Join your fellow employees who are fighting for your benefits - Join the Alliance!

Retirees, Vendors, Contractors, Temps, and Active Employees are all eligible to become members of the Alliance.

• The Hill: With legislation in limbo, CMS launches HSA demo. By Jeffrey Young. Excerpts: Congress has yet to make progress this year on legislation to promote further adoption of health savings accounts (HSAs), a darling of conservatives, but the Bush administration is taking steps on its own to integrate new health-insurance products into the Medicare program. This week, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) unveiled a demonstration project that would allow health-insurance companies to offer products similar to HSAs to Medicare beneficiaries.
  The administration has aggressively campaigned for the wide use of health savings accounts in the private sector. The accounts allow for tax-free saving and spending of money for medical costs and must be paired with high-deductible insurance plans to cover catastrophic expenses. Conservative champions of HSAs and other so-called consumer-directed health plans also view the vehicles are part of a broader agenda to sever the ties between health coverage and employment or government entitlement programs.
  Opponents, mostly on the Democratic side, maintain that HSAs — like the Social Security private accounts proposed by President Bush — are nothing more than part of what they view as the GOP’s goal of eliminating social-insurance programs. “This is yet another attack on Medicare by this administration,” Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) said in a written statement. “The Bush administration tried to replace the guarantee of Social Security with chancy private accounts, and now they’re attempting the same thing with Medicare. These private accounts are a tax giveaway to the wealthy that will leave millions of seniors behind.”
• New York Times: A Windfall From Shifts to Medicare. By Milt Freudenheim. Excerpts: The pharmaceutical industry is beginning to reap a windfall from a surprisingly lucrative niche market: drugs for poor people. And analysts expect the benefits to show up in many of the quarterly financial results that drug makers will begin posting this week. The windfall, which by some estimates could be $2 billion or more this year, is a result of the transfer of millions of low-income people into the new Medicare Part D drug program that went into effect in January. Under that program, as it turns out, the prices paid by insurers, and eventually the taxpayer, for the medications given to those transferred are likely to be higher than what was paid under the federal-state Medicaid programs for the poor. [...]
  Drugs tend to be cheaper under the Medicaid programs because the states are the buyers and by law they receive the lowest available prices for drugs. But in creating the federal Part D program, Congress — in what critics saw as a sop to the drug industry — barred the government from having a negotiating role. Instead, prices are worked out between drug makers and the dozens of large and small Part D drug plans run by commercial insurers. Since Part D went into effect, the pharmaceutical industry has raised the wholesale prices of its brand-name drugs an average of 3.6 percent. Although the actual amount spent depends on what each insurer negotiates, in many cases the drugs for those 6.5 million people who used to receive their medicines through Medicaid will cost more now.
• New York Times: Bush Administration Plans Medicare Changes. By Robert Pear. Excerpts: The Bush administration says it plans sweeping changes in Medicare payments to hospitals that could cut payments by 20 percent to 30 percent for many complex treatments and new technologies.
• Associated Press, courtesy of the New York Times: San Francisco Moves Closer on Health Plan. Excerpts: San Francisco moved closer Tuesday to becoming the nation's first city to provide health care coverage for all its residents. The city's Board of Supervisors unanimously approved a plan that would give adults access to medical services regardless of immigration or employment status. The plan's estimated cost is $200 million a year. Financed by local government, mandatory contributions from employers and income-adjusted premiums, the universal care plan would cover the cost of everything from checkups, prescription drugs and X-rays to ambulance rides, blood tests and operations.

• ThinkTwice for Summer 2006 [PDF]. Articles in this edition include:
  • Employees fight force-outs due to medical conditions
  • IBM to invest $6 billion in India. Where is your job going?
  • Study Reveals “Jobless Recovery” in Tech Labor Market, Despite Industry’s Contrary Claims
  • SSR’s Sold Out to Qualxserv
• Communications Workers of America: NLRB Cases Put Millions at Risk of Losing Union Rights. Excerpts: Union members turned out in force across the country this week to draw attention to three pending National Labor Relations Board cases that could leave millions of workers without union rights by redefining who can be labeled a "supervisor" in a workplace. In Washington, D.C., area CWA members were among hundreds of union activists who rallied Thursday in front of NLRB headquarters. Rallies also took place this week in Nashville, Portland, Ore., Phoenix, Chicago, Milwaukee, Albuquerque and other locations. The NLRB cases, known collectively as the "Kentucky River" cases, began with groups of nurses trying to organize in Kentucky. Management has tried to claim they are supervisors and therefore ineligible for union rights. [...]
  "Skilled and experienced workers such as registered nurses, who give instructions to co-workers about how and when to perform certain tasks, are particularly vulnerable to reclassification as supervisors under this push for a broader reinterpretation of the term," EPI says. "For example, nurses who tell orderlies or nurse aides to do certain things for particular patients are at high risk of reclassification, as are journeymen construction workers who guide other workers on a crew."
• American Rights at Work: Stephen Colbert Satirizes Anti-Union Assault. Excerpts: The Bush-appointed National Labor Relations Board is poised to issue decisions that could strip millions of workers of their right to have a union at work—all without holding public hearings. On July 18, Comedy Central's "The Colbert Report"—a show satirizing Fox News' "The O'Reilly Factor"—host Stephen Colbert took on the National Labor Relations Board and the potentially disastrous impact its rulings could have on workers. Watch this hilarious clip below. Just click the "Play" button in the middle of the image.
• Building employee power in IBM. Excerpts: One of the most common questions asked of the Alliance@IBM by IBM employees is "When are we going to have a union and when is the vote?". Many IBM employees have the misconception that all we have to do is call someone up and schedule a vote. Unfortunately it isn't that easy and the process to getting to the vote is difficult.
  Ever since IBM started taking away benefits that were promised to people when they were hired, the Alliance@IBM has strived to undo the injustices that IBM perpetrates in the name of short-term gain. Members of the Alliance have taken and continue to take actions such as writing letters to Politicians and newspapers, launching workplace e-mail campaigns, organizing and attending large rallies and smaller meetings, introducing stockholder resolutions and holding stockholder actions, circulating newsletters and e-mails in the workplace and community, and starting our own TV show on cable access and streaming video on our web site. The Alliance also works closely with IBM unions around the world and participates in joint actions and dialogue.
• AFL-CIO Weblog: Executive Excess: Final CEO Pay Numbers Reveal Jaw-Dropping Retirement Packages. Excerpts: and it looks like the 21st century Gilded Age for Corporate Titans, according to Daniel Pedrotty from the AFL-CIO Office of Investment, who reports that the numbers stack up big time for U.S. CEOs. The final 2005 CEO compensation numbers are in, and the results are truly jaw-dropping. Leading the pack is Exxon Mobil Corp. CEO Lee Raymond, who stands to collect more than $8 million a year in retirement. According to The New York Times, Raymond collected more than $686 million from 1993 to 2005 ($144,573 for each day he headed the company).
  But wait—Raymond’s retirement package is even more outrageous because of all the biggest U.S. corporations, ExxonMobil has the largest funding deficit in its employee pension, according to BusinessWeek. ExxonMobil’s assets are $11.2 billion short of its projected obligations, according to company figures as of Dec. 31. ExxonMobil, with $27 billion in its coffers, could write a check for its underfunding this afternoon. Meanwhile, Raymond’s total compensation package was short just $49 million.
  ExxonMobil could top off the tank for its employees but chooses not to. Nor does the company seem to care that its CEO gets the cushiest retirement while its employee pension plan is the most underfunded. Says media relations adviser Dave Gardner on ExxonMobil’s decision not to fully fund its employee pensions
  We basically chose not to. That’s not an investment we want to put more into at this point.
  ExxonMobil isn’t alone among companies that put golden CEO retirements before their workers’ retirement well-being. As companies freeze or eliminate pensions for workers, their executives are building up even bigger pensions, causing their financial obligations to balloon. Among the top 25 companies in the AFL-CIO PayWatch, executive pension obligations include $3.5 billion at General Electric Co., $1.8 billion at AT&T, $1.3 billion at IBM and ExxonMobil and $1.1 billion at Pfizer Inc. and Bank of America, according to The Wall Street Journal.
• From the Job Cuts Status & Comments page
  • Comment 7/16/06: IBM Southbury is going to close/mothball the Southbury (CT) "A" building. If you have been recently laid off, or have been given a layoff or "redeployment" notice and are currently in the "A" building and you feel you have not been given a fair chance to be consolidated into another building in Southbury, please let the Alliance know. -sby_willie-
  • Comment 7/17/06: From an IBM executive--"We're not taking jobs from the U.S. and shifting them to India. Over the years, we've tended to spread out what we do in different parts of the world, and we've decided to spend our R&D globally. We are investing heavily in China, and have been for many areas. We have growing investments in Brazil and the Czech Republic. We will continue to make such investments and keep looking for new areas; it's a portfolio management exercise." Really?! Then why are IBMers training their Indian replacements and then losing their jobs! How can you tell when an IBM executive is lying? His/her lips are moving. -Anonymous-
  • Comment 7/20/06: From Austin, The software we built has been "transferred" to IBM Mexico to a team in Guadalajara. IBM Director plugins Capacity Manager, System Availability, System Rejuvenation. Division 7T, Dept. 0RTA. -Anonymous
• From the General Visitor's Comment page:
  • Comment 7/16/06: My manager is giving out impossible unachievable project deadlines one atop another. When you cannot meet the deadlines even if you work 10+ hours, you get into trouble, ultimately it becomes a reason to get a "3". Very disturbing of late is that highly qualified people with solid and needed skills are being forced out in this way. They present packages to them (an offer you cannot refuse) and then either people leave willingly or leave without making a fuss. IBM is a terrible company to work for now, you need to watch your back all the time and cannot trust anyone in management.
    When I hear of certain people being forced out that are key to the company I just feel like it is no use even trying anymore. I believe that they want the ibm of the future to be that services and sales are fronted by people in Brazil and USA, but that the technical work is going to be done in China or India. Does this sound familiar? Look at your shirt, your shoes, chances are that they were not made in America. Problem with this model is that they are draining the company of talent that takes years and years to build and they think that giving people who are new in China and India some training then it will fill the void.
    The execs will be able to leave with their golden parachutes, and pensions intact. An additional thing going on is that marginal or substandard people (junior managers) are being promoted to increasing levels of management and thus they become the lackeys of the high execs and willingly destroy what is left of IBM technical staff. They assume though that this will protect them, but it will not. So if you are a manager, and you are told to do something unethical, questionable, or something that in your gut you know will hurt someone who does not deserve it, just know that it will come back to you, because you are going to be next.
    Other companies know what is going on and they will take advantage of the business that IBM loses because of this behavior. The ultimate death of IBM will be the failure to execute on just about anything because they are cutting off the life blood of what made this company great. If you are an employee(non manager) and you see that your coworkers are being unfairly treated or abused, and if you do nothing, then it's your fault too. Do not think you can go along and just hope that things will not touch you either.
    Their goal is go get all technical work done cheaply overseas. Services and sales will become small,and only really a brand in the end. There are so many ways to fix this company properly that I do not see why we let this happen. Do the execs really need all that cash or are they so afraid that they will also lose that they keep quiet? I am sick over this company. -Anonymous-
  • Comment 7/16/06: What I really want to know is how come the property manager in Poughkeepsie, Grubb and Ellis still has the same head count as years ago when they were managing twice the space. Who are they paying off? -Anonymous-
  • Comment 7/17/06: Everyone needs to accept that IBM is just a job and not a career anymore. Start looking at your salary and any benefits that you get as temporary and start stashing something away now for a rainy day and looking for other opportunities wherever. Don't kill yourself by working 70 hours a week, degrading your health, and impacting your family and personal lives for a lost cause. Spend that time instead brushing up your skills and your resume and looking at the job market. You might find a better job or more likely have to work for less, but there is life after IBM.
    I know. I was in a RA early last year. I'm doing OK, but I wish I'd spent more time preparing for the inevitable instead of thinking if I worked harder, I could keep my job a while longer. When your number is up, it's up. It won't matter how good a job you did. If your job is targeted for a RA, the cuts will happen.
    Also, doing a lousy job training your replacement will not affect your ability to get another job. IBM doesn't give details for references anyway, and you just might even get a call to come back as a contractor after IBM gets in trouble because your replacement can't do the job. -Anonymous-
  • Comment 7/19/06: Have been reading some of the comments below. Have any of you heard the phrase "setting someone up for failure"? I joined a new dept in Aug of last yr, I walked into a disaster. In the month of Sept I worked 80% OT was starting at 5 am quitting at 2 am the next day, after two months of this I suffered a herniated disk when getting up from my chair, i laid on the floor and worked for months because i could not sit, my mgr's comments were, do what you have to do to take care of yourself but we have deadlines to meet and you have a job to do. I am currently going to phys therapy trying to avoid back surgery, had my mid term pbc review yesterday, now SHE is using all this against me, Dr appointments, my PASSION for my work is lacking, in order to justify giving me a 3 at the end of the year. I just concluded my 7th yr at IBM, this place has got to be one of the most demoralizing unrewarding places to work I have ever been a part of. You are given an impossible workload!
    So you will fail, then they can use this to their advantage, I wish they would go ahead and offshore my job, give me my package and I will be on my way... It is managers like the one that I currently have that are a piece of garbage, she has a god complex and thinks she has to micromanage every little aspect of my job, I honestly think they are trying to make everyone so miserable they will quit... -mad as hell-
  • Comment 7/19/06: Fear not, time is on our side. Many years ago I started my career at a team that is now in India. It was a highly technical group and our customers appreciated the good quality support we provided. Recently I had to deal with the Indian team a lot and learned first hand that they are utterly useless. We are trying different ways to somehow get around those guys because as long as they are in the loop, absolutely nothing gets done. Apparently their idea of technical support is to act compassionate and the communication gap is striking. In the old days the client received good service. Nowadays, they receive crappy service for just a little less because they still have to pay for the outrageous bonuses of greedy IBM CEOs. Sooner or later it will dawn on them that they are better off with a local IT team. -Anonymous-
  • Comment 7/19/06: Palmisano's comments about 2nd quarter 2006 performance.... "IBM has taken many strategic actions in recent years to reposition the company. Our focus on higher-value segments of the marketplace continues to deliver good results to shareholders, our cash position improved significantly year over year, and we remain committed to investing in our business and driving business performance to generate strong returns for investors. IBM has returned more than $5.8 billion to shareholders in the first half of the year." WHAT KIND OF NONSENSE IS THIS?
    On 01/02/2003, IBM closed at $80.57. Today, 07/19/2006, it is up 2 and change to $76 and change. This is 3 and 1/2 years, and he has the gall to say "strong returns for investors" and "continues to deliver good results to shareholders". Compare IBM with HPQ over the last 2-3 years and see where you should be putting your money. You don't make any money on stock buybacks but the execs are getting really fat wallets. -Anonymous-
  • Comment 7/19/06: Unless we stand up and do something it'll get worse. At least join the Alliance and have a chance to take away some of the currently unlimited IBM Executive power. Get out on the sidewalk and protest if you want to do more and really get the big dogs concerned. -Anonymous-
  • Comment 7/20/06: IGS is losing contracts because of the cost and inefficiency of offshoring. -Anonymous-
  • Comment 7/20/06: Dividend return on share price of 76 is 1.78% annually. I think this is the "strong return" he means. With a CD you can get 5 to 6% currently. -Anonymous-
  • Comment 7/20/06: I don't know how many of you are in the same boat as me. I just wanted to let people know. I was at IBM for 5 years; working 50 hours a week. I didn't have time for my wife and son at home because I was so tired from working so many hours. My health was getting really bad. So much so that my doctor was telling me my job is taking years away from my life if I continue. I'm only 25 had high blood pressure, ulcer issues cuz of stress from job. I left early 2005. I am happy to say all my test results are back to normal and my ulcer issue is totally gone. Moral of the story being we all need jobs; but the IT market if u got the right skills is great. I used to get measly 4% bonuses or less at IBM with a 2 rating. My company just handed me a 17% bonus in my first year. Go out and seek another job. To hell with IBM. Don't waste your time there. -Anonymous-
  • Comment 7/20/06: My team recently received an email from management asking for volunteers to help on a Disaster Recovery test for an account that has been outsourced to India. The reason? The Indian team doesn't have the "tools" to accomplish the test. In the real world this means they've had the account for months and still can't handle it. That's why we have permanent "advisory" staff attached to these accounts to cover up for the lack of ability of the foreign staff. -Anonymous-
• From the Pension Comments page
  • Comments 07/19/06: I have retired in 1991 and since then I have received one 3% increase in my retirement pay but that was wiped out by a significant increase in the medical insurance. I am now one small step above a poverty level and when I use my last of the CD, I certainly will be there. It is shame that I have believed my managers for 35 years of my employment. -Anonymous-
• IBM employees on employee raises

• "We are really all over the map" by "wonderaboutibm". Full excerpt: Did you say low price/low cost? A low cost mentality prevails, definitely, but the low cost efforts extend only to front line staff. The bloated overhead, all those blue dollars floating around ... no attempt or interest in controlling them. So the low-cost mantra is laughable.
  LOW PRICE??? Not really, but I will concede there are exceptions. SO will price so low as to virtually guarantee losses. But GBS is at heart a premium pricer ... never forget the real context under all that chatter about "value propositions." In its greed, what IBM really wants is high prices and low costs. Then the margins are better and so are the mucky-muck bonuses. Greed prevails. But the execution of this flawed high price, low cost model just compounds the mess -- and Wall Street is noticing.
  What I think you are advocating is a high price, high cost mode. Both the price and the cost are "premium." That would be a really solid strategy with the promise of good margins, but as we have discussed on other posts, it does not suit the interests of current management.
• "Official HR Estimates" by "BCS-SA". Excerpts: The new pension modeler and the new pay plan data should give you an idea. The pension modeler that emphasizes the new 401(k) offerings for 2008 uses 2.5% over the length of your career. Based on comments from a lot of the more senior people in my team, that's pretty optimistic, but probably accurate.
  Your pay raises are highly dependent and affected by where your tax jurisdiction is located. There are high pay areas, par areas and below par areas. If it's high, you may eventually over 5 years or so get up to 5% more than those in par areas and 10% than those in below par areas. Don't think metro and MSA's. For example, all of Florida is below par. Atlanta is just par, I think. Te very few above par areas are concentrated in Westchester County, NY, NYC and SFO/Silicon Valley. Chicago is par. Ask the recruiter, HR or hiring manager where your location is relative to the IBM pay plan.
• "Sounds like your wife may be right" by "deep_eye". Full excerpt: My best advice to anyone who is getting a "package" - always have a labor attorney review the particulars - believe me, it is money well spent. Even if it is a mutually agreed upon decision to go - a good attorney can usually negotiate a better overall package for you. The pig has absolutely no interest whatsoever in being fair or equitable - unfortunately, that's why we need courts and attorneys. Once you sign the documents and move on, even if you determine later that they pulled a fast one on you, it can be quite difficult to successfully prevail in court.
  I saw someone decline a project due to his wife's illness and the burden his travelling would place on the marriage, his concern for her health and being alone, etc., etc. The pig got cute and starting dropping hints around "performance," "not a team player," etc., long story short, they started to make his life miserable - he returned the favor by initiating an action and they settled out of court. Like any bully, they fold when aggressively challenged, they are counting on people to tuck their tails between their legs and run away. Check the internet (or your phone book)for labor or employment attorneys who specialize in employee related work issues - unfair/unjust termination, hostile workplace (my personal favorite), performance reviews, etc.
• "Definition of Global Delivery" by "Dose of reality". Full excerpt: The kind of global delivery that clients want is to have resources available in local markets to be able to address multi-country project needs in an efficient, and coordinated manner, and with resources that understand the nuances of each country that we are DELIVERING SERVICES TO. Global delivery does not mean having a concentrated hub of a team that has to deliver services across multiple country lines. Even if the resources were capable, the chain letter effect across the disjunct members of the project team wreaks havoc on development. If anything, the hub development center model is diametrically opposed to global delivery objectives.
• "So, how long will they keep us in suspense?" by "kindaoldibmer". Full excerpt: From GR's (Ginny Rometty's) latest epistle ... "We've got a focused and clear growth strategy around Deeper Client Relationships, Differentiated Solutions and Services, and Global Delivery, and our third-quarter actions will be communicated in detail in the context of that strategy by your local leadership teams." This looks like management-speak code-words for "we're gonna accelerate the layoffs of xx,000 US IBMers and move the work to India as part of our Global Delivery Strategy".