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.

• Washington Post Writer's Guild: It's Time to Talk Health Care. By Marie Cocco. Excerpts: If -- and the word should be capitalized, italicized, printed in boldface and underlined -- the political civil war raging over the Bush administration's war on terror ever ends, then we will, at some point, have to return the civil war over health care. Except it seems that the American people have put down their arms.
  More than a dozen years after Hillary Rodham Clinton's grand experiment in reshaping the health insurance system died in a pyre of overheated political argument and hysterical claims, it turns out the public wants pretty much what Clinton tried to deliver: Coverage for all Americans. A nationally mandated, guaranteed set of core benefits to replace the current patchwork that leaves even many people who have insurance with inadequate coverage for some illnesses and treatments. A national policy that refuses to let a family be crushed financially if someone becomes very ill.
  All this would, naturally, be financed in a way the body politic considers "fair" -- without creating an undue burden on sick people and in a way that's related to a family's ability to pay. The most popular means of raising additional funds is through "some form of progressive, or 'sliding scale' income or payroll tax (like the Medicare payroll tax) specifically dedicated to supporting health care for all."
  No, this isn't a script for a Democratic candidate's campaign commercial. And they're not talking points for an interest group pushing this health care solution or that.
  These are the conclusions of an official, nonpartisan government commission set up by Congress as part of the Medicare prescription-drug legislation. What the commission now tells us -- after taking soundings in 37 states, collecting tens of thousands of responses to polls and written questionnaires and listening at 98 community meetings -- is that Americans see clearly what is wrong with the health care system, and have on their own achieved a remarkable degree of consensus on how to fix it.
• Physicians for a National Health Program: Health Reform: Reinventing The Wheel. By Alan Maynard. Excerpt: The American health care systems perform impressively, producing what they are designed to deliver: cost inflation, inefficiency, and inequity. At regular intervals, local pundits declare that the outcomes of the incentive structures in the constituent parts of the systems are unacceptable, usually emphasising that “the nation cannot afford to spend 16 percent of GDP on health care.” Such “insights” ignore the fact that inflation is a consequence of the systems’ perverse incentives and that improved control of expenditure inflation would oblige physicians, nurses, hospitals, and the pharmaceutical industry to moderate their lifestyles.
• Economic Policy Institute: Consumer-driven health care is a false promise. By Elise Gould. Excerpts: Health costs are reducing the ability of American business to compete internationally. At the same time, companies that do provide health insurance to their workers are finding it harder to compete with domestic companies that do not. Premium costs have increased on average 11.4 percent over each of the last five years, while overall inflation grew by just 2.5 percent and real GDP grew by 2.6 percent. Add to that the cost of retiree coverage, and it’s clear that high health care costs have become an albatross for many American companies.
  Top policymakers have suggested the answer to this problem is “consumer-driven health care,” with its requisite high deductibles and health savings accounts. There are two main reasons why this isn’t the answer.
  First, workers don’t want these plans. According to a Kaiser Family Foundation’s survey of employers, only 15 percent of employees who were offered health savings account qualified high-deductible health plans decided to enroll. Furthermore, a study by the Commonwealth Fund shows lower satisfaction in these types of plans. It finds that 63 percent of individuals with comprehensive health insurance were extremely or very satisfied with their health plan, compared with 42 percent of consumer-driven health plan enrollees and 33 percent of high-deductible health plan participants. Granted, the status quo isn’t the best option, but low take-up and low user-satisfaction should give employers pause before they decide to rearrange their benefits to offer these types of plans.
  At the same time, compelling evidence suggests these consumer-driven health plans will be ineffective in restraining health costs. The ideology behind consumer-driven health care is the belief that Americans over-consume health care. Labeling this a “moral hazard” problem, proponents push for high-deductible health plans that make consumers spend out-of-pocket for the first dollar of coverage up to the plan deductible.

• From the Job Cuts Status & Comments page
  • Comments 10/09/06: Want to let you know that IBM is moving people from the Poughkeepsie site to the Fishkill site in order to meet an employment level at that site. This entitles them to some tax savings from NYS. I'm sure that the spirit of this agreement with the state was that there would be new employment in the Hudson valley, not a shift from Poughkeepsie to Fishkill. In my case the move to Fishkill is mandatory yet there is no efficiency to be gained. -Anonymous-
  • Comments 10/08/06: We have a team from China studying our product's test processes right now. I just left an organization that brought in a team from India a year ago, so I expect all of our testers will be offshored next year in a 3Q07 resource action. Turnover in India for the test group was running 70%. They all leave for better pay and benefits. At some point the turnover rate and rapidly increasing employee costs will make outsourcing unprofitable. Let's hope Sam sees this before no one wants to return to IBM in the future. -IBMersDozen-
  • Comments 10/08/06: For the second time since I was laid off from IBM last year, I have been contacted, unsolicited, about an opening in IBM that exactly matched my then "lacking" skills. I don't even have my name activity posted anywhere. Both IBMers and Contract companies are wanting me to interview for this job, and they are having trouble filling it. I had 28 years with the company, and this is advertised as a "multi-year" job. What does that say?! I have no intention of working for IBM again in any capacity after the way I was treated. My advise to the people who are in constant angst over their jobs at IBM -- Join the Union. Stand Together. Now. Don't wait until its you're turn to go. I can't see a company this messed up in its management and HR practices getting any better soon. My sympathies for the people currently let go. I wish you good luck in finding an alternate job within or better yet a comparable job outside. -Anonymous-
  • Comments 10/08/06: There are a lot of managers and manager's sidekids (aka close friends) that have their spouses working at IBM Tucson. Has IBM let go these top manager's spouses? I think our VP's husband still has his nice cushy job. But she is telling all of us that sacrifices have to be made to keep IBM afloat in this competitive market. Ms. VP please remember Charity begins at home. -anonymous in Rita Road-
  • Comments 10/09/06: I work in Rochester. I was notified of 'redeployment' and also notified of the resource action. About 80 employees were affected in Rochester. A significant number of those fit the 25 - 50 profile: 25 years of service and 50 years of age. Anecdotal info supports my conclusion that about 35% have found other jobs, leaving 52 without work as of 10/06/06. -Anonymous-
  • Comments 10/10/06: What the heck is IBM doing laying off SOA strategy people for? Are they surrendering to BEA and Oracle or did JBoss kick their rear? -Open Sourcer-
  • Comments 10/13/06: "I was RA'd on 10/6, got 30 days notice and offered normal severance, along with an email that I will be training someone in Bangalore India to do my job." What a crap company IBM has become. They have lost total respect for the individual. They said you have 30 days before you are laid off and you have to train an Indian in Bangalore? I'd give Sammy the middle finger salute and tell him to kiss my ass.-Keep IBM in the USA-
• From the General Visitor's Comment page:
  • Comment 10/08/06: I suggest a mass boycott of the US annual ECCC campaign. There are numerous alternative channels for your charitable contributions, which do not flow thru IBM's hands and which do not bolster IBM's external image. -JohnQSmith-
  • Comment 10/08/06: Take a wild guess...Sam, in the 5 years he's been CEO, has not brought growth to IBM. CEOs, like at a startup company, are given 5 years to make their mark. What is Sam's report card at the 5 year mark? He has bought new companies rather than innovate in house; he has outsourced jobs to cut wages; he has not had growth in 5 years, selling off the PC division as an indication of lack of growth. Despite Sam's labor cost savings programs, he still lays off each month. Where is the money going? How come IBM can't get it right? They resemble the Investment Banking industry in the 90s..hire...fire...hire...fire. Why is Sam still in charge?--take a wild guess... He's got a pal named Lou Gerstner hanging out on the Board of Directors, covering Sam's ass. Isn't it time we got rid of BOTH of them? -Take A Wild Guess-
  • Comment 10/13/06: Do not contribute one penny to the ECCC charity this year. IBM uses it as a ploy to show how wonderful a company it is in the community. I received an email plea from Diane Diggleman who is actually one of the VP culprits responsible for offshoring our jobs. Hey Diane why don't you ask for some rupees from all your indian employees. -Anonymous-
  • Comment 10/13/06: Yup, there is a war out there. Not the one in the Middle East though, that one is just a smoke screen. The real war is happening, here, in Western countries. There is an all out attack against our middle class. I think things will get a lot worse before most people will wake up and understand what's going on. There is no third alternative yet. The middle class badly needs its own political party and a charismatic leader. But then again... for an action there is an equal reaction. As the oppression grows, the resistance grows with it. -iknowitsucks-
• Pension Comments page
• IBM employees on employee raises

• "Another end run?" by "wonderaboutibm". Excerpts: And now for the latest turn of the wheel ... services automation! The pigs of Animal Farm are now bleating its wonders, just as they once said two legs good, four legs better. So this is how we are to get around high American labor costs .. we'll just reduce the labor content of our projects through the wonders of standardization, componentization, and asset reuse. My, my.
  Now,folks, I have nothing against building up solid assets for reuse. I have two problems with the approach: first, IBM mgmt has to now paid only lip service to real asset reuse, and the jury is out on whether that mindset has changed. But more fundamentally, the implicit assumption that labor is really minimized somehow is mistaken at best and misleading at worst. Yes, let's not reinvent the wheel every time, but let's give extensive customization its due. Our customers are looking after their own special needs and their own competitive advantage. We cannot standardize that set of customer needs.
• "What I won't miss (after leaving IBM)" by "bcg13". Full excerpt:
  • Going on a project where the client acts like you're Foley and Junior High Track Meet.
  • Interesting hotels, when posted in remote locations. I once packed my own sheets.
  • Looking at people who had been with the company for 5+ yrs and wondering what have you done in the past 5 yrs? Then realizing they came in with some talent, and in the past 5 yrs have wasted away. Worse was realizing that could be me in 5 yrs!
  • The Monday morning project terrors. Being assigned to a project as an "expert", when it has nothing to do with your education, training, job experience. Reading the PowerPoint slides, and realizing this is not going to cut it, and worse realizing that the client was sent to a comprehensive IBM training class, and you are expected to lead them.
  • Bribing clients to get their IBM training material, so that you can catch up.
  • Booking travel online, and getting the worst seats on a flight.
  • Cross-country engagements, with stop-over flights. Another form of torture that I feel violates the Geneva convention.
  • Going into an engagement, and client has been swindled by 2 groups in SWG, and they are mad at you. Especially nice, when there is nothing you can do about it.
  • Going into a client where 2 rival groups of SWG, are trying to sell overlapping products, and are duking it out.
  • Escalating issues about potential project failure, and instead leading to fault finding. (I learned my lesson... it is not a failure if nobody says it is, or was). This is the worst, ruining unsuspecting careers at client.
• "Congratulations" by "greenbean07". Full excerpt: Congratulations on taking a step towards a better career. I couldn't help wondering though, and this is a open thought to everyone on the board, is our hatred towards our work directed at IBM or the consulting life in general?
  There are so many of bcg13's points that could be non-IBM specific, but relate to the consulting genre at large. The travelling aspect,jumping through the client relations hoopla.
  I mean apart from the big 3 (McK/B/B), are there any companies (ACN, Del, Cap, BP) that are NOT facing this? Granted that IBM with its product placements adds an extra dimension of complexity, but maybe we oughta reconsider what exactly is it that causes all the sarcasm/spite/hatred. IBM or 2nd tier consulting in general?
  To bcg13: What are you moving forward onto? Another consulting gig (and if its bcg according to your screen-name, then another congratulations)?
• "Second that" by "Dose of reality". Full excerpt: Congratulations on your move! As liberating as it is to leave an oppressive environment, it amazes me how much inertia there is around here. I don't know if it is fear of the unknown, brainwashing, or just plain low expectations that keeps people from putting themselves in position to be happy.
  With regard to the question about IBM vs the industry, there is no question that there are industry forces in place that can lead a company to implement these exploitative policies. However, there are plenty of companies that realize the downside to them, and manage to a standard that limits the impact.
  What sets IBM apart (in a negative way) is a few things:

  1. There is a hyper-bureaucratic culture, so the flexibility that most companies have in day to day operational decisions just isn't there. We manage to the policy, regardless if it makes sense in a particular situation.
  2. HR is an extension of finance. Employees have no ombudsman to mitigate against the cost control mindset. That plays out in resource assignments, compensation policies, and travel, etc.
  3. We are mired in the products culture of the rest of IBM. ACN et al don't have that problem.
  4. A legalistic approach to contracts. We sell aggressively, and plan to contend/litigate on the quality of delivery. A customer-service oriented company will prefer to maintain goodwill.
  5. Bundling. We don’t mind screwing over the traveling consulting staff, since we use them as a “loss leader” to get the HW, SW, and SO sales. We may not lose money, but we are content to lose resources, because the total payoff when you consider the HW, SW, SO sales is disproportionate to the cost of high turnover in consulting.
  So don’t make the mistake of believing that IBM is just like everybody else, we aren’t. That is precisely what IBM would want you to believe to keep you in the fold.
• "Start Date" by "question_mark". Full excerpt: I got an offer letter from IBM with no start date on it. Apparently is is yet to be determined!! What kind of an offer letter is that!! My recruiter says that I will get a start date in the next quarter!! Can I really expect anything from them??
• "Common question" by "Dose of reality". Full excerpt: This question is asked even more frequently than "which is better Accenture or IBM".
  At IBM, we do virtual recruiting. We will conduct initial interviews with many candidates, and then wait until we have an imminent project need for someone in your area with your skills. If you happen to be in the pipeline, and are graded out near the top, then and only then, will you get called for a second round. If the project hits, and you make the cut, you will be hired.
  It's all part of the "On Demand" strategy. It's cheaper to have CANDIDATES on your "roster" than employees. We don't want to hire you to sit on the bench. Of course, with this approach, we generally don't get the best candidates, since we take best available today as opposed to taking candidates that meet a set of rigid criteria on an ongoing basis. Then again, IBM isn't interested in getting the best candidates, all we want is warm bodies that will work at our rates and our unfriendly HR practices.
  Do yourself a favor and read through this forum, and you'll have a lot more than offer letter dynamics to ask about. Take some of that outrage you expressed in your post and extrapolate. If they treat you with this much disdain when they should be trying to coddle you and make you want to join the company, how do you think you will be treated after you come in?! This place is career purgatory - avoid it if you can!
• "That's a novel approach - that is where IBM innovates" by "civilliberty". Full excerpt: Yes, IBM does innovate - but it innovates through redefining the meaning of words. It also has innovative HR policies that work in their favour. If you're relatively green behind the ears I can understand this question, but if you're more experienced you should be able to read between the lines and understand the company you are thinking of joining is not going to be your best friend. It won't reward you for doing well or achieving though they will cajole into doing that, it's just that you won't have the career or remuneration you desire. They are without the doubt the absolute worst company I have ever had the misfortune of working for.
  My main consolation has been that I came across from the PWC takeover and ultimately got a retrenchment package.
  Life outside of IBM is infinitely more rewarding in a multitude of ways that you perhaps would never expect unless you worked at such an inept company staffed by seriously self-serving individuals at all levels and without the management and operational capability that exists in virtually any other line of business or industry.
• "The face of IBM" by "Dose of reality". Full excerpt: Here's what they are going to do. You will have a nice chat with someone in HR that has no clue about what kind of skills you need to be an SAP consultant. They just want to make sure that you don't have two heads, or any other physical defects that would make a client hesitate to pay us over $200 an hour for your services. My apologies to the THSOA (Two Headed Society of America) - I am sure you are all very fine people. However, at IBM, two heads are NOT better than one!
  Then you will have a nice chat with someone that works in your practice, perhaps one or two bands above where you are applying. Depending on how high up they are, they may also be clueless about what kind of skills you need to be an SAP consultant, though they will pretend that they do know. They will be looking to see if you have the skills to cover their @$$, and whether they think that you will be willing to work like a dog for a few years before you realize you are not getting ANYTHING for all your hard work. Now they wouldn’t even notice if you had two heads – that’s what the HR rep is for.
  The bottom line is, if you are at least borderline presentable as a person, and can spell SAP, we will hire you, as long as we have a project to assign you to. We are taking anyone with a pulse, since anyone that has marketable skills looks to get out of here as soon as they find out what we are all about. If you want a reminder, just look back at the image posted above. If you are a “words guy”:
  • Across the board salary cuts two years running
  • Raises in the 0 – 3% range with most closer to 0
  • Bonuses TARGETS at 10 – 15%, but never paid out since they are contingent on practices meeting their overall profit targets which are always inflated well beyond what is realistically achievable. But somehow, the front office always gets their bonuses, since they always sandbag their targets
  • Promotions are rare, and the thresholds are set artificially high so as to keep staff running on a treadmill in futile hopes of getting one. Then again, there is no material bump in salary with a change in title
  • Utilization targets (the % of your working capacity that you are expected to be chargeable to a client) are set so high so as to leave no time for you to be trained, take vacation, do practice development, administrative tasks etc.
  • A philosophy of putting you on any project where we may need you, regardless of career fit or geographic location
  • Restrictive travel policies that mean you may have long layovers, multiple connections and cheap hotels.
  • A bureaucracy that would put the government to shame.
  • Oversold projects that put undue stress on staff. Many project managers that can do nothing more than blame staff for failure.
  If you want more details, read back in the history of this forum. Any questions?
• "The IBM Results?" by "ancientblueconsultant". Full excerpt: The Blue Pig has an outstanding record of taking simple ideas and destroying them with complexity, introspection ignoring client needs, talking technology without solving anything and just plain arrogance. The result is a diarrhea of useless innovation talk followed up with a lack of solutions client delivery because of process binding constipation.
• "The pregnancy analogy" by "Dose of reality". Full excerpt: As most of us know, you can't be 90% pregnant. The same is true for effective consulting. It was never a secret that a client was getting the benefit of prior deliverables when they hired a consulting firm. There is no way that they will pay 300% premiums to internal hiring costs just to have surge resources that have 20 points higher IQs than their own resources. They expect to pay for us having done it before, and get prior outputs as a relevant baseline.
  However, it is the 10-15% of on-site expertise that makes the difference between fertilization or just another high priced romp in the hay (or screwing depending on the team we fielded). That's what we have to deliver to make the client happy, and when the team is comprised of 80% clueless tech-heads from India, we can't do it effectively. We compromise our way down to just delivering the baseline 90%, which is even less than the client needs to even receive the same service levels as your previous clients, since every client's needs are different.
  The days of touting methodology, solutions, or citations as the reason to hire us went out in the early 2000's, when public domain knowledge became available, the industry started hiring ex-consultants on staff, and the capacity constraints of the 1990's were eliminated. This is back to being a people and talent business, and that is where IBM is failing miserably with our current HR strategy.