In a correspondence dated April 16, Grassley asked IBM Chairwoman, President and CEO Virginia Rometty for an explanation of IBM's apparent plans to "hire thousands of H-1B visa holders." Grassley's concern arose when IBM petitioned for 5,800 H-1B visas on April 1.
"It has come to my attention that IBM will be laying off employees in the United States this year while at the same time apparently seeking to hire thousands of H-1B visa holders," the letter states. ...
Grassley told TH Media on Monday that U.S. companies have not always followed the spirit or the letter of the law.
"Since it was passed, (the program) has been based on the assumption that whenever we are short of labor, we want to help these companies get help where they need it," Grassley explained. "We have found situations where that wasn't the case." ...
Clint Roswell, director of external communications for IBM North America, defended the company's use of foreign workers in an email statement to TH Media:
"In order to serve the evolving technology needs of clients in high-growth areas such as cloud computing, data analytics, mobile, social and security, IBM and the tech industry must utilize a global talent pool. Today, there simply are not enough American workers with expertise in these areas to fill the thousands of U.S. job openings IBM currently has available," Roswell stated. ...
IBM informed workers in late January of a "permanent mass layoff event" of 202 employees at the company's Dubuque facility, which became effective Feb. 27, according to documents submitted to the state.
Rick Dickinson, president and CEO of Greater Dubuque Development Corp., estimated at the time that the move dropped IBM's employment in Dubuque to between 600 and 650 workers -- about half of the jobs the company reached during its peak employment of 1,300 in the fall of 2011.
Lee Conrad, national coordinator of Alliance@IBM, a union representing some IBM workers, said IBM has been using foreign worker visas to fill positions vacated by American workers for years. ,,,
Conrad, meanwhile, said Alliance@IBM has received reports of layoffs to take effect at the Dubuque facility at the end of June.
Grassley said Monday he has not heard back from IBM since issuing his letter. His letter asks IBM to respond to his inquiries by April 29.
“I can’t hear.”
“I can’t see you.”
“Is this on?”
When the January presentation ended, Ms. Rometty fumed at colleagues, “We’re only the IBM Company—we’re better than this,” according to people who were there. “Get this fixed now!”
That is a directive Ms. Rometty is giving a lot these days as she tries to reinvent the nearly 104-year-old icon while it continues a yearslong slump. International Business Machines Corp.’s sales for 12 straight quarters have fallen from the year-earlier quarter. ...
At the design lab, IBM’s team showed Ms. Rometty a demonstration on a large flat screen showing a real-time view of corporate hacking around the world. IBM is designing a security product, code-named “X-Force,” in which businesses share intelligence on security threats. “Fellow CEOs,” she told her team, “will see the values I do and want on this platform.”
She dropped in on a group of young IBM developers, some with tattoos and piercings, who are responsible for IBM’s new email offering, called Verse. A team leader promised to hit a year’s-end rollout target.
At that, Ms. Rometty pivoted sharply on her high heels. “No, no, no! Too slow,” she interjected. “What can I do to help you move faster?”
Speed is of the essence, she says later, because the industry is fast moving. But remaking a company IBM’s size can be complex: “I have trained my life to fly a 747. That is way different than piloting a two-prop engine plane.” ...
Ms. Rometty is relentless in pushing staff. Jeff Smith, an IBM vice president, says he was at a Starbucks with his baseball cap pulled low on a recent Saturday morning and didn’t think Ms. Rometty, who lives near him, would notice him.
She made a bee-line for him, tea in hand, lifted his cap and asked: “What are we doing to change the company?”
Selected reader comments follow:
Rometty says “We’re only the IBM Company—we’re better than this.” They may be the only IBM, but it's not the same IBM that was once a world leader, an innovator and a progressively productive company. Its people like Rometty who ascend to a corporate position that they are not competent to hold. It used to be called the "Peter Principle". I guess we can also call it the "Priscilla principal!
Longevity at a firm and company cultural affinity is no substitute for leadership and creativity. Rometty needs to be replaced and IBM needs to get off its high, but old horse and mount one that can run to win!
This is just one example of what is wrong with IBM. They have a line of business that was profitable and competitive, but they've let it languish, and it becomes unprofitable and not competitive. Rather than fix it, they dump it and move on to something else and repeat the process. Now they've almost run out of things they can't do. They can't do disk drives anymore. Or tape drives. Or PCs. Or printers. So they offshore jobs, they lay off experienced people.
"We’re better than this.” No, you're not better than this. This is exactly who you are, and you are just the latest in a long line of incompetent and grossly overpaid pretenders
How does a company the size of IBM (or HP for that matter) re-kindle the fires of innovation? That's the real question, and, as far as I know, it's never been done before.
Unfortunately, nothing in this excellent article shows IBM is on the path back to innovation. A new email service? Puh-lease! (1995 called; they want their business model back.)
2) The article mentions she "grabbed the elbow" and got in the face of a male analyst while she was arguing with him. Hmm. If a male CEO did the same thing to a female analyst - how long do you think it would take for the media to flay him and for the board to fire him?
All the other platforms mentioned in the article - cloud, analytics, etc - are in nearly the same boat: there are already established offerings in each of these spaces, and no one is desperate for an IBM product.
IBM needs to offer innovation, and they need to offer it 'in size' as the say on the street. So far that's not happening.
I don't think Ms. Rometty has the right vision as their current approach is just to follow the crowd and buy competing products. From what I have seen they have lost too much ground to competitors and will be hard to gain ground as equivalent IBM products are relatively more expensive to implement.
It takes years for cuts in quality to show up as loss of sales. The quality cuts started almost 10 years ago but just translated into customer loss in the last three. It's very hard to recover from a loss of reputation.
In my opinion, after working there for 11 years, IBM's biggest problem is that the executives do not realize that it takes talented staff to accomplish goals. The employees that actually do the work are entirely replaceable, numbers on a chart. No need to motivate, they can always find someone cheaper to do it. It's like the anti-Google (who seems to work hard to keep employees engaged). Everything in this article only reinforced that view, as it paints Rometty as someone who thinks she can fix the company by cracking skulls.
IBM lost its way as a technology company under Sam Palmisano and became a financial engineering company.
The worst part is instead of firing 6 layers of VPs, they have demoted some excellent Distinguished Engineers which has been devastating for morale. Can't be a Tech winner by demoralizing the best technologists you have.
In the past few months, IBM has rolled out innovation after promising innovation. The company launched an analytics tool for the healthcare industry based on its Watson artificial-intelligence platform. Watson tools for other industries are on tap, and meanwhile Watson has written a cookbook.
IBM is also building a cloud platform for the Internet of things that companies can use to make sense of data collected from far-flung sensors embedded in a wide variety of devise. The company not only announced its Hybrid Cloud–meshing IBM’s own cloud with a client’s on-premise machines–it signed the US Army up as a key customer. Oh, and it’s building new computers that mimic the human brain. ...
This all sounds encouraging, but now look at the first-quarter earnings report IBM delivered on Monday. Revenue fell 12% year-over-year to $19.6 billion and came in $100 million shy of analysts’ consensus forecast. That marked the 12th straight quarter of falling revenue and the eighth time in the last nine quarters that IBM missed its revenue estimate. In fact, it was IBM’s lowest quarterly revenue since the first quarter of 2002. ...
How can IBM have so many promising technologies and such a weak financial performance? The answer is a classic innovator’s dilemma, in which successful companies struggle to stay atop their industries as they face newer, more efficient technologies and business models that slowly drain life from their cash cows. ...
The catch is that areas like cloud-based services are growing because they’re cheaper, lither versions of the legacy services IBM and others have depended on for profits. In a conference call discussing earnings Monday, CFO Martin Schroeter talked about “a pretty dramatic shift of spending within IBM… Some of what you’re seeing in that core business decline is that engineered shift toward the strategic imperatives.”
IBM saw its revenue decrease across every reporting segment, but that wasn't entirely due to lack of customer demand, and there were some bright spots. One significant item that affected IBM's results this quarter was an approximately $870m charge for "workforce rebalancing." That's layoffs to you, and the charge was taken across multiple reporting groups. ...
Revenue for the company's all-important services businesses, meanwhile, looked gloomy. Global Technology Services saw its revenue decline 10.9 per cent from the year-ago period, to $7.89bn. Global Business Services, on the other hand, brought in $4.32bn in revenue, a 13 per cent decline.
Throughout the festivities, one number came through loud and clear: 800.
"We anticipate creation of up to 800 jobs by 2012," Tim Shaughnessy, then-senior vice president for IBM’s Global Technology Service, told the crowd gathered outside the Daniel Boone City Building.
In May 2011, Shaughnessy reiterated that the goal was to employ 800 in Columbia by the end of 2012, and he made the additional promise that half of the jobs would come by the end of 2011.
By the end of 2011, however, the service center employed 338 people, according to annual employment records IBM submits to the state. By the end of 2012, it reported employing 513. ...
In 2014, IBM's global workforce declined by 12 percent, its revenue fell by 5.7 percent and its revenue from Global Technology Services, which is the area the Columbia location contributes to, dropped by 3.9 percent.
While IBM confirmed it laid off Columbia workers on Jan. 28, it has not disclosed the extent of these layoffs. IBM does not share workforce data with the public beyond what it's required to report to the state in exchange for taxpayer support.
This support has totaled $10.26 million so far and could reach up to $28 million if IBM adds jobs and increases payroll. (Click here for a detailed summary of the various incentives and how IBM has performed.) ...
Despite its $10.26 million investment, the state of Missouri has no idea how many people were hired or fired at IBM during the past 15 months. The most recent information the state had on IBM employment as of April 13 was the 606 figure from the end of 2013. Officials with the Missouri Department of Economic Development have not expressed interest in discovering the extent of the Jan. 28 layoffs.
The initial three industry partners are Apple, Johnson & Johnson and Medtronic. On Monday afternoon, after the close of stock trading, IBM also announced it would buy two start-ups: Explorys, a spin-off from the Cleveland Clinic whose data on 50 million patients is used to spot patterns in diseases, treatments and outcomes; and Phytel, a Dallas maker of software to manage patient care and reduce readmission rates to hospitals.
The IBM plan, put simply, is that its Watson technology will be a cloud-based service that taps vast stores of health data and delivers tailored insights to hospitals, physicians, insurers, researchers and potentially even individual patients.
The bullish case, meanwhile, is based on capital extraction, the same thing we look for in a Real Estate Investment Trust, the same thing we loved Gordon Gecko for in Wall Street. The stock yields 2.7% and is expected to raise its dividend later this month, all part of a systematic program of financial engineering meant to keep the stock up by giving money back to shareholders and buying shares back.
This kind of thing is great if you're running nursing homes. It is not so good if you are running a tech company. In technology you either grow or you die. IBM is dying. This was a $104 billion sales company just a few years ago. For 2015 it may bring in $80 billion.
Selected reader comments follow:
zSeries was a one time revenue hit due to a product refresh cycle. It sits in a shrinking market that is being eaten up by efficient capacity distribution and utilization from cloud. Their services businesses cannot scale as they are labor driven and increasingly not meeting client requirements on the services delivery side. Their single digit share in cloud is hardly anything to be proud of. That market is and will continue to be fragmented and eventually become 'free' to harness apps and functions that users will pay others for.
This behemoth is buckling at the knees. The 'flat' reported growth includes high growth in strategic areas. This is a fabrication constructed by adding anything that moves to a mobile, cloud or analytics deal and counting it as such.
I deduce this because, no matter how they arrange the optics the net result that cannot be hidden is that revenues declines are being papered over by the financial engineers and marketing spin artists who want you to believe otherwise. Look forward to a $50B company in 3 years.
Every other segment of IBM's business is riff with severe competition many of whom know how to work the consumer space as well as commodity products which IBM says it does not want to be a player in. The IT industry really gained traction in the 1950s and is therefore only 65 yo and headed each day for a a higher degree of commodity status in all segments and now with the mobile revolution upon us with multiple processor on our person and possessions their avoidance of the consumer space is truly counter to the realities of future opportunity. other than being a catcher of monitoring data sold by others.
IBM therefore is by its own definition headed for either a permanent slope of contraction or a buy out by a stronger company or country i.e. India, China as its cap continues to contract; their recent hiring of counter take over lawyers shows they too are planning for this possibility. Meanwhile the leaders of IT continue to grow, thrive, and fund their own moon shot projects that build true mindshare.
Also the top 3500 execs take out as much as they can now and keep packing their golden parachutes with bigger ones much like any oligarchs on a sinking ship or company or country.
If ever there was a company that needs an outside real restructure not a rewarmed hash of failed initiatives its IBM just like Gerstner gave it.
As a turnaround investment IBM simply is not being lead by the kind of execs that can compete in the current environment.
Here's a recent Forbes article that would seem to contradict your statement. "The Best Cloud Computing Companies And CEOs To Work For In 2015" http://onforb.es/1DiAlDX
You'll notice that IBM is waaay down the list and that the IBM CEO is not even listed.
Taking a common sense approach, let's compare IBM to Google from the perspective of a young, talented engineer. Which work environment would you want to work in?
Here's a very telling quote from that article, "Google’s various offices and campuses around the globe reflect the company’s overarching philosophy, which is nothing less than “to create the happiest, most productive workplace in the world,” according to a Google spokesman, Jordan Newman."
From Google's culture statement "It’s really the people that make Google the kind of company it is. We hire people who are smart and determined, and we favor ability over experience." http://bit.ly/1d0aiG2
So, if you were a young, talented engineer, which company would you prefer to work for?
The financial services industry can be a minefield for ordinary investors, who often cannot tell whether their advisers are putting the investors’ interests first; the legal term for this is fiduciary duty. The rules, proposed by the Labor Department, which oversees retirement accounts, are part of the Obama administration’s declared mission to support the middle class.
The proposed rules would eliminate some of the loopholes that allow brokers to avoid acting as fiduciaries when providing advice on retirement money held inside accounts like 401(k)’s and in individual retirement accounts, which hold roughly $7 trillion, as estimated by the Federal Reserve. ...
Investors are particularly vulnerable when they roll over the savings they have accumulated in 401(k)-type retirement accounts, which are overseen by their employers, into individual retirement accounts. Brokers who are advising customers on that transaction do not necessarily have to act in the customer’s best interests and may be influenced by higher commissions or other incentives the firm has put in place.
As a result, investors’ money may not end up in the most appropriate investment, potentially costing them thousands of dollars over many decades. In 2012 alone, rollovers to I.R.A.s exceeded $300 billion, and that is expected to rise steadily in the years ahead.
As companies reinvent management by slashing layers of hierarchy or freeing workers to set their own schedules, performance ratings—which grade workers on a 1-5 scale or with labels like “on target”—stubbornly hang on. Companies like Gap Inc., Adobe Systems Inc. and Microsoft Corp. abolished such ratings after leaders decided they deterred collaboration and stoked staffers’ anxieties. Yet other companies are having a harder time letting go.
Intel Corp. has long rated and ranked its approximately 105,000 workers on a four-level scale, from “outstanding” to “improvement required.” Devra Johnson, a human-resources director at the chip maker, observed that ratings tended to deflate morale in a good chunk of the 70% of the company’s workforce that receives a “successful” rating each year—the second-lowest label.
“We’d call them the walking wounded,” she said. ...
Companies that have gotten rid of ratings say their employees feel better about their jobs, and actually listen to managers’ feedback instead of obsessing over a number. John Ritchie, a Microsoft human-resources executive who goes by “J,” said the technology company’s practice of rating and ranking employees discouraged risk-taking and collaboration; since discontinuing the practice in late 2013, teamwork is up, he said.
Pros: Lots and lots of access to smart people — smart meaning a deep skill set and / or a good understanding of how to maneuver within the company. Lots of opportunity to move to a different job role or geographic location. I would recommend IBM to some people, for others not so much. It really depends on your personality and your approach to work.
Cons: Machine culture isn't very personable. Employees are treated like machines. The employees who succeed here (and there are many who do) do so because they know how to set boundaries and advocate for themselves and their human-ness aggressively while still being professional. An example of setting a boundary and being a self-advocate would be letting management know that you are not willing to work more than 55 hours a week.
Advice to Management: None — the culture is what it is. IBM is successful because of its culture which is simply not for everyone. If you feel comfortable here you're probably going to be very successful right along with the company.
Pros: Several years back, it was a great company to work for. Lots of flexibility for learning and opportunities. There was no limit on what one could achieve. No limit on which class one could attend. Continuous learning was promoted to better support our clients. It was great to be an IBMer and to work with very, very smart people. Great memories!
Cons: Frequent layoffs since 2007, almost every quarter employees are laid off and employee selection is not based on performance. It is a numbers game. The IT resource model is being transformed into an off-shore resource model.
Advice to Management: The off-shore resource strategy is likely to fail. It is like witnessing a train wreck.
I was RA'd at 54 years 7 months old, with 18 years of service. I was given a "Bridge to Retirement" that would take me to my 55th birthday. That timeframe to 55 years old was within my 6 months of severance pay window. The IBM retirement counselor from Fidelity told me not to expect the FHA, I asked why he did not believe I would get the FHA and he was vague and avoided a direct answer.
The FHA was granted when I retired August 2015 at 55 years old. The FHA can only be used for IBM healthcare now or in the future; you have to be able to prove coverage at all time until you use the FHA for IBM healthcare. I can get cheaper insurance with similar coverage through the ACA portal. I estimate my IBM FHA will cover about 9 months for 2 people. -BobK-
Alliance reply: Why would those skill sets you mentioned want a union? For a variety of reasons. First a union gives you a voice at IBM and a seat at the table. You as an individual IBM worker do not have that.
With a union terms and conditions of work, no matter what your skill set, must be negotiated between the workers represented by the union and the company.
There are many IBMers that would like to see a union negotiate a more just system than the PBC for example.
Resource Actions, (if needed, and they would have to be negotiated as well) would not be the brutal, non-caring actions that they are now.
There are union members in Europe that work in research and we have Alliance members in research, that DO want union representation.
At non-union IBM:
In a union workplace:
Now here's the kicker. I asked why I had to chase him down for this; no answer. So I try to contact the next 2 levels up, guess what!? The calls don't go through! I call the service center and ask why I had to chase this down; got a circular answer that the final check wasn't approved. I told the person that it wouldn't be approved until I sent back the laptop. I asked why I had to go chase this down, again same answer. I politely hung up the phone after declining to speak to a supervisor. So, here is my question, if I hadn't chased this down, when would I have gotten it? -On Toppa That-
What has been your PBC's for the last 3 years? Should you not have been on a PIP after the first four quarters of missing revenue, followed by written warnings for the next four and then dismissal for the last four?
I miss my targets for 4 quarters then I get a PBC 3 with a PIP; then within 60 days I am on a warning if I miss the PIP and then within 60 further days am out the door!
You my friends are still around after missing twelve quarters and getting bonuses and pay rises! How is this fair? You blame the troops, you push them to breaking point, you take away all the benefits and support and they pay the price of your failed strategies.
THINK and be on your way. Go start your own business and see how far you get with your failed strategies. If you understand any of the wisdom or the business acumen of the founder of IBM then you would do the honourable act of resigning before you send the company into history books and make it into an MBA case study! -Anonymous-
"While IBM said it’s cloud business brought in $3.8 billion in the first quarter this year as opposed to the $2.3 billion in year-ago period, it’s still difficult to pin down just what that figure means since IBM did not lay out the specifics in its earnings statement. Some analysts believe that figure might include older software partnerships that IBM now counts as being part of its cloud business as a way to puff up its cloud revenue numbers." https://fortune.com/2015/04/20/ibm-cloud-computing-earnings/
Bottom line, earnings are down *again*. The ship is sinking; not turning around. The 'positive aspects' are all spin and lies; those of us seeing the apple from inside know this. Nobody is buying our cloud hodgepodge; the numbers are all internal and sales of other 'things'. Another $280 million for 'restructuring'. Those of you who have not yet joined the Alliance would be well served to spend a few bucks now. They are fighting for us, our only advocate, and it may be your turn. I'm sure the RA's slated for this quarter will begin soon now that the results are out. -ReadTheTeaLeaves-
"And we're continuing to rebalance our workforce, and this quarter, we took a charge of $280 million, but that's down $580 million year-to-year, so with a lower level of workforce rebalancing charges, drove another seven points of decline.
As we continue the transformation of our business, I'd expect a similar level of workforce rebalancing next quarter, which will impact our year-to-year profit performance."
A transcript here: http://seekingalpha.com/article/3084026-international-business-machines-ibm-q1-2015-results-earnings-call transcript?page=1 -Anonymous-
"IBM continually rebalances it's workforce to meet the ever changing needs of it's customers and the demands of servicing and supporting new technologies such as the cloud and analytics on a global scale. IBM remains committed to Dubuque and Iowa and that is apparent from the jobs that still exist there"
It will be the usual, typical IBM smug drivel wordspeak. -Anonymous-
"In order to serve the evolving technology needs of clients in high-growth areas such as cloud computing, data analytics, mobile, social and security, IBM and the tech industry must utilize a global talent pool. Today, there simply are not enough American workers with expertise in these areas to fill the thousands of U.S. job openings IBM currently has available," Roswell stated.
What incredible baloney. They are laying off the most experienced people and only hiring young and cheap. This has nothing to do with "expertise in this area." I think he meant "there are simply not enough American workers willing to take a big pay cut so that we can keep our EPS deceptively high." -IBM_Values-
Alliance Reply: Your last line is spot on. Bingo. This is the truth. This needs to be repeated more than the LIE about "lack of skilled American workers".
In a correspondence dated April 16, Grassley asked IBM Chairwoman, President and CEO Virginia Rometty for an explanation of IBM's apparent plans to "hire thousands of H-1B visa holders." Grassley's concern arose when IBM petitioned for 5,800 H-1B visas on April 1. "It has come to my attention that IBM will be laying off employees in the United States this year while at the same time apparently seeking to hire thousands of H-1B visa holders," the letter states.
Get rid of the entire corrupt and greedy executive team, starting with Rometty. These executives' teams (Lou, Sam, Ginny) have done lasting harm to the US IBM employee. Join the union -ANA-
Dear Fellow IBMer:
As Texas SSE (Kevin Nowka) and Austin SLE (Dexter Henderson), we were proud to represent the Austin site and IBMers throughout Texas at IBM's annual Fly-In to Washington, D.C. last week. We participated in a day of briefings on IBM's key priority policy issues and then spent all of last Tuesday visiting several Texas U.S. House members and staffers for our two U.S. Senators. It's always enlightening to visit these elected leaders in their offices and remind them about IBM's leadership in technology in improving our world.
This week, Congress is poised to consider significant legislation called Trade Promotion Authority, or TPA, that will facilitate passage of critical trade agreements that are vital to global companies such as IBM.
The two of us are writing the House members and both Senators who represent us. For the first time, IBM is inviting any IBMer to help this effort by contacting your U.S. House member and both U.S. Senators from Texas to urge passage of TPA through the IBM Policy/grassroots advocacy tool. The U.S. Senate plans to take up TPA on Wednesday, April 22, so letters from you will be very helpful and timely.
We're here to make this process easy. The IBM Policy/grassroots advocacy tool has been renamed "ibmpolicy.com". It now also includes links to IBM's positions on public policy and legislative priorities, as well as links to current activity on IBM's Policy twitter handle @IBMPolicy. There is a map to find the Members of Congress who represent you (if you don't already know), and a suggested text on TPA that may be customized. Indeed, based on your experience with data, working with customers in other countries and/or other perspectives, the more you can focus the letter, the more relevant and unique it will be for the congressional staffers to inform their bosses about constituent opinions. The TPA legislation includes provisions that will ensure the free flow of data across borders in an increasingly digital economy. We also need to prevent barriers to access data as some countries seek to mandate that data be kept within their borders - this so-called forced localization strikes at the heart of IBM's view of data as the new natural resource".
IBMers: You will NEVER defeat IBM's LIE about your "lack of skills" as long as you are divided against each other. NEVER. How can you really unite and fight back in big strong numbers? Organize a union. Alliance is providing that very opportunity to join together. Don't believe that? Then you must believe that door #3's booby prize can be used for something...like fertilizing your lawn. That's a win/win for you isn't it? I see your head shaking "no". So join the Alliance and skip the booby prize bucket of BS. Fight back. There's never been a better time for a union. -no more lying-
An STSM colleague who left last year in disgust used to point out failures of the CIO and Security Services organizations, using his words after he crashed or broke their deliverables time after time. "I'm standing in front of you screaming in your face, beating you over the head with a 2x4 and you say you didn't see it?"
There is something to be said for what someone mentioned a few months ago about Armonk using Berlin 1945 bunker mentality claiming super weapons and imaginary armies will save them. -anon-
These essential internal calls and webcasts are *always* a Dilbert-esque comedy show. People don't mute, and it's clear most are distracted with toilets flushing, dogs barking, kids crying, background home conversations, TVs, etc.
The audio and/or video don't work properly; they can't scale if more than a few people join, etc. Leaves you thinking, where is all this great technology we brag about? Surely not working in practice. Then there are the people problems. I'm on a call right now for 1Q results.
The execs on here are a comedy show. They are all clearly reading from a script, which speaks to their communications skills and further lowers morale of the drones listening, and half of them can never figure out how to unmute themselves or do the slideshow thing.
Pretty sad for a technology company, but then we're left now with the unmotivated or not-so-bright individuals who would actually stick it out on a sinking ship like this. Amazing how much red there is on the charts from all of the product areas and geographies that missed their 1Q targets so badly. Join the Alliance so that we can continue to fight to change the company and the culture and get these bozos out of here with some younger, fresh, motivated and motivational leaders in IBM, before it goes the way of Kodak and so many others. -LowMorale-
Try finding www.ibm.com/afteribm/us and you will be greeted with a 404 error. It was always available to me in the past and suddenly, this year, I can no longer access the site. However, if I go to another site mentioned in the same document, I can retrieve the correct pages. This site is http://www-03.ibm.com/employment/us/benefits/afteribm/ Obviously some important maintenance support for IBM web pages has been lost.
Next try to find the IBM Club pages mentioned in the same document. On some days they are not available in a legible format; today they seem to be there, however not updated for months in some cases. Even some of the links are no longer available, like http://www.rjcancilla.com/IBMClub.
The point I am making with these somewhat trivial examples is that things are falling apart even on simple matters that should be extremely easy to maintain and without high-level skills. Heck! IBM Management would not recognize a valuable skill unless it was nepotism and sychophantism. It is all very disheartening. I am just hoping that all of you have VOTED CONTRARY to anything the IBM BOD has suggested prior to the stockholder meeting on April 28, 2015 so that we can make a statement about the disarray in the company. -- SKILLED but RA'D DUE TO AGE and UNSKILLED MANAGEMENT --
Why is the CEO and top execs rewarded and given double digit pay raises (remember 16% to CEO and 3.6 MILLION DOLLARS Bonus) for horrible leadership and driving the company in a spiral downward trend! How many chances do employees get if they don't produce results?
Senior employees were promised a lot back in the 70s and 80s and one of the reasons we joined IBM vs other companies. To lay off senior-aged employees and reduce retiree benefits just because we make a fair salary after 25+ years is not right, nor fair, especially when executives are kept on with their huge pays, bonuses and stock options! I hope every member can get a minimum of five employees still remaining to see the light and join the ALLIANCE! -GladtobeGone-
Yes it was sent to Washington Metropolitan Area also. Sender was Dion Rudnicki. A few things jump out about this notice. Executive management is:
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.