20 minute trip to a different building. Penny wise and pound foolish.
We the managers decided that we would buy commercial grade Keurig machines (that we paid out-of-pocket) and IBM agreed to pay for installation and allow our employees to bring their own coffee. Ridiculous in two ways. The cost of offering coffee, tea, hot chocolate for free is easily offset by the time saved by employee. The way the employees are looking at it is "you gotta be kidding me, what next?".
So, in short, IBM has a lot of places where it could spend the cash it used to buyback shares to make the company more efficient and better for the future, probably allowing them to reduce workforce in future, but it chooses not to invest in itself, only to satisfy a few shareholders.
I could go on a long time about the inefficiencies that could use some investment to correct. That is all aside from market/product strategy, but if they cannot even see these internal problems, what else can they not see?
In 2011 IBMers when faced with a statement in their global surveys "People are rewarded according to performance," responded greater than 60% negative or neutral. The I.T. industry best in this area responded at greater than 65% favorable. I can only assume it has gotten worse since IBM gathers the data but doesn't talk about the results. It, as I have said on many occasions, has removed the data from its corporate responsibility reports starting in 2010. Saying "bonuses are flowing to employees" is much different than the working reality within IBM.
As investors received forecasts about IBM’s long-term future, the stock is down 20% in the past two years. Over the same period, the S&P 500 has risen 39%. Rometty made her new forecasts at the tech firm’s annual meeting.
Among Rometty’s predictions is that a very modest investment of about $4 billion this year will help drive revenue of $40 billion in the cloud, mobile, analytics software and social communications areas by 2018. She forecast that two in five dollars of IBM revenue will come from these initiatives by then. Based on IBM’s recent track record, and the extent to which the industries in which it wants to compete are very crowded, the predictions have little chance of succeeding.
IBM rarely, if ever, discusses the hurdles in its way. Among those are the leading technology firms in the world, which have already staked large positions in the fields IBM has targeted. Many of these companies have revenue of $50 billion or more and balance sheets with billions of dollars of cash. Among the best examples is Microsoft Corp., which has bet much of its future on the cloud, and it claims to already be wildly successful. Also, Oracle Corp. recently announced quarterly revenue of $9.6 billion and net income of $2.5 billion. ...
Rometty continues a habit of making claims about how IBM can be turned around, while not a single one of the important claims have come through. IBM’s shareholders need to prepare for another period in the wilderness between now and 2018.
The Employee Consultation Committee for Systems Middleware staffers working in Platform, Integration or Smarter Process units was formed last week and its first meeting has already been held.
The minutes of that session, seen by The Channel, suggest IBM is aiming to push 70 people, or 10 per cent of the SM division, to willingly walk from the building with an “anticipated exit date of 5 April”.
“IBM has opened the discussions with proposals of addressing the business pressures through a voluntary redundancy programme. The pressures are driven by business transformation and the recognition of potentially lower margin,” the document stated. ...
Some of the voluntary redundancy offers already run at IBM were heavily over-subscribed, with Global Business Services looking for several hundred people to leave but seeing upwards of 600 staffers applying.
It’s the second straight annual drop for IBM’s workforce, the first two-year decline since 1993 and 1994 when the company was pushed to the edge of bankruptcy. Rometty has been seeking to transform International Business Machines Corp. to keep up with newer competitors in an industry undergoing what she’s called “unprecedented change.”
IBM had 379,592 employees at the end of 2014, down 12 percent from a year earlier when the company posted the first decline in a decade, according to a filing Tuesday. Excluding a 35,000 reduction from divestitures, headcount fell about 3.9 percent last year. ...
To help boost earnings-per-share, Rometty has fired and furloughed workers, cut IBM’s tax rate and bought back shares. She has also offloaded less-profitable business units last year, like the low-end server business sold to Lenovo Group Ltd., a customer-care business and the chip-making unit, which IBM paid Globalfoundries Inc. $1.5 billion to take off its hands. ...
That reorganization has also included firings, with IBM spending more than $1.5 billion on restructuring its workforce last year. In the fourth quarter, a $580 million charge for “workforce rebalancing” equated to the firing of “several thousand people,” the company said last month.
With a change in its severance package last year, IBM has also made it more difficult and riskier for dismissed older employees to decide whether it’s worth pursuing age-discrimination claims. The move also allowed the company to withhold data on job titles and ages of workers being let go -- information that has been released for at least a decade and helped people glean how many employees were dismissed.
In a media briefing ahead of an investor conference in New York on Thursday, Virginia Rometty said the company plans that the new tech markets should make up 40 percent of IBM's business, or $40 billion, in the next 4 years. That's up from 13 percent five years ago and 27 percent by the end of this year.
Once the dominant PC-maker known as "Big Blue," IBM is confronting a sales slump as it struggles to adapt to big changes in the way businesses buy software and other commercial technology. It issued another disappointing earnings report in January, as both revenue and profit fell in the December quarter.
No. 1. The enterprise tech world is changing faster than she thought it would. ...
No. 2. She wasn't watching how consumer technology was invading the workplace. Rometty didn't predict how consumer tech was being brought to work, giving employees increasing control over what apps they use and how they want to work. ...
When Rometty bailed on Roadmap 2015, she sent the stock into a tailspin from which it has yet to recover. We argued at the time that giving up this goal was ultimately good for the company. IBM needed to stop killing itself with layoffs and financial maneuvering to hit an arbitrary profit number at an arbitrary time. It needed to be focused on the land grab going on in the hot new enterprise markets that were quickly overtaking the stalwarts like IBM. ...
Selected reader comments follow:
In response to Rometty's cloud strategy; it is impossible to be competitive in cloud services with front-end investments. The nature of cloud is to spin up and deliver services on demand or as sold. It is of no competitive advantage to build an infrastructure and then sell the space. Moore's law punishes all investments in all on-deck investments. The service providers that figure out how to make the fastest and most granular incremental growth in cloud infrastructure are the only ones that will survive.
"Ginni, your Mea Culpa is so phony. You and the rest of the senior management team are presented an annual "GTO" (General Technology Outlook) that looks forward several years where IBM should position itself. 200+ people spend several thousand hours working on this and demos of technology to show how IBM can address the future.
In addition you and the rest of the senior management team are given monthly or bi-monthly "TT's" (Technology Transfers) again many people spending much time preparing boiled down education sessions so you can give the pretense of knowing what you are talking about.
Having been involved with both over recent years, YOU WERE TOLD about coming technology changes. As the article points out:
- "No. 1. The enterprise tech world is changing faster than she thought it would", and,
- "No. 2. She wasn't watching how consumer technology was invading the workplace."
means that you were asleep at the wheel, not paying attention to what was presented to you. Bob Cringely and Peter Greulich would have a fun time if they dig into GTO and TT process and contents."
According to this, she knew (or should have known) exactly what was trending in the tech world as did all the top executives in the company. They are more interested in financial engineering than innovation, laying off thousands of talented people and listening to bean counters has put this company into a death spiral. New leadership is needed.
Pros: Working behind a well known company. Lots of training available. All jib related certifications are paid for. Many employees have been with the company for a long time. They have lots of experience to share.
Cons: Having survived the last round of layoffs, I've come to find out that no job at IBM is safe. The company is not employee focused anymore. It's more about cutting costs (i.e. employees) if shares are down. Being a newer guy with the company has felt like I have a target on my back because older guys think I was hired to replace them.
Advice to Senior Management: Think about cutting out some of the upper management and reduce their insane salaries and focus on innovation instead of share value.
Pros: 40% of staff are great people (medium ranked professionals) but eager to assist colleagues.
Cons: 60% of staff (managers mostly included) are rude, quite untrusted, always lie to their clients and to their colleagues. All kinds of Reports and Metrics that are used in everyday job, are "just for laughs".
People have to produce reports (serious ones) by hand, with no use of any inn-house tools.
Company product know-how is simply nonexistent. Upper management is interested in just selling products and pocket the money.
No salary increases. Everybody is recruited as IT Experts, paid with "peanuts" and are actually ranked in the bottomless ranking tower. Every now and then they perform appraisals, which most of the time do not constitute a professional's actual corporate image. Let alone that if a professional stands up for himself towards his manager, he will most likely get sacked after 2-3 months.
People who constantly ask their managers to assist them in order to gain further education in specific sectors, usually get an answer like "You are way too expensive for us and a training is out of the groups' budget for this year".
People who find their own way round to get certified in various sectors are mostly loathed and put to war within the "local tribe".
Advice to Senior Management: What management?
Pros: Still tremendous resources, which applied properly make IBM an employment to be sought after. Infrastructure, support and many of the people are the brightest and best. It is a world wide presence unmatched in the computer industry and still develops and builds some of the best super computers, without which the communications and IT infrastructure as has been known for today's "cloudy" world would be impossible.
Cons: What is best for the customer is often second. Too many layers of management. There is also a mole very high in the management chain that leaks information to the media that either is dead on accurate, but found out by the employees via that media first and not the company, OR, which the company can selectively contradict and soften resource action negativity by not being as large in numbers as originally leaked.
Advice to Senior Management: Return to being at your core about international business MACHINES, or change your name. And then get rid of about 6 layers of upper management to streamline operations and cut costs where they would have the most impact. Reread over and over Thomas Watson, Jr.'s book "A Business and its Beliefs-The ideas that helped build IBM".
Pros: Great company to work for those that are interested in career development. There is a lot to learn. Work flexibility home versus office is available upon request. Having a fitness center is the best.
Cons: IBM stands for "I'm by myself" very hard to get things done. Very complicated company to work for; lots of politics. If you know people within the company you will achieve great things while others don't. Managers only hire their friends to collect on referral bonus.
Not keen on rewarding hard work, as they are slowly moving the inside group back to PSP (Pool System Payment) where no matter how well you do towards your goal your commission check still depends on how the organization does for the quarter. Management can still use their discretion to position you in the pool.
Advice to Senior Management: Focus on what's important, not on the unnecessary tasks and endless reports. A better CRM would help; "SalesConnect" is still not doing the intended job.
Pros: Exposure to technology, heavy sales environment in services division where you are pressured to sell IBM technology.
Cons: Too many, but too many layers of management and bureaucracy at IBM with a ruthless focus on billing productivity above even impacting customer mission. It is terrible here. They should not be in services at all.
Advice to Senior Management: Get out of services, you are conflicted by nature as a technology provider.
Pros: The people are not any more exceptional than any other company, but there are a lot of them which means there is usually someone who can (and will) help. IBM does have a lot of processes and procedures still in place from the 'good old days' so there are flexible work options and supportive time off policies for family crises. There is lots of training on offer (but see below). Pension contributions are better than average (but see below). Poor management actually means you can be left to use your initiative quite a lot (but see below).
Cons: Training: almost all e-training now, much of what is on offer is poor quality video or audio recordings of people not skilled in presenting material. Embarrassing how often these internal training sessions lose the network or can't transfer sharing the screen to someone else; or (worst) feature some executive with absolutely nothing to say, but taking 40 minutes to say it. Often these latter are mandatory and of course everybody switches them on and goes and makes a coffee.
Ten years ago IBM had a planned annual process where you agreed training with your manager, obtained quality training (because it was in your plan); now you are presented with HOURS and HOURS of mandatory dross put together cheaply to let our CEO think we are all being trained in the latest technology.
Pensions quality has been driven down and down (court cases still being heard on this), so although it is better than average, don't expect it to stay that way.
Everything that can be sold or cut seems to have been in a desperate attempt to hit Sam Palmisano's ill-judged promise to hit $20 by 2015 revenue. It was obvious to most people a while ago it wasn't going to happen. Executives took a loooooooonnnng time to wake up and cancel that impossible dream.
You have a lot of leeway due to hands off management; but this is largely because no manager seems to want to say/write/do anything that they could be judged for later, so they sit on their hands stay silent.
From all of the above you might not be surprised to learn that morale is lower than low. New starter graduates might find it quite an exciting environment, most will move on when they fail to get a rise for 5 years.
Redundancies are now an annual tradition, a big re-org this year is mostly moving the deck chairs on the Titanic. I'm afraid and has had the effect of freezing any decision making process for several months as no manager wants to be responsible for deciding anything they might be held culpable for later.
Advice to Senior Management: Upper management thinks renaming the products and moving the chairs around is enough. It really is time to listen to your staff rather than dictate to them. It's time to explain rather than threaten. And it is definitely time to prune the upper reaches thoroughly, the workers have been cut and cut, but the senior staff just keep cloning more vice-presidents.
Pros: Prestigious name recognition for the average person. Company protects the "brand name" at all costs. Dividend checks are nice but at what cost (low wages, layoffs, business unit sell-off, stagnant innovation).
Cons: Internal turmoil, unhappy customers, disgruntled employees, job-scared work environment. Many layoffs have occurred and the layoffs will only continue. It is inevitable. Business unit sell offs and closings. Current company leadership is clueless regarding how to "right the ship".
Advice to Senior Management: Stop wasting the shareholder's money on the "SMARTER PLANET" television commercials that are only designed to bolster the IBM corporate image. Start living the so-called corporate values and employee morale might turn around. Ginni Rometty and her confidants have got to go.
Pros: Saying I worked for IBM for a year looks good on my resume.
Cons: Clunky, outdated virtual infrastructure; excessive numbers of outsourced employees (most of whom hardly speak English); peeling paint, filthy walls and floors, broken plumbing with open sewage (for over a year); no available drinking water in the building. For a multi-million dollar, international corporation, IBM has to be one of the 'cheapest' companies I've ever worked for. Seriously, they'll even charge you for a napkin and a plastic fork in the employee break room!
Advice to Senior Management: Way too many upper level managers, and none of them seem to have a clue about IBM's internal organization beyond their own specific department.
Pros: There were some "pros" many years back but not any more. Lots of slogan shouting senior management with no contribution towards revenue generation, client delivery, or technical innovation. They are plain email shooters and spreadsheet movers.
Cons: 8+ layer of executive management, very top heavy and fat organization. Hardly agile and nimble which current CEO is trying to push.
Advice to Senior Management: Reduce the management fat, raise the employee morale by reducing emphasis on 130% utilization, re-skill the workforce to drive the new agenda which the company is striving for. Make salary more competitive and earmark meaningful profits toward employee training.
Pros: IBM looks good on your resume. IBM hires smart people.
Cons: Lack of Integrity (lying to/overcharging clients); poor values/focus (partners are greedy); can't innovate (look at their cloud business); thug/intimidation tactics (like program manager screaming at staff); resources are widgets not people; poor communication; clueless who on the team is working and who is pawning off their work.
Advice to Senior Management: Too much is wrong to salvage. Best left to continue its slow death.
Pros: Great people, very bright and lots of R&D. Health and 401K are very good, except that they moved to giving the company match only at the end of the year — so either you stay and get it or you loose it. You also loose the benefit of investing through the year instead of one day. Flexibility is great and IBM knows how to get work done, irrespective of where you are (home, beach, office).
Cons: Employees are not given good incentives and growth opportunities are not even. Too much work for very little monetary rewards. Some have been lucky to be in positions that have great rewards.
Advice to Senior Management: It's not all about the stock market price. Look within.
Pros: Lots of creative freedom. Great work/life balance. Empowered engineering team. Lots of satisfaction of many products that are in production. Server group satisfaction high.
Cons: Old building, old practices, bad cafeteria, old phones/printers/projectors etc. Poor bonuses, slightly bad salaries.
Advice to Senior Management: Please don't scrimp on things like lunches for employees and $100 travel; you are not going to make shortfalls of billions by making the employees feel unwanted.
Pros: The technical writing community is an amazing group of people who are willing to help each other. Plus, there are a lot of innovative documentation strategies being worked on.
Cons: It's no secret that IBM hasn't been doing well. As such, more and more people are leaving to take better paying jobs at other companies. As they leave, replacements aren't hired so the workload keeps growing. The stacked ranking system is absolutely ridiculous. After years of losing employees, everyone left is amazing, and to have some people fall to the bottom sure doesn't make people want to do more. Morale is at an all-time low.
Advice to Senior Management: Hire more people, and treat the people who you do have decently. Give employees bonuses and raises when you give yourselves bonuses and raises.
Pros: Rotates you to different client projects, giving you lots of exposure in different technology and industry and challenge your ability to thrive in fast paced environment.
Cons: Get prepared to work on underestimated projects which demands to meet the project baseline like mission impossible. Always need to work with a newly-formed team (and with offshore under-skilled resources) meaning that every time you start from zero.
Advice to Senior Management: The project delivery approach really needs to move to a more industrial solution based and having a more strategic talent management solution to make business more repeatable and sustainable. They need to position themselves to be more transformation partner rather than transaction based.
Pros: You may well be able to work from home, but, at some point you will be replaced with a lower cost offshore employee.
Cons: The expectations constantly increase while benefits decrease while the most talented leave and the most senior, most expensive are laid off.
Pros: Offers excellent work life balance and a chance to work with the brightest in the industry. Smart leader at the helm.
Cons: No career growth; frequent layoffs; insecurity; bonuses and pay hikes are jokes on employees; too process oriented and clique driven; job promotions and changes only; each division is an island on its own; not a place for minorities or immigrants; treats off-shore resources derisively; executive and management are uncaring and dangerously awful.
Advice to Senior Management: Leave, make room for new blood.
Advice to Senior Management: Value and treat employees as an asset instead of a liability.
My proudest achievement in life, apart from my children, and Rudy the Shih-Tzu, has been growing up in IBM and meeting all you wonderful, talented, intelligent, compassionate, loyal, hard working friends. Some of you I know, some of you I don't know. This does not matter.
My health is not great so I have been absent from posting but following along yours, and of course keeping up with IBM in the press. I did post to glassdoor.com, my post appears on February 20th where I hope I acknowledged all of my friends and colleagues around the world at IBM. It was brutally honest.
I also hope I acknowledged the tireless work of the Alliance for IBM and all the wonderful people who have been looking out for our best interests for years. Respectfully, -Deb Kelly, Proud Alliance@IBM member-
Throughout the process you should arrange weekly reviews with your FLM to discuss your process and document your results. Again if your FLM is not prepared to do this then this should feed into your decision making process. Do not leave everything to the last minute and if you can achieve goals early, do so and concentrate on the next goals. Of course, as an at will employee, this could all be irrelevant. But if they are looking to get rid of you as quick as possible then surely a 30-day PIP would have been preferable for their purpose.
The only chance to change any of this process and PBC's is to join the Alliance; US IBMers not doing so are like turkeys voting for Thanksgiving, but hoping a wave of vegetarianism will save them. Cheers n Beers -Sean-
Worst case scenario: 2 adults + 6 kids PPO+ premiums of $17,328/year with $300/$600 deductible with $27,000 max out of pocket. Even individual max out of pockets are $15,000/year. IBM must be paying well for employees to take risks like that? Consider an illness in December and January (double these numbers); I wouldn't go near IBM with a ten foot pole. I'd high tail it out of there even with a lower paying job. Good employers are limiting family premiums to $3500; deductibles $500 and max out of pocket $5K range. Worst case. You are paying IBM to work there. -Unbelievable-
Most managers don't understand this, so make sure it's done correctly. When I was RA'd, my manager assumed that since vacation isn't banked anymore, the automatic entry for carried over vacation should be zero. When I later found the correct answer on W3, he vaguely recalled hearing something about that when they went through RA training. But, because he had already submitted the paperwork, he won't put through a change. -RAtired-
In general, I believe you would not be placed on a PIP if your manager intended to keep you around. If that was the case, your manager would have been coaching you throughout the year so that you reached your GDP goals. I have seen employees placed on PIP as a "wake-up call" that their performance is an issue. From the cases I observed, those employees were actually once great employees that were suffering from personal problems that affected their work. Their managers were actually trying to help them throughout the year but that help was falling on deaf ears. The PIP was used to alert them to the seriousness of the situation. -Anonymous-
The PBC says that I agreed I could not improve my performance in a timely manner and as such I did not need to review the PBC. I never agreed to anything and how can they just stop you from reviewing? I have requested that the PBC be reopened and I be allowed to comment.
-2015 Round 2- The word has been going around that another shedding of employees will happen in 60 days and it is not those th The word has been going around that another shedding of employees will happen in 60 days and it is not those that have been given RA date through to June. This is supposedly a fresh round of RAs. -LastDayATIBM-
Alliance reply: We have our platform and some of our action plans at the top of this page. We certainly are not going to put everything on this site so IBM can see it. The main thing we are missing and which is vital to move this forward are people willing to step forward and publicly organize. Are you willing to do that? If so contact us at email@example.com. We need multiple chapters of the Alliance nationwide. Remember, the Alliance has lost people too with all the job cuts. We need to rebuild in some locations.
As for the Alliance and the website I have just given a donation and would really suggest that others do the same as it has been a source of generally reliable information which otherwise I would not have obtained. I really don't understand why Americans don't join the union other than you are living in a climate of fear and what a sad way to live that is. If that is your reason then it is very sad and it's no way to win.
If you think that unions are only for uneducated blue collar workers then you are believing a fantasy. The white collar workers have become the easiest to exploit, there must be some books on that topic. When I was young I was educated by the Jesuits. One priest used to open his masses with a dedication "to those who live in fear". A prayer for you all! -Away From Fear-
Quite agree! But, I think IBM is a machine that has no clue on surgical precision. If so, IBM would heal and mend itself. IBM just gets more and more unhealthy. IBM management just does lobotomies to its business these days and botched ones at that. If RAs really help the IBM business and grow revenue and EPS, then where is the revenue and EPS growth? Profits are just cost cutting tactics to IBM. Stock buybacks are not true earnings. Revenue is something IBM has absolutely no handle on now. -da_facts-
More broadly, I disdained unions as bringing corruption, nepotism and rigid work rules to the labor market, impeding the economic growth that ultimately makes a country strong.
I was wrong.
The abuses are real. But, as unions wane in American life, it’s also increasingly clear that they were doing a lot of good in sustaining middle class life — especially the private-sector unions that are now dwindling. ...
I’ve also changed my mind because, in recent years, the worst abuses by far haven’t been in the union shop but in the corporate suite. One of the things you learn as a journalist is that when there’s no accountability, we humans are capable of tremendous avarice and venality. That’s true of union bosses — and of corporate tycoons. Unions, even flawed ones, can provide checks and balances for flawed corporations.
Many Americans think unions drag down the economy over all, but scholars disagree. American auto unions are often mentioned, but Germany’s car workers have a strong union, and so do Toyota’s in Japan and Kia’s in South Korea.
In Germany, the average autoworker earns about $67 per hour in salary and benefits, compared with $34 in the United States. Yet Germany’s car companies in 2010 produced more than twice as many vehicles as American companies did, and they were highly profitable. It’s too glib to say that the problem in the American sector was just unions.
Or look at American history. The peak years for unions were the 1940s and ’50s, which were also some of the fastest-growing years for the United States ever — and with broadly shared prosperity. Historically, the periods when union membership were highest were those when inequality was least. ...
Richard B. Freeman, a Harvard labor expert, notes that unions sometimes bring important benefits to industry: They can improve morale, reduce turnover and provide a channel to suggest productivity improvements. ...
It may be that as unions weakened, executives sometimes grabbed the gains from productivity. Perhaps that helps explain why chief executives at big companies earned, on average, 20 times as much as the typical worker in 1965, and 296 times as much in 2013, according to the Economic Policy Institute.
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.