Welcome to IBM Employee News and Links

News and Opinion Concerning Health Savings Accounts, Medical Costs and Health Care Reform

• Wall Street Journal: Health Savings Plans Start to Falter. Despite Employer Enthusiasm for Consumer-Directed Approach, Patients Express Dissatisfaction With How the Accounts Work By Vanessa Fuhrmans. Excerpts: Where employees do have a choice, only 19% choose the newfangled plans, the Kaiser study estimates. In the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, which has offered the plans for several years, only about 50,000 of its eight million members were enrolled in them in 2006, according to industry estimates. At lightbulb-maker Osram Sylvania, just 5% of employees enrolled in the plans in 2006, their first year.

  In addition, those who are in consumer-directed health plans often report lower satisfaction and confusion about how the plans are supposed to work. The general idea is for patients to conserve money in their savings accounts, which are meant to pay for care until they reach their high insurance deductible. In theory, patients who shop carefully could have money left over, which they can keep and let build into savings for bigger health-care costs down the line. [...]

  A growing number of industry experts believe that for consumer-directed plans to succeed, they have to offer coverage that is at least as rich as traditional plans. That means providing upfront coverage of most preventive services and treatments and a generous contribution to employees' accounts. "If you're just trying to cost shift, and you only get 10% of your employees in, they are the youngest and healthiest, and you haven't accomplished anything in terms of health-care costs," says Bill Sharon, a senior vice president at Aon Consulting, the human-resources consulting arm of insurance broker Aon Corp.

• New York Times: Open Wide and Say ‘Shame’. By A.O. Scott. Excerpts: Mr. Moore has hardly been shy about sharing his political beliefs, but he has never before made a film that stated his bedrock ideological principles so clearly and accessibly. His earlier films have been morality tales, populated by victims and villains, with himself as the dogged go-between, nodding in sympathy with the downtrodden and then marching off to beard the bad guys in their dens of power and privilege. This method can pay off in prankish comedy or emotional intensity — like any showman, Mr. Moore wants you to laugh and cry — but it can also feel manipulative and simplistic.

  In “Sicko,” however, he refrains from hunting down the C.E.O.’s of insurance companies, or from hinting at dark conspiracies against the sick. Concentrating on Americans who have insurance (after a witty, troubling acknowledgment of the millions who don’t), Mr. Moore talks to people who have been ensnared, sometimes fatally, in a for-profit bureaucracy and also to people who have made their livings within the system. The testimony is poignant and also infuriating, and none of it is likely to be surprising to anyone, Republican or Democrat, who has tried to see an out-of-plan specialist or dispute a payment.

  If you listen to what the leaders of both political parties are saying, it seems unlikely that the diagnosis offered by “Sicko” will be contested. I haven’t heard many speeches lately boasting about how well our health care system works. In this sense “Sicko” is the least controversial and most broadly appealing of Mr. Moore’s movies. (It is also, perhaps improbably, the funniest and the most tightly edited.) The argument it inspires will mainly be about the nature of the cure, and it is here that Mr. Moore’s contribution will be most provocative and also, therefore, most useful. [...]

  With evident glee (and a bit of theatrical faux-naïveté) Mr. Moore sets out to challenge some widely held American notions about socialized medicine. He finds that British doctors are happy and well paid, that Canadians don’t have to wait very long in emergency rooms, and that the French are not taxed into penury. “What’s your biggest expense after the house and the car?” he asks an upper-middle-class French couple. “Ze feesh,” replies the wife. “Also vegetables.”

• New York Times: When Dollars Trump Compassion. By Bob Herbert. Excerpts: You won’t see these stories on television, but Marian Wright Edelman and Dr. Irwin Redlener could talk to you all day and all night about children whose lives have been lost or ruined because they didn’t have health insurance.

  This is not a situation one associates with a so-called advanced country. That you can have sick children wasting away in the United States, the wealthiest nation on the planet, because medical treatment that could relieve their suffering is withheld by men and women with dollar signs instead of compassion in their eyes is beyond unconscionable.

  Ms. Edelman is the president of the Children’s Defense Fund, and Dr. Redlener is president of the Children’s Health Fund.

  Both are appalled at the embarrassing fact that nine million American children have no health coverage at all. Among them are children with diabetes, chronic asthma, heart conditions, life-threatening allergies and so on. In many instances they are left untreated until it is too late.

• Christian Science Monitor, courtesy of Physicians for a National Health Program: Michael Moore refocuses healthcare debate. By David R. Francis. His latest film, ‘Sicko,’ may boost efforts for a national healthcare system, an idea that still faces stiff resistance in Washington. Excerpts: Advocates of a single-payer national healthcare system welcome Moore’s movie. With millions of viewers likely to see the film, it’s “unquestionably” helpful, says a spokesman for Physicians for a National Health Program. PNHP, with a membership of 14,000 physicians, has been campaigning for a national system for 20 years. But the prospects of success for PNHP are not great yet, figures Henry Aaron, an economist at the Brookings Institution in Washington.

  One reason is the power of various medical industry lobbies. Americans spend as much on healthcare today as the entire gross domestic product of France and Spain combined, notes one economist. If health-related costs continue to rise rapidly, spending could soon equal the entire GDP (that is, the output of goods and services) of Germany.

  The $2.1 trillion the US spends per year on healthcare creates “strong interest groups,” notes Mr. Aaron. These include a host of politically powerful private health insurance companies and for-profit hospitals. [...]

  Faced with globalization and severe competition from abroad, American companies are moving to reduce their health insurance costs. They are raising deductibles, requiring bigger copayments, and trimming the medical services covered. As these trends hit the middle class, the political result will be a “big storm,” Dr. Woolhandler predicts.

  As it is, the US devotes about twice as much to healthcare as a proportion of GDP than do other rich nations with nationalized health systems.

  Economists at the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services said last February that, if current trends continue, $1 of every $5 spent in 2016 will go toward healthcare. Today, healthcare takes close to $1 of every $6, or about 16 percent of GDP. “We must do something large and serious and soon,” says Alain Enthoven, a healthcare expert at Stanford University in California. [...]

  So far, such Democratic presidential candidates as John Edwards and Barack Obama are advocating plans that keep the private health insurance industry intact. “Different flavors of the same plan,” complains a PNHP spokesman. Insurance companies would still strive to insure the healthy and exclude the sick, he says, noting this process adds to administrative and other overhead costs.

  A study by Woolhandler and others published in 2003 calculated that, in 1999, health administration costs in the US amounted to at least $294 billion. That’s $1,059 per capita, compared with $307 per capita in Canada. By now, administrative costs are probably about $350 billion, a sum big enough to provide insurance coverage for uninsured Americans, reckons a PNHP spokesman.

• Washington Post: Baby Boomers Appear to Be Less Healthy Than Parents. By Rob Stein. Excerpts: As the first wave of baby boomers edges toward retirement, a growing body of evidence suggests that they may be the first generation to enter their golden years in worse health than their parents. While not definitive, the data sketch a startlingly different picture than the popular image of health-obsessed workout fanatics who know their antioxidants from their trans fats and look 10 years younger than their age. [...]

  "People are working two jobs. They are not sleeping as much. They're experiencing more job insecurity. They have less time to take care of themselves. They are more socially isolated," said Lisa Berkman of the Harvard School of Public Health. "This all could add up to a huge crisis and really calls for us to examine the things that perhaps we're not doing so well." [...]

  The findings are consistent with a number of studies, including one last year that found American adults have poorer health than their British counterparts, and a preliminary analysis of data collected between 1972 and 2003 for the National Health Interview Survey, a nationally representative survey of more than 100,000 Americans.

• National Public Radio (NPR): Unpaid Sick Leave Diminishing for Poor. Excerpt: Morning Edition, June 20, 2007 · Half of working Americans don't receive a sick day. For low-wage workers, one out of every four workers doesn't get a sick day. Beth Shulman, labor consultant and author of The Betrayal of Work: How Low-Wage Jobs Fail 30 Million Americans, talks with Steve Inskeep about the issue.

New on the Alliance@IBM Site:

• From the Job Cuts Status & Comments page (Note: There were a massive number of posts to this page during the last week. The following is a sampling of the large list of posts received by the Alliance@IBM.)
  • Comment 06/18/07: I posted a while ago that I had decided to leave IBM of my own choice. I wanted to let you know that there are great opportunities out there. The job market in the US is much stronger than you may think, and many companies are doing extremely well and looking for experienced hires. The company I joined has a long list of open vacancies that it is trying to fill. I hope that alliance will let me post this, as I'd like to try help a few of my former colleagues. If you are part of an RA, or just looking for a change, here's an offer. If you have experience in Project Management, Supply Chain, Fulfillment, Warehouse, Consulting Client Facing roles, and are willing to consider some element of travel, them please send me a note at thereislifeafteribm@gmail.com and I'll respond with more details. My only promise, is that I'll get your resume in front of the hiring manager. I can honestly say, leaving was the best thing I did. There are companies that treat employees decently, with respect, and share successes. -Anonymous-
  • Comment 06/19/07: Wow... this video confirms my suspicions about why IBM posts job listings on the bulletin boards within the site. If they were really looking to fill the positions, I was wondering why they'd advertise where hardly anyone would see the ad. Now I see it's intended to not be seen by any qualified applicants. Wow, I'm dumbfounded that there is actually a consulting firm out there videotaping this sort of advice. Good way to get your car keyed, I would think. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCbFEgFajGU -H1B Visa Critic-
  • Comment 06/19/07: Many GBS employees received a memo today advising them that their jobs now require any amount of travel that management deems necessary A ploy to scare more employees into submission and further into slavery. Single fathers and mothers must now face the possibility of refusing a direct order from management and risk being fired or caring for their children. What a family oriented values company! -Threatened GBS Employee-
  • Comment 06/21/07: I talked to a former IBM SSR that was resourced to QUALXSERV a year ago. This person told me that MOST of the IBM SSR's that went to QUALXSERV have been let go by QUALXSERV. Can anyone verify that this has happened to the former IBM SSR's? -I knew it was going to happen-
  • Comment 06/22/07: I was one of the IBM SSR's moved to Qualxserv a year ago and am still here and busy as ever, covering IBM, Dell and Apple products. As far as I know the other ex IBMers in our group in the SE states are also still here. The first few months were very stressful until we hired additional people and everyone cross-trained but nowadays my workday is reasonably smooth. IBM is the biggest pain to deal with compared to the other companies, they will not change their inefficient processes for any reason. Glad to be out of the toxic environment at IBM . Ex Big Blue and loving it! -Anonymous-
  • Comment 06/25/07: Time to use LEAN to its fullest extent. It just kind of dawned on me what an opportunity we IBM'ers have in front of us. A real program that allows us to do as little as possible and get away with it. All you need do is use the "Welcome to Lean" mantra anytime you are asked to do anything. Simply say you are too busy. Would love to help you out - management won't let me - "Welcome to Lean". I have used it several times and it works let me tell you. Nobody doubts it. IBM wants LEAN - they're getting it from me I'll tell you that. Shoot- is that the time? Coffee break. back in 20. -Chauncy-
• From the General Visitor's Comment page:
  • Comment 06/15/07: In response to "Formeribmer" on 06/14/2007 -- I can attest to the fact that there are fewer IBMers with disabilities around today than in the past, as well as older workers.

    The first action (or inaction) that I observed was at NHD in RTP back in the late 90's where a blind writer (who was, by all co workers accounts was doing quite well at his job), was let go due to performance issues. During the discussion of things with his 2nd line manager, Don Davis, it was revealed that the new incoming systems (Lotus Notes and Framemaker) were not yet endowed with the ability for screen readers (as were the legacy mainframe systems). This writer was essentially let go due to the software's inability to interface with 'on hand' screen readers. Don Davis's management chain (our third line and the writer's first line) up held this decision.

    I ASSUME that there was some type of package which allowed the writer to leave without too much hardship on his part, as he did not pursue the issue. Several of us (regular employees) looked into 'open dooring' this issue, but were told by our managers to let it drop unless we wanted to be next in line for layoffs. That was the first example of discrimination against handicapped workers that I observed.

    Of course, I've also observed 4th line managers at 'all hands' meetings stating that they seek to change the mix of employees from 60% 'seasoned' and 40% 'fresh' to a mix of 40% 'seasoned' and 60% 'fresh'. This was at a meeting held by Helene Armitage at Austin AIX development. She never recanted her statement. The first instance was reported to local newspapers and the last one reported to 'The Alliance', but not enough outrage ensued to force management's hand to do the 'right' thing. I would like to see others post instances such as these so that we can 'air' some dirty laundry and let other see what has been really going on. -TexasBound, but not by IBM-

  • Comment 06/18/07: FormerIbmer! I am physically disabled and they had NO problem dumping me...and I was a productive employee...No matter...I am gone in less then 2 weeks.. -RemoteBoy-
  • Comment 06/21/07: Maybe we're too late. I just had a thought (and yes...it did hurt). A union vote requires cooperation but IBM has turned the employment environment into a zero-sum game. You want to be retained? Take it away from somebody else. Same for raises, promotions, et al. In a zero-sum game, you have to lose for me to win. This is not the environment that a union can make a toehold in. There is no cooperation possible between the competitors. Or maybe I'm just depressed from reading the Yahoo message boards. -Anonymous-
• Pension Comments page
• Raise and Salary Comments
  • Comment 06/18/07: Salary = 40k; Band Level = 2; Job Title = Prod Specialist; Years Service = 10; Hours/Week = 40; Location = East Fishkill, NY; Message = Very disgusted here with this so- called 2% or whatever increase. It's a slap in the face! My manager never even took the time to call me in the office and discuss it. Some people were told and others had no clue. Done very unprofessionally. IBM a big company and they treat the employees like trash! They can keep their 2% and stick it where the sun don't shine. It's just disgusting that a huge company behaves like this with their employees. What is wrong with you big blue? Siview ain't gonna be 100% either so we lose our jobs. I'll make sure that don't happen! Pissed off employee -Toby-
  • Comment 06/19/07: Here's the monthly salary survey update:
    • Band 4: 10 respondents, avg: $44K, standard deviation: $10K, range: (min/max reported): $32K to $60K
    • Band 6: 25 respondents, avg: $62K, std dev: $8K, range: (min/max reported) $48K to $79K
    • Band 7: 56 respondents, avg: $72K, std dev: $14K, range: (min/max reported) $49K to $110K
    • Band 8: 55 respondents, avg: $99K, std dev: $15K, range: (min/max reported) $60K to $130K
    • Band 9: 28 respondents, avg: $118K, std dev: $17K, range: (min/max reported) $89K to $152K
    • Band 10: 11 respondents, avg: $148K, std dev: $25K, range: (min/max reported) $107K to $190K

    Only US data points are included in the above; due to exchange rate fluctuations, I decided not to take into account non-US respondents. The spread (reported min & max) within a band is surprising, at least to me. If you're paid way below the average for your band, and if you can find a better salary elsewhere, look seriously into jumping ship. Raises at IBM have been, and probably will be, anemic. -Anonymous-

  • Comment 06/20/07: Salary = 104,000; Band Level = 8; Job Title = Certified I/T Spec; Years Service = 19; Hours/Week = 45-50; Div Name = 16; Location = Washington DC; Message = No raise again this year, pbc 2 again. -Been Bamboozled-
  • Comment 06/20/07: Suggest adding a field for the Market Reference Point. Readers would know the average salary for the Job Title with this information and Salary. This would be valuable information with one of the raise and bonus components being a Market Based Adjustment. -Anonymous-
  • Comment 06/20/07: Salary = 68K; Band Level = 6; Job Title = SE; Hours/Week = more than 50 HRS; Div Name = 08; Location = BOSTON; Message = I work fro IBM more than 2 years but still in the MRP. Feel very disappointed. Can anybody remember the salary range of Band 6 last year? And the Band 7's this year in SWG? -beginner-
  • Comment 06/20/07: Salary = $49,000; Band Level = 6; Job Title = TECHNICAL SERVICES PROF; Years Service = 5.5; Hours/Week = 45; Div Name = 07; Location = LEX; Message = Same old message--not enough money to go around--4 managers in the past year. Changed my band rate so I am towards the upper now with no chance of a raise unless I go to the next band. Thanks for caring IBM--burn in hell Sam! -IBM slave-
  • Comment 06/21/07: Location = East Fishkill; Message = IBM is so horrid about these so called increases. I got 28 cents more an hour! Is that insane! 28 cents! How embarrassing! What the hell is 28 cents! IBM needs a learning lesson here and make it a painful lesson. It's called screwing your employees. We need to over turn this and get the union in here. No question about it. We need some protection now! IBM is turning into the antichrist here. Time to make them put a bullet in their own head! -Revolution among the employees-
  • Comment 06/21/07: Salary = 23,663; Band Level = 2; Job Title = Production Operator; Years Service = 6.5; Hours/Week = 40; Div Name = 29; Location = Burlington; Message = I have been working a night shift AWS schedule during my time at IBM Burlington. So after premiums and whatever I make around 36K a year. I can not really complain like many because I have always received a raise and it is usually higher compared to my peers. But there are peers that have at least the same experience as me, but are still band 1's. -Amanda Hugginkiss-
  • Comment 06/22/07: Amanda - hate to be the one to tell you this, but if you are bringing in 36K for working nights on AWS you are getting massively screwed. I did midrange ops in Roch NY for years, AWS on nights. By the end I was grossing about 61K and I'll never see that much from IBM again, now that I work a straight day shift, no AWS. I lost big money switching depts but it was worth it to me, just to get out of Ops and have a life. The only people getting less respect for their amazingly hard work than Ops is probably Tape Ops, followed by your local cleaning crew. You seriously need to look at your options. -NoMoreAWS-
  • Comment 06/22/07: Salary = $120,000; Band Level = 8; Job Title = Senior Consultant; Years Service = 10; Hours/Week = 40 or less; Div Name = 16; Location = PA; Message = I was acquired by IBM in 2002 and took a 4% pay cut on the way in the door (ouch!). Since then (it is now 2007), I have seen a grand total of 2% in increases over that entire duration with consistent PBC ratings of 2 and 2+. I was just told that my increase in July of this year will be ZERO PERCENT once again.

    Inflation in US is now running about 2.5%, so it is only a 2.5% pay cut this year. Inflation has been closer to 3.5% for past two years, so my net pay cut is slightly less this year. Factoring inflation since I was acquired, I would need a 16% increase today just to break even -- that will never happen.

    It is almost as if IBM WANTS ME TO LEAVE -- they try to treat us so bad that we will just leave. Some genius recently figured out that Payroll is their number one expense, so they need to cut payroll and cut heads. Meanwhile, the executives continue to get richer and richer.

    If I wasn't on such a great local assignment and so well taken care of by the people I work for (no thanks to my IBM organization), I would have been gone long ago (like right after the acquisition with the rest of firm). It's pretty hard not to be angry and harbor resentments -- I do not drink the Blue IBM cool aid they are constantly forcing upon me -- I see IBM for the bastards that they are. I have no relationship with them -- I am a services whore and they are my pimp for now. -Used N Abused-

  • Comment 06/23/07: Salary = WAS $95,700.00; Band Level = 8; Job Title = Advisory Software Engineer; Years Service = 12; Hours/Week = 60+; Div Name = STG; Location = RTP/Austin/Tucson (in that order); Message = To 'Outsider' on 6/12/07 -- I can appreciate your misunderstanding of some of our postings with regards to our salaries. I once managed a restaurant (pre IBM) for less than 25K a year with 6 day work weeks and 14 hour days. ---However, I went back to school, undergrad, masters and PhD and spent quite a few bucks on that education. I thought I could now start working on a rewarding life.

    Started with IBM and worked like a dog to get ahead. However, IBM's catch is that with each promotion you're expected to do more and give up even more of your personal life. By the time I left the company, I had been asking for a demotion, decrease in salary, just so I would not spend weekends mandated working from home, would not be told to give up vacation for the 'all important hot project', not have to start my day with 4:30 am conf calls overseas and be allowed (without being bullied) to take a day off for a family member's birthday.

    Whereas I can see that I was NEEDED, I was NOT APPRECIATED and given the consideration of a normal human being. I believe that those of us who were/are making larger salaries should be given the consideration that should be afforded to any worker. Simply stating that those of us who maker bigger salaries (and yes, I worked to put myself through undergrad, grad and phd programs) deserve the higher salary, but also consideration as a human being. Don't be focused / jealous of money matters, I was happy to leave and find a job that decreased my salary by 15% just to have weekends off and real vacation time. -Anonymous-

• PBC Comments
  • Comment 06/13/07: If you get a new job or assignment in IBM, or a new manager in IBM you are bottom of the barrel. Consider yourself lucky or just plain great if you can swing a PBC "2+" first time around. You'll probably get a "2" and could even risk a "3". If you were a PBC "2+" or a "1" you think your previous manager would let you go easily? So you wonder why folks are happy being stultified where they are and doing the jobs they have been doing for years? IBM you suck!!!!!!!!! -Anonymous-

Vault Message Board Posts:

Vault's IBM Business Consulting Services message board is a popular hangout for IBM BCS employees, including many employees acquired from PwC. A few sample posts follow:

• "Resign or Travel?" by "IBMMom". Full excerpt: I have been told that if I don't travel, I will have to resign. Has anyone else received this request?
• "Wrong" by "Dose of Reality". Full excerpt: If you don't travel, they will have to lay you off. They can't force you to resign. It is an important distinction for both parties. Even if they did lay you off, you could have a case against them, since there is nothing contractually explicit that says travel is a condition of employment. They will likely ask you to sign something waiving your right of recourse as a condition of severance.

  In the meantime either tell them you can't travel, or push back on each opportunity on the grounds of career fit, or some other reason.

  If on the other hand you really want to continue to work here at all costs, you might as well surrender on the travel issue. They do have ways to chip away at your situation if you take a hard line. It WILL become unpleasant - screwing over recalcitrant employees (or any employees for that matter)is a core competency of IBM HR

  Bottom line is you can stay on their terms, or leave on your terms (with separation payments). The last thing you should think about doing is resigning, unless you find another job that you want to take and can't wait for this to play out. Good luck!

• "Good Point, Dose" by "Frank_Reality". Full excerpt: Make them pay severance and unemployment to get rid of you. Being fired/layed off by IBM no longer carries the negative baggage it used to. Everyone in the business knows what a piss poor employer IBM has become.
• "Interesting timing" by "colokee". Full excerpt: Many GBS employees received an executive memo today which outlined travel requirements. The memo stated that if you do not want to travel you are resigning from your job. Is this legal? The memo's wording is... interesting. If you are forced to resign, do you get severance?
• "Thanks to ABC" by "Tweetie_Bird". Full excerpt: I'm not an expert, but I remember ABC telling posters here that when they applied for a job internally in IBM they should keep the original job posting, in case they changed the job to try to fire you. ABC had stated that if the position requirements change, and you can't make them, then it's not a performance related firing but a layoff situation. They can't blame the change on you.

  I made a copy of the original posting on JOBS for my position, on a PDF. I also stated the no travel requirement on my first PBC, which the then practice leader approved.

  I sent the PDF to my manager today after getting the travel notice and he was in shock. I talked to a relative who is an attorney and she says I have a good case for a full severance rather than the smaller performance related severance and she also believes I can't be fired for insubordination with no severance. She added that this is a blatant attempt to fire employees without severance to reduce layoff expense.

• "Paper tiger" by "Dose of reality". Full excerpt: You can't be forced to resign, they have to fire you/RIF you/lay you off. Unless there was prior written or otherwise documentable precedence for mandatory travel being a condition of employment, putting out a memo is nothing more than a scare tactic.

  They can't create policy that changes the terms of your employment and fire you with cause if you don't comply. That makes you subject to the stated severance policy. While that policy can be changed at will, it cannot be applied arbitrarily. Hold your ground, again unless you are committed to continuing employment here. If so, then God help you.

• "IBM's strategy - is this a joke?" by "dirtpoorstupid". Full excerpt: A Japanese company (Toyota) and an American company ( Ford Motors) decided to have a canoe race on the Missouri River.

  On the big day, the Japanese won by a mile. The Americans, very discouraged and depressed, decided to investigate the reason for the crushing defeat.

  A management team made up of senior management was formed to investigate and recommend appropriate action. Their conclusion was the Japanese had 8 people rowing and 1 person steering, while the American team had 8 people steering and 1 person rowing.

  Not sure of how to utilize that information, but wanting to prevent another loss to the Japanese, the rowing team's management structure was totally reorganized to 4 steering supervisors, 3 area steering superintendents and 1 assistant superintendent steering manager.

  They also implemented a new performance system that would give the 1 person rowing the boat greater incentive to work harder. It was called the Rowing Team Quality First Program, with meetings, dinners and free pens and a certificate of completion for the rower.

  The next year the Japanese won by two miles.

  Humiliated, the American management laid off the rower (a reduction in force) for poor performance, halted development of a new canoe, sold the paddles, and canceled all capital investments for new equipment.

  The money saved was distributed to the Senior Executives as bonuses and the next year's racing team was "outsourced" to India...

  Here's something else to think about:

  Ford has spent the last thirty years moving factories out of the US, claiming they can't make money paying American wages.

  Toyota has spent the last thirty years building more than a dozen plants inside the US

  The last quarter's results: Toyota makes 4 billion in profits while Ford racked up 9 billion in losses. Ford folks are still scratching their heads.

• "A lot of truth to that" by "Dose of reality". Full excerpt: There is a lot of IBM in your analogy. If you permit me to carry on the next chapter…

  The following year, the offshore team put 30 rowers in the boat with one onshore supervisor. Their paddles got hopelessly tangled, they spent the entire race blaming each other as well as the manufacturer of the canoe, the size of the paddles, and the onshore supervisor, who didn’t understand a word they were saying. They stopped rowing in the middle of the race in order to wait for better instructions, and a signed confirmation of what they needed to do. After they received them, they claimed that it would be impossible to complete the race as instructed and demanded an additional 40% in payment, because they needed to upgrade the skills of the team and add more resources.

  At the end of the day, they lost by over 3 miles and the boat sank, but it only cost the company a third of what it cost last year to lose by 2 miles. Management was ecstatic, and were again able to arrange for huge bonuses for themselves.

  As far as the Ford allusion goes, in addition to their obvious design and cost structure issues, they have some series PR issues that they are dealing with due to a suicidal refusal to address the cultural concerns of their core customer group. At the risk of riling up the censors, that’s all I’ll say about that, but if you want to know more just do a search on Ford boycott.