Welcome to IBM Employee News and Links

Our Friends:

Alliance@IBM Rocky Mountain Action Coalition U.K IBM Members

Quick Links:

Get involved! Insider trading After IBM Lenovo Employee Discount

Previous highlights:

January 28, 2012 January 21, 2012 January 7, 2012 December 31, 2011 December 24, 2011 December 17, 2011 December 10, 2011 December 3, 2011 November 26, 2011 November 19, 2011 November 12, 2011 November 5, 2011 October 29, 2011 October 22, 2011 October 15, 2011 October 8, 2011 October 1, 2011 September 24, 2011 September 17, 2011 September 10, 2011 September 3, 2011 August 27, 2011 August 20, 2011 August 13, 2011 August 6, 2011 July 30, 2011 July 23, 2011 July 16, 2011 July 9, 2011 July 2, 2011 June 25, 2011 June 18, 2011 June 11, 2011 June 4, 2011 May 28, 2011 May 21, 2011 May 14, 2011 May 7, 2011 April 30, 2011 April 23, 2011 April 16, 2011 April 9, 2011 April 2, 2011 March 26, 2011 March 19, 2011 March 12, 2011 March 5, 2011 February 26, 2011 February 19, 2011 February 12, 2011 February 5, 2011 January 29, 2011 January 22, 2011 January 15, 2011 January 8, 2011 January 1, 2011 December 25, 2010 December 18, 2010 December 11, 2010 December 4, 2010 November 27, 2010 November 20, 2010 November 13, 2010 November 6, 2010 October 30, 2010 October 23, 2010 October 16, 2010 October 9, 2010 October 2, 2010 September 25, 2010 September 18, 2010 September 11, 2010 September 4, 2010 August 28, 2010 August 21, 2010 August 14, 2010 August 7, 2010 July 31, 2010 July 24, 2010 July 17, 2010 July 10, 2010 July 3, 2010 June 26, 2010 June 19, 2010 June 12, 2010 June 5, 2010 May 29, 2010 May 22, 2010 May 15, 2010 May 8, 2010 May 1, 2010 April 24, 2010 April 17, 2010 April 10, 2010 April 3, 2010 March 27, 2010 March 20, 2010 March 13, 2010 March 6, 2010 February 27, 2010 February 20, 2010 February 13, 2010 February 6, 2010 January 30, 2010 January 23, 2010 January 16, 2010 January 9, 2010 January 2, 2010 December 26, 2009 December 19, 2009 December 12, 2009 December 5, 2009 November 28, 2009 November 21, 2009 November 14, 2009 November 7, 2009 October 31, 2009 October 24, 2009 October 17, 2009 October 10, 2009 October 3, 2009 September 26, 2009 September 19, 2009 September 12, 2009 September 5, 2009 August 29, 2009 August 22, 2009 August 15, 2009 August 8, 2009 August 1, 2009 July 25, 2009 July 18, 2009 July 11, 2009 July 4, 2009 June 27, 2009 June 20, 2009 June 13, 2009 June 6, 2009 May 30, 2009 May 23, 2009 May 16, 2009 May 9, 2009 May 2, 2009 April 25, 2009 April 18, 2009 April 11, 2009 April 4, 2009 March 28, 2009 March 21, 2009 March 14, 2009 March 7, 2009 February 28, 2009 February 21, 2009 February 14, 2009 February 7, 2009 January 31, 2009 January 24, 2009 January 17, 2009 January 10, 2009 January 03, 2009 December 27, 2008 December 20, 2008 December 13, 2008 December 6, 2008 November 29, 2008 November 22, 2008 November 15, 2008 November 8, 2008 November 1, 2008 October 25, 2008 October 18, 2008 October 11, 2008 October 4, 2008 September 27, 2008 September 20, 2008 September 13, 2008 September 6, 2008 August 30, 2008 August 23, 2008 August 16, 2008 August 9, 2008 August 2, 2008 July 26, 2008 July 19, 2008 July 12, 2008 July 5, 2008 June 28, 2008 June 21, 2008 June 14, 2008 June 7, 2008 May 31, 2008 May 24, 2008 May 17, 2008 May 10, 2008 2008 Stock Meeting April 26, 2008 April 19, 2008 April 12, 2008 April 5, 2008 March 29, 2008 March 22, 2008 March 15, 2008 March 8, 2008 March 1, 2008 February 16, 2008 February 9, 2008 February 2, 2008 January 26, 2008 January 19, 2008 January 12, 2008 January 5, 2008 December 29, 2007 December 22, 2007 December 15, 2007 December 8, 2007 December 1, 2007 November 24, 2007 November 17, 2007 November 10, 2007 November 3, 2007 October 27, 2007 October 20, 2007 October 13, 2007 October 6, 2007 September 29, 2007 September 22, 2007 September 15, 2007 September 8, 2007 September 1, 2007 August 25, 2007 August 18, 2007 August 11, 2007 August 4, 2007 July 28, 2007 July 21, 2007 July 14, 2007 July 7, 2007 June 30, 2007 June 23, 2007 June 16, 2007 June 9, 2007 June 2, 2007 May 26, 2007 May 19, 2007 May 12, 2007 May 5, 2007 2007 Stock Meeting April 21, 2007 April 14, 2007 April 7, 2007 March 31, 2007 March 24, 2007 March 17, 2007 March 10, 2007 March 3, 2007 February 24, 2007 February 17, 2007 February 10, 2007 February 3, 2007 January 27, 2007 January 20, 2007 January 13, 2007 January 6, 2007 December 30, 2006 December 23, 2006 December 16, 2006 December 9, 2006 December 2, 2006 November 25, 2006 November 18, 2006 November 11, 2006 November 4, 2006 October 28, 2006 October 21, 2006 October 14, 2006 October 7, 2006 September 30, 2006 September 23, 2006 September 16, 2006 September 9, 2006 September 2, 2006 August 26, 2006 August 19, 2006 August 12, 2006 August 5, 2006 July 29, 2006 July 22, 2006 July 15, 2006 July 8, 2006 July 1, 2006 June 24, 2006 June 17, 2006 June 10, 2006 June 3, 2006 May 27, 2006 May 20, 2006 May 13, 2006 May 6, 2006 2006 Stock Meeting April 22, 2006 April 15, 2006 April 8, 2006 April 1, 2006 March 25, 2006 March 18, 2006 March 11, 2006 March 4, 2006 February 25, 2006 February 18, 2006 February 11, 2006 February 4, 2006 January 28, 2006 January 21, 2006 January 14, 2006 January 7, 2006 December 31, 2005 December 24, 2005 December 17, 2005 December 10, 2005 December 03, 2005 November 26, 2005 November 19, 2005 November 12, 2005 November 5, 2005 October 29, 2005 October 22, 2005 October 15, 2005 October 8, 2005 October 1, 2005 September 24, 2005 September 17, 2005 September 10, 2005 September 3, 2005 August 27, 2005 August 20, 2005 August 13, 2005 August 6, 2005 July 30, 2005 July 23, 2005 July 16, 2005 July 9, 2005 July 2, 2005 June 25, 2005 June 18, 2005 June 11, 2005 June 4, 2005 May 28, 2005 May 21, 2005 May 14, 2005 May 7, 2005 April 30, 2005 April 23, 2005 April 16, 2005 April 9, 2005 April 2, 2005 March 26, 2005 March 19, 2005 March 12, 2005 March 5, 2005 February 26, 2005 February 19, 2005 February 12, 2005 February 5, 2005 January 29, 2005 January 22, 2005 January 15, 2005 January 8, 2005 January 1, 2005 December 25, 2004 December 18, 2004 December 11, 2004 December 4, 2004 November 27, 2004 November 20, 2004 November 13, 2004 November 6, 2004 October 30, 2004 October 23, 2004 October 16, 2004 October 9, 2004 October 2, 2004 September 25, 2004 September 18, 2004 September 11, 2004 September 4, 2004 August 28, 2004 August 21, 2004 August 14, 2004 August 7, 2004 July 31, 2004 July 24, 2004 July 17, 2004 July 10, 2004 July 3, 2004 June 26, 2004 June 19, 2004 June 5, 2004 May 29, 2004 May 22, 2004 May 15, 2004 May 8, 2004 2004 Stock Meeting April 24, 2004 April 10, 2004 April 3, 2004 March 27, 2004 March 20, 2004 March 13, 2004 March 6, 2004 February 28, 2004 February 21, 2004 February 14, 2004 February 7, 2004 February 1, 2004 January 18, 2004 December 27, 2003 December 20, 2003 December 13, 2003 December 6, 2003 November 29, 2003 November 22, 2003 November 15, 2003 November 8, 2003 November 1, 2003 October 25, 2003 October 18, 2003 October 11, 2003 October 4, 2003 September 27, 2003 September 20, 2003 September 13, 2003 September 6, 2003 August 30, 2003 August 23, 2003 August 16, 2003 August 9, 2003 Pension Lawsuit Win July 26, 2003 July 19, 2003 July 12, 2003 July 5, 2003 June 28, 2003 June 21, 2003 June 14, 2003 June 7, 2003 May 31, 2003 May 24, 2003 May 17, 2003 May 10, 2003 2003 Stock Meeting April 26, 2003 April 19, 2003 April 12, 2003 April 5, 2003 March 29, 2003 March 22, 2003 March 15, 2003 March 8, 2003 March 1, 2003 February 22, 2003 February 15, 2003 February 8, 2003 February 1, 2003 January 25, 2003 January 18, 2003 January 11, 2003 January 4, 2003 December 28, 2002 December 21, 2002 December 14, 2002 December 7, 2002 November 30, 2002 November 23, 2002 November 16, 2002 November 9, 2002 November 2, 2002 October 26, 2002 October 19, 2002 October 12, 2002 October 5, 2002 September 28, 2002 September 21, 2002 September 14, 2002 September 7, 2002 August 31, 2002 August 24, 2002 August 17, 2002 August 10, 2002 August 3, 2002 July 27, 2002 July 20, 2002 July 13, 2002 July 6, 2002 June 29, 2002 June 22, 2002 June 15, 2002 June 8, 2002 June 1, 2002 May 25, 2002 May 18, 2002 May 11, 2002 2002 Stock Meeting April 27, 2002 April 20, 2002 April 13, 2002 April 6, 2002 March 30, 2002 March 23, 2002 March 16, 2002 March 9, 2002 March 2, 2002 February 23, 2002 February 16, 2002 February 9, 2002 February 2, 2002 January 26, 2002 January 19, 2002 January 12, 2002 January 5, 2002 December 29, 2001 December 22, 2001 December 15, 2001 December 8, 2001 December 1, 2001 November 24, 2001 November 17, 2001 November 10, 2001 November 3, 2001 October 27, 2001 October 20, 2001 October 13, 2001 October 6, 2001 September 29, 2001 September 22, 2001 September 15, 2001 September 8, 2001 September 1, 2001 August 25, 2001 August 18, 2001 August 11, 2001 August 4, 2001 July 28, 2001 July 21, 2001 July 14, 2001 July 7, 2001 June 30, 2001 June 23, 2001 June 16, 2001 June 9, 2001 June 2, 2001 May 26, 2001 May 19, 2001 May 12, 2001 May 5, 2001 2001 Stock Meeting April 21, 2001 April 14, 2001 April 7, 2001 March 31, 2001 March 24, 2001 March 17, 2001 March 10, 2001 March 3, 2001 February 24, 2001 February 17, 2001 February 10, 2001 February 3, 2001 January 27, 2001 January 20, 2001 January 13, 2001 January 6, 2001 December 30, 2000 December 23, 2000 December 16, 2000 December 9, 2000 December 2, 2000 November 24, 2000 November 17, 2000 November 10, 2000 November 4, 2000 October 28, 2000 October 21, 2000 October 14, 2000 October 7, 2000 September 30, 2000 September 23, 2000 September 16, 2000 September 9, 2000 September 2, 2000 August 26, 2000 August 19, 2000 August 12, 2000 July 29, 2000 July 22, 2000 July 15, 2000 July 1, 2000 June 24, 2000 June 17, 2000 June 10, 2000 June 3, 2000 May 27, 2000 May 20, 2000 May 13, 2000 May 6, 2000 April, 2000

Highlights—May 16, 2009

• Wordpress Blog: IBM’s Anti-American Labor Practices. By "barbararaisbeck". Excerpt: Today, on International Workers’ Day, I bring you a story on IBM’s labor practices. The post IBM Outsourcing Thousands of Jobs to India has been one of the most widely read and commented articles on this blog. Understandably, there is a lot of agitation around the issue of outsourcing American jobs. I recently spoke with Alliance@IBM Representative Rick White on what is transpiring at IBM. Following the interview are a series of videos with IBM in the news. The hypocritical comments from IBM CEO Sam Palmisano in the first video, and his audacity to ask for stimulus money, are reprehensible.
• MC Press Online: IBM Layoffs and Compensation Raise Disturbing Questions About Corporate Ethics. By Chris Smith. Excerpts: The corporation continues to keep layoff numbers secret but is obliged to report that executives received millions in bonuses and extravagant perks. ...

  The secrecy surrounding the layoffs at IBM, which most observers close to the situation have estimated will total about 10,000 in North America this year, is just one of the seeds of discontent the company is sowing in this period of economic downturn. Mind you, people are losing their jobs all over the place, and private companies aren't exactly broadcasting how badly they are being hurt by the recession. One of my friends is watching her human resources and insurance business evaporate because her small-business clients are simply shutting their doors and going belly up.

  The policy of most large companies, however, is to announce layoffs of significant size. It's considered a matter of business and social responsibility and has the effect of easing the psychological blow on the laid-off worker by telling the community that it's not the fault of the workers that they are losing their jobs; it's just that the company is cutting back. By not announcing the layoffs, IBM is making it harder on the people who are losing their jobs. The message is: suck it up, the company is doing fine, you're being laid off because you weren't as good as the workers we chose to keep.

  This message of inadequacy is multiplied onto a national scale. While IBM is laying off workers in North America, it is hiring workers in emerging markets. As of last year, the company had nearly as many workers in Brazil, China, India, and Russia--113,000--as it did in the U.S.

  The most recent IBM layoff of some 5,000 workers has raised the ire of the union-backed Alliance@IBM, which says that IBM is "abandoning the U.S. workforce." Lee Conrad, national coordinator for the group, made that statement upon learning about a patent application IBM had submitted that essentially is for a method to outsource work offshore. "A method for identifying human-resource work content to outsource offshore of an organization," was originally submitted for a patent in January 2006, according to Christine Young, a reporter for the Middletown, New York, Times Herald-Record. The application was withdrawn in October 2007 by IBM, which said that it lacked technical content.

  At the end of last month, however, the existence of a second, similar patent came to light. According to Young, the application, which had been sitting in the Patent Office for some time unbeknownst to the press, was for a "computerized system to help businesses outsource offshore jobs while maximizing government tax breaks." The application apparently referenced weighing such goals as "50 percent of resources in China by 2010," the Times Herald-Record reported. ...

  Meanwhile, grumbling continues among laid-off IBM employees who just learned recently that the man responsible for steering IBM safely through the troubled waters of 2008 received nearly $21 million in compensation for his stewardship. IBM Chairman and CEO Sam Palmisano was rewarded for his efforts with salary--$1.8 million; performance-based bonus--$5.5 million; stock options and awards--$12.2 million; and perks--$1.44 million (including $493,881 for personal use of a company aircraft). The figures were reported as part of the company's filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. ...

  There is something ironic and tragic about workers who help build up a company to the pinnacle of success, only to have the current regime of well-heeled executives secretly fire them and stealthily replace them with lower-paid foreign workers. Meanwhile, stockholders and company executives continue to reap far-above-average rewards from the corporation's continued high profits--which all employees took part in producing through hard work and extraordinary dedication.

• Charlotte News & Observer: Times bring tough choices for families of the elderly. Laid off from IBM, wife has to find less-expensive facility for husband. By Thomas Goldsmith. Excerpts: The recession pushed Walt Kline, an IBM retiree with Alzheimer's disease, out of his latest home Friday. Kline, 74, whose four-year battle with the illness was chronicled by The News & Observer last year, moved from his home at the $4,800-a-month Woodland Terrace assisted-living center into a low-rated Chatham County nursing home. ...

  Peggy Kline had also worked for IBM, but recently lost her job along with thousands of others at the computer giant. Her unemployment, along with the impending expiration of Walt's long-term care insurance, meant the Cary couple could no longer afford the cost of his slot at Woodland Terrace.

  Selected reader comments concerning the above article follow:

  • annonymous wrote on May, 2 7:22 AM: To the contrary - this is not due to economic distress or out of our control. IBM is enjoying record profits, increasing stockholder dividends, and stock price is high. In their own communications with the media - American employees are being laid off for the sole purpose of shipping American jobs overseas. Cheaper labor and, more importantly, our corporate tax policy -- low corporate taxes (5%) on overseas profits are driving this. If tax laws changed, so would corporate behavior and jobs would stay in the United States. Multiply this story by 10,000 - the number of IBM employees laid off since January - and you begin to see what it is doing to American families. Contact your representatives in Congress.
  • Cottonelle wrote on May, 2 9:06 AM: Sam Palmisano, CEO of IBM stated in a recent Fortune magazine article that the company was planning to put millions into marketing efforts. As much advertising as we have today, the CEOs of the advertising companies must be filthy rich too. Is this really needed in lieu of taking care of longtime loyal employees?
  • LearningFast wrote on May, 2 10:35 PM: IBM's strategy on what appears to be age discrimination is interesting. The IBM severance package discloses possible guilt upfront by giving employees the breakouts. The groups hit hardest were over 40. They specifically list all the laws that they think they may have violated. You are then asked to sign the release waiving your right to sue and take the money or not. They advise you to talk to a lawyer before signing. Since most people cannot analyze this information timely and don't understand the law, they sign, game over. Effectively IBM skips the trial and settles for pennies on the dollar with their severance offer.

    If your job moves to China you may get offered the Project Match option. Your job moved and you can too. We think you will like it. Of course the local currency is fish heads.

    While this is an effective way to exterminate employees, do US corporations really need to behave this way to be successful?

  • LearningFast wrote on May, 2 10:50 PM: Refresh my memory. What was IBM's 2008 revenues? $104 Billion. What was IBM's 2008 profits? $12 Billion. How much would an angry jury award to a person who was wrongfully terminated for whatever reason after devoting most of their life to IBM? This type of corporate behavior must be stopped. I am very sorry about Ms. Kline's loss and I admire her courage and strength during this difficult time.
• BusinessWeek: Why Jobs Go Begging Amid Layoffs. Mismatched skills and picky hiring managers explain why openings persist ahead of the government's latest payroll report. By Peter Coy. Excerpts: So what gives? Why don't employers give jobs to some of those 13 million people who are eager to work? Wouldn't that make everybody happy? Employers don't see it that way. They say that jobless people don't necessarily have the skills they're looking for—especially since the sectors with the most openings (education and health care) are very different from the ones that are losing the most workers, manufacturing and construction. Even within the same industry, employers say, there are people whose skills are outdated or out of sync with what's needed for the jobs that need filling.

  But BusinessWeek was deluged with comments from people, many of them unemployed, who said employers are too picky, want to avoid paying for training, want to export jobs, or would rather hire cheap foreigners on H-1B visas. Here's a typical comment from someone who signed herself Lucy: "I don't believe this article at all; it's hogwash. IBM is not laying off people because of a skills-mismatch problem. They are laying off people because they want to offshore all U.S. jobs to low-wage countries, or bring in more people to the U.S. under the H-1B visa program. They also don't want to train U.S. employees."

• IBM Pension and Retirement Issues message board: "An inquiry from public radio show Marketplace" by Janet Krueger. Full excerpt: I received the following request from a journalist at National Public Radio. Please respond to him directly if you are interested in talking...

  Hello - I'm a journalist at the public radio program Marketplace. We're trying to get in touch with people who have experienced layoffs to find out how people are staying in touch (or not) with the companies they've left. If you find it appropriate, I'd be grateful if you could post the following request to the ibmpension discussion group.

  Anyone who responds to the inquiry by filling out the form becomes a source for public radio -- our goal is to tap people with insight into news topics to inform our reporting. And it goes without saying that we would love to have more current and former IBM employees in our source network to help us in reporting about technology, pensions, employee benefits and more topics. Many thanks, Joellen Easton.

  The public radio show Marketplace is looking for people who can give us insight into what happens after a layoff. Use this link to talk to the show: http://tinyurl.com/d2nzqd.

  Getting laid off can be an isolating experience in which work-based connections and relationships break down. But some companies, like IBM, Lockheed Martin and Microsoft, are making efforts to stay in touch with laid-off employees through online social networks and other means.

  If you've been laid off, have you kept up relationships with your former employer, or your coworkers? Did you burn bridges, or leave on good terms? And if you are staying in touch via a"corporate alumni community," what's that like? Do you feel it's for your benefit...or the employer's, so they can find you when it's time to start rehiring?

  How have you maintained work connections post-layoff? Talk to Marketplace: http://tinyurl.com/d2nzqd

  Thank you, Joellen Easton Analyst, Public Insight Journalism Blogger, The Trading Floor (http://www.publicradio.org/columns/marketplace/tradingfloor/) Marketplace | American Public Media.

• HR On Your Desktop: Can't Resist - Lack Of Critical Thinking Again - IBM. Full excerpt: So folks - here's another one for the critical thinking waste basket. From another patent application:

  "A significant source of wasted time is the general predisposition to using integral units of time, based on hour or half hour increments. This is especially true of business meetings, which are invariably scheduled to last an hour. Meeting attendees will fill the full hour for which the meeting is scheduled regardless of whether the entire hour is necessary to address the business at hand. The result of this is that a meeting that could have taken less than an hour will end up wasting time due to the arbitrary hour-based scheduling paradigm."

  I've never attended a meeting in the last 20 years that lasted as long as it was scheduled - it either runs longer or shorter than the scheduled time. And no, they are not typically an hour. If the meeting runs shorter, then we all leave. No one feels obligated, including the person calling the meeting, to use up the extra time. So the assumption: "Meeting attendees will fill the full hour for which the meeting is scheduled ..." is absurd unless your management paradigm is so screwed up within your company that people actually do that. That's a management problem easily solved, not a software design issue that is worthy of a patent. Perhaps the management should adopt the Best Buy corporate meeting philosophy - don't schedule a meeting unless it is absolutely necessary and then don't schedule it. You get a lot more done.

  No wonder Scott Adams doesn't have to work hard... people do it for him every day. Critical thinking - where did you go?

• Yahoo! IGM Employee Issues message board: "Time Off with one third pay" by "Gary Louis". Full excerpt: Take Time. STG/ISC launch US summer time-off pilot. Take Time Estimators. Visit the Media Library to estimate your salary payments if you 'Take Time.' The tool is available for regular work schedule employees and alternate work schedule employees.

  A new pilot program will allow some IBMers the option to take time off this summer at partial pay. The voluntary program called "Take Time" is open to Systems and Technology Group and Integrated Supply Chain employees in the United States.

  Take Time participants can use the added time in any way they wish – to volunteer in the community, engage in skill development/learning activities or simply spend more time with their family. For instance, Take Time participants could take advantage of IBM's On Demand Community and find volunteer opportunities in their communities.

  While IBM reported favorable first quarter earnings overall, Systems and Technology Group's performance reflected the current challenges facing hardware companies. Take Time offers employees a way to voluntarily participate in a program that provides them additional personal flexibility while providing the business with a potential way to reduce operating expenses.

  How it works: Regular full-time employees can take anywhere from 10 to 20 extra days off (or seven or 14 extra days off for employees working an alternate work schedule) at one-third pay from May 15 through August 31. They are free to structure the time away as they prefer one day a week, all days consecutively, or some variation in between, in full-day increments. Employees who are on IBM sales incentive plans or in client-impact support roles are not eligible to participate.

  The pay deductions will not be taken during the summer when the time away is being used. Instead, the pay deductions will occur in equal increments from the two pay statements in September, giving participating employees time to plan financially for the cash flow changes.

  Benefits coverage, including earned vacation, continues without interruption since employees are considered active and full-time employees while participating in Take Time.

• Yahoo! IBM Employee Issues message board: "Re: Time Off with one third pay" by "sby_willie". Full excerpt: Why not have the VP's heading ISC and STG take time off this summer for reduced pay as well? Better yet since these VP's are having trouble making their numbers for 3rd QTR maybe they should be RA'ed.
• Yahoo! IBM Employee Issues message board: "Re: Time Off with one third pay" by "flatsflyer". Full excerpt: Only problem is that the program will put a target on your back for the next round of "RA's". It will not reduce your utilization (target) and if you can afford to be away from your cubicle for more than 3 days your 2nd line management will probably figure your job is not necessary.
• Yahoo! IBM Employee Issues message board: "Re: Time Off with one third pay" by "ibmretiree2006". Full excerpt: Oh Iggy!!! You think IBM has some ulterior motive? What have they done to make you suspect this is not a good thing? Why, if they can do without you during the summer for a bit, why not year round? OR when things are slow, furlough you. I guess we are both jaded.

  And then there was a comment about "life balance," IBM's fabulous program to "help" the employee. How can you have "life balance" when you are working 6 days a week. I get emails from folks in my time zone at 11PM, 4AM, Saturdays and even Sundays. But heck, as long as the corporation is making profit, who cares? I have a lot of contacts in IBM still and I am seeing really top quality people AFRAID to take vacation time. Working on RFPs on Christmas day and Easter. I am one of the lucky ones but I surely do feel for those poor ba$tard$...

• Yahoo! IBM Employee Issues message board: "I've been reading your posts and have a question" by "Collen Burger". Full excerpt: Hello, I am newly RA'd IBMer. Been with the company 27 years. Was really hoping to make it to 30 to get the medical coverage but the target on my back was just too big. Always a 1 or 2 (2+ now) performer with all the accolades. IBMretiree...I really appreciate your posts. They are right on and you seem like a very honorable, well rounded human being.

  What got me to post after a lot of reading was your statement: "An analogy is someone suffering domestic abuse but has NO WHERE to go (or believes they have no where to go)" ...that is EXACTLY how I felt and said (to myself of course) many many times. I was SO SCARED. I come from a place where IBM is the ONLY game in town and my parents didn't have enough money to send me to college. The day I got into IBM at a very young age was one of the happiest days of my life (or so I thought). To see what I have seen over 27 years...words cannot express.

  I am hoping that IBMretiree or some of the obviously intelligent gentlemen on this board can help me with a question. I need an answer from an 'insider'. The question is, should I take my pension now or should I wait 5 years when I hit 55? That will be my next opportunity to take it, now or 5 years from now. The reason I am asking you is, do you think with the way IBM is going it will still be there for me in 5 years? I would appreciate very much any help or advice you might have for me on whether you think I should take the money now or wait...I admit I am a very sheltered IBMer. uh... ex-IBMer... THANK YOU... for any help...Seaflea

• Yahoo! IBM Employee Issues message board: "Re: I've been reading your posts and have a question" by "flatsflyer". Full excerpt: I took the money and ran. I did have 30 years but my account put it very simple, take as much as you can get as early as you can. I worked for 6 years as a consult after retiring but I think the outlook today is some what more challenging. If you don't take it now and you can't find employment in your field, then what will you do? Hate to say it but with the college education you may end up with a lower paying job, with your pension and a lower paying job you probably will be alright. Then when your SS kicks in at 62 with an annual COLA you maybe able to fully retire.
• Yahoo! IBM Employee Issues message board: "Re: I've been reading your posts and have a question" by "Colleen Burger". Full excerpt: Thank you for your reply flatsflyer. It is interesting to hear what your accountant said. The only 'accountant' I have talked to is the Money-Smart person that IBM is providing to me free of charge (I'm using him because he is FREE)...but he hasn't been especially available or helpful really. I realize I will be making half of what I was making at IBM and that's if I'm LUCKY, with no college education. I am taking advantage of the retraining IBM is offering in the package they gave the RA'd folks, but no matter what I will never make that kind of money again and I know that. I'm actually not sure what 'COLA' is...I have a lot to learn. I will be sure to look into what that is....thanks again for your reply, I appreciate it !! Seaflea
• Yahoo! IBM Employee Issues message board: "Re: I've been reading your posts and have a question" by "madinpok". Full excerpt: I wouldn't worry too much about the safety of the IBM pension fund. The pension fund is in reasonably good shape today, and is a trust fund that is separate from the rest of IBM's money. Even if IBM were to go bankrupt, that doesn't mean everyone would lose their pensions.

  I think you should focus on the difference in dollar value to you of having the money now vs later and how that fits into your financial situation.

  I think that if you run estimates for your pension amounts for taking it now vs 5 years from now, you will find that it increases very little for each additional year that you wait - probably something in the range of 1 - 2% per year.

  For that small increase, you are probably better off taking it now. Think of it this way. Say your pension will be $10,000 per year if you take it now, and $11,000 per year if you wait 5 years. If you take it now, you will have $50,000 in the bank 5 years from now vs starting off with nothing and getting $11,000 per year going forward. Even allowing for a fairly high income tax rate, if you waited 5 years, it would take you 25 years or more to hit the break even point before waiting would have been the right choice.

  My math here is highly oversimplified. But the pension amounts are based on average life expectancies and the crossover point is usually around 80 years of age. IBM's pension calculations include an early retirement subsidy that results in a more generous pension (in terms of the theoretical lump sum value) the younger you are. So if you want to get the most money out of IBM's pocket, that is another reason to start now instead of waiting.

  You might have an idea about how long you might live based on your family history. But who knows what else might happen in the meantime? Those unknown factors tend to make me think that, if it were me, taking the pension now is a good idea.

  Finally, it is always a good idea to talk to a fee-for-service financial adviser about these decisions. It is an important, once in a lifetime choice and someone who understands your full financial picture can hopefully give you a recommendation that is right for you.

• Yahoo! IBM Retiree Information Exchange: "Re: Retiree ID Cards" by "ibmretiree2006". Full excerpt: Ah, remember those Family Dinners? The Christmas parties with gifts for the children? the "Fun In The Sun" outings? The IBM club? The Silver Spoons? Sam and his buds get all the money that was spent on those events as boneii!!!
• Yahoo! IBM Retiree Information Exchange: "Re: Retiree ID Cards" by "lederer2000". Full excerpt: Back in the day was a great time. I remember being so proud to work for IBM. How proud my wife was. My mother would love to tell people that her son "worked for IBM", like I was a doctor of something. I lived on Long Island at the time. there weren't that many IBM'ers around. It's amazing how time changed.
• Yahoo! IBM Retiree Information Exchange: "Re: Retiree ID Cards" by "ibmretiree2006". Full excerpt: We would have "taken a bullet" for IBM. Now, the bullet COMES from IBM. Yes, we have so many telling us the world has changed and this is a new global economy. What they keep glossing over is the delta we had to, say, TJ Jr is salary and today's IBM Executive world. I am glad I am retired but I rarely tell anyone where I retired from. I won't say I am exactly embarrassed but surely don't feel the pride I had up until a decade or so ago.
• Yahoo! IBM Retiree Information Exchange: "Re: Family dinners" by "trolly.dodger". Full excerpt: The Family Dinners in Mid-Town Manhattan were really big events. They would pay for your baby sitter so that the spouse could make it. They were "dry." My date almost chocked on a class of pink lemonade; not what she was expecting. Back when the personnel were important and respect for the individual was a two-way street. Think has changed to scheme Bob Coppola
• Yahoo! IBM Retiree Information Exchange: "Re: Family dinners" by "Lou Copits". Full excerpt: I was in a tech support group and a marketing office. Every few years we would have an excellent dinner, spouse included, white tablecloth type and wine at least once. A high level executive would attend, with Tom Watson once. A very nice fringe benefit.
• Yahoo! IBM Retiree Information Exchange: "Re: Family dinners-Picnics In Austin" by "lambeththompson". Full excerpt: Was in Austin in Mid 70's-Many good memories of Family Christmas Parties, Family Picnics in 'then IBM Century Oaks Park'. In those days the people we worked with daily were also our family friends! Sadly the IBM property which was the Century Oaks Park has been sold and turned into a shopping center.
• Yahoo! IBM Retiree Information Exchange: "Re: Retiree ID Cards" by "lederer2000". Full excerpt: We had Family Dinners when I worked in the OP Division on Long Island. This was from 1968 to 1974. I don't remember where they were held, but it was in one of the swankiest places on Long Island. I don't believe they were every year either. I seem to remember every other year. You could put in an expense form for costs of the tip for valet parking and baby sitting costs. Of course no booze, but they did have a "cash bar" on the premises.
• Yahoo! IBM Retiree Information Exchange: "Re: Retiree ID Cards" by "Paly". Full excerpt: Family dinners were really nice affairs. We had them in New York City at some class hotels when I worked in the branch. I would meet my wife's train in Grand Central and hook up with other couples from the office. That was when IBM was IBM. A branch office was like a family. Before pigs like Gerstner and Palmisano turned it anti family anti employee. SHAME on them.
• Yahoo! IBM Retiree Information Exchange: "Re: Retiree ID Cards" by "Paly". Full excerpt: That was like a hundred years ago Larry, And BTW only received one out of 5 silver spoons, IBM has turned into a company you would not recognize let alone want to be associated with. The days of family dinners and Christmas parties etc etc were over years ago.

  Those of us not yet Medicare eligible are going through hell trying to insure our wives. Over 900 a month is more than half our pensions or damn near. I am forced to take early SS payments to make ends meet. It is my goal to find my wife outside insurance and then get away from IBM insurance when medicare comes around. I never thought it would be like this when I came aboard over 40 years ago.

• Yahoo! IBM Retiree Information Exchange: "Re: Family Dinners et al" by "mr_quarkwrench". Full excerpt: And how many from southern California offices remember Disneyland night in Novembers of the late '60s and early '70s. This was a time when Disneyland still had the A thru E tickets but on IBM night all rides were open. I miss the real IBM. -- Don
• Yahoo! IBM Retiree Information Exchange: "QC Club" by Rod Cordell. Full excerpt: Induction into the Quarter Century was something. You got to pick the restaurant and the guests, I don't remember how many guests. Your guests would be paid by IBM to get there no mater what part of the country they were in. By 1990 that had changed. The lunch, at least in San Jose was moved to the Homestead on the plant site. Still got a Rolex. A couple of years later it went from a Rolex to a Tudor.

  Into the early '80s, at least, they would pay for a lunch, at a restaurant of your choice, for hitting 30 years. You could invite a half a dozen of your buddies. You could even act like grownups and have a drink, or two, all of the attendees had the rest of the day off. Rod Cordell 1965-1995.

• Yahoo! IBM Retiree Information Exchange: "Re: QC Club" by "drebe102". Full excerpt: I joined in 57 and retired in 87. I hit it at the best of times. Main Frames and IBM were flying high. Family dinners, Golden Circles, 100% Clubs, Rolex Watches, 25 year dinners, and all the rest. My pension plan and medical is still going fine after twenty something years. I have no complaints whatsoever.

  All this discussion about how bad IBM has become and how unfaithful it is to it's employees sort of chaps me. I personally think that the employees changed first. They had no loyalty to their employer. I am not sure but that it was the egg -- not the chicken. America was taken over by the psychology of entitlement -- the "ME" generation.

• Yahoo! IBM Retiree Information Exchange: "Re: QC Club" by "orsonbear". Full excerpt: Sorry, old timer, but you have been away from IBM too long, 22 years. You did not live through the current history. You forget that in 1993, IBM hired Lou Gerstner, an outside hatchet man, to be the CEO. He subsequently brought in dozens of outsiders, like Randy MacDonald, head of HR (and who is still there).

  Lou and Randy engineered the termination of over 100,000 IBMers. Lou officially discarded the Basic Beliefs and put in place a new list of "core values". "Respect for the Individual" was not on the list. IBM stopped being "IBM" and was now "just another computer company".

  Sure, IBM is amazingly successful, having had its best year ever in 2008. But the culture is gone. It is NOT the employees who did this. Do you ever see IBM making the "best places to work" list? Wonder why not?

• Yahoo! IBM Retiree Information Exchange: "Re: QC Club" by "madinpok". Full excerpt: Actually, Lou's original hatchet man was Tom "Socks" Bouchard who engineered the vast, initial rounds of layoffs and then the great pension heists in 1995 and 1999. Randy MacDonald didn't arrive until 2000.
• Yahoo! IBM Retiree Information Exchange: "Re: QC Club" by "bits_bytes_and_bugs". Full excerpt: It may chap you, but the IBM company you worked for from 1957 to 1987 no longer exists. IBM used to be a great company to work for - it used to be one of the best companies to work for. It is no longer. The decline in employer loyalty started shortly after you left.

  I bet you never heard a Senior Vice President tell his reports at a town hall meeting that "if you want loyalty, get a dog".

  I bet you have no idea what it's like to work your ass off, watching solid performing long term co-workers get resource actioned every quarter even though their performance was good and there's plenty of work to do, simply because the executives of the corporation are cutting costs to pump up the short-term stock price. You probably have no idea what it's like to wonder every quarter whether you get to keep your job.

  That is the truth - and it's not the employees that changed first. The change was that employees were once treated like assets - now they are fungible liabilities to be discarded like trash whenever the execs need to cut costs to pump up the stock price.

  It used to be that IBM would invest strategically in plants, people and technology. The executives led the company with a long term focus. That too is gone. All that matters now at IBM (and a lot of other companies) is the short term stock price. The exec team has more focus on managing the short term stock price than it does leading the company.

  You got your pension and retiree medical. Mine was cut in 1991, 1995, 1999 and frozen in 2007. My retiree medical was taken away and replaced with a funny money account that won't last 3 years before it's all used up. Most of my coworkers are worse off than I.

  A lot of very bad things have happened at IBM in the 22 years since you retired, so rather than blame the victims, you may want to listen with compassion.

• Yahoo! IBM Pension and Retirement Issues message board: "IBM Retiree Health Coverage vs. Government 'Single Payer'" by Thomas Holford. Full excerpt: I currently am signed up for the IBM Medium Deductible PPO. I am not an expert in healthcare plans, but compared to what most other people have, I have to believe I have good coverage. Six years ago, I had a major (and expensive) life-saving medical procedure which was adequately and satisfactorily covered by my (then) IBM healthcare plan.

  Compared to what I have now AND WHAT I EARNED AS A LIFETIME BENEFIT AND PAID FOR AS A PART OF MY IBM EMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION, I believe that any government provided "national healthcare benefit" or "single payer healthcare" system will be vastly inferior to my current healthcare coverage.

  My question is: does my expectation of a lifetime assurance of comprehensive, high quality, available health care represent a contractual obligation and a "property right" which the Obama administration or any other government interlopers are Constitutionally prohibited from interfering with?

  Or, in other words, if the government tries to make me accept some shabby, third-world health care plan and take away my access to arguably superior IBM Retiree health care plans, are there avenues of legal recourse under contract law, property rights ("takings", ex post facto doctrines, or whatever?

• Yahoo! IBM Pension and Retirement Issues message board: "Re: IBM Retiree Health Coverage vs. Government 'Single Payer'" by Kathi Cooper. Full excerpt: You have no legal right to medical health care from IBM. It is a gift. That is why they call it a benefit. Lots of companies want to drop it. If you want your medical benefits legally protected, you need to work with your Congressional Critters.

  Whenever I go to the hospital, as a patient or a visitor, I've observed they medically treat everyone the same. I'm pretty sure you receive the same superior medical treatment as me and everyone else.

  Regarding your concern of 'third world' medical treatment, what pills have you been popping?

• Yahoo! IBM Pension and Retirement Issues message board: "Re: IBM Retiree Health Coverage vs. Government 'Single Payer'" by Thomas Holford. Full excerpt: Retiree medical health care from IBM is more than a gift; it was an inducement offered to tens of thousands of people to accept employment with IBM.

  I don't think that IBM and the government can ethically and legally get away with saying that we are going to exchange your proffered inducement of high quality retiree medical health plans with crappy stand-in-line government healthcare plan that doesn't pay for hip replacements because you're over 66 or whatever.

  I have to believe that there are many, many underemployed trial lawyers who could articulately make the case that such a scheme (in the absence of bankruptcy) is at minimum bait and switch and arguably default on an implicit or constructive contract.

• Yahoo! IBM Pension and Retirement Issues message board: "Re: IBM Retiree Health Coverage vs. Government 'Single Payer'" by Kathi Cooper. Full excerpt: IBM can ethically and legally get away with changing your health plans on any day of the week. They have to tell you they are doing it, but that is about it.

  There are around 40 million Americans using single payer health insurance and they get quality hip replacements whenever they need one. It is the same superior hip replacement that you would get either on IBM's plan or on a single payer plan. (And I've never known anyone to wait for one, how silly is that?)

  Bait and switch has nothing to do with it. Contract law has nothing to do with it. Why? Because IBM's health benefits are not legally protected by any law. The truth is sometimes hard to take, but that is the truth.

  Be grateful that IBM provides you with health care. In fact, be grateful that you still work for IBM. If you were RA'd, like tens of thousands just lately, you would be paying up the yin-yang for your premiums, for a while, before they run out, and then you wouldn't have any health benefits at all, unless you are able to get another job at a company that provides it, if they do, which many don't anymore.

• Yahoo! IBM Pension and Retirement Issues message board: "Re: IBM Retiree Health Coverage vs. Government 'Single Payer'" by Kathi Cooper. Full excerpt: Regarding active employees health care (USHR106): "As noted in various company publications, IBM reserves the right, at its discretion, to amend, change or TERMINATE ANY OF ITS BENEFITS PLANS as the company requires."

  Regarding the FHA if you are lucky enough to qualify (USHR117): "IBM reserves the right, at its discretion, to amend, change or terminate any of its benefits plans, programs, practices or policies, as the company requires. Nothing contained in this summary shall be construed as creating an express or implied obligation on the part of IBM to maintain such benefits plans, programs, practices or policies. Your benefits at or after retirement may be different from those described herein due to changes made to the IBM Future Health Account or THE TERMINATION OF THE PLAN."

  (emphasis mine on both quotes from IBM's docs)

• Yahoo! IBM Pension and Retirement Issues message board: "Re: IBM Retiree Health Coverage vs. Government 'Single Payer'" by Mike Germano. Full excerpt: 1) You'll be able to keep your private plan under the proposed White House changes. You only have to use the Government plan if you have no coverage. You can also choose it instead of your private coverage.

  2) If we don't go to a better model, most of us will not be able to afford health insurance as costs and deductibles continue to rise.

  3) The US is way down on the list for quality medical care and life expectancy compared to other industrialized nations with (gasp!) socialized medicine. The US is number one in what it pays for medical costs, though. Even several non-industrialized nations have much better medial care at much lower costs. What we are doing clearly isn't working very well.

  IMHO, as long as we have a "for-profit" medical system, then we'll never get costs under control. Don't give me the GOP bullsh*t lines about competition lowering prices and private being able to do it cheaper than government because it's had every opportunity to happen for many years and look at the mess we're in. The definition of a fool is someone who keeps doing the exact same thing and expecting a different outcome. It's time to give Government 2.0 a chance.

• Yahoo! IBM Pension and Retirement Issues message board: "Re: IBM Retiree Health Coverage vs. Government 'Single Payer'" by "Courtault." Full excerpt: As Kathi rightly points out, the "expectation" is just that - an expectation. IBM is under no obligation to continue coverage and can raise deductions, caps on payment, etc. as it wishes. IBM can also make qualification more difficult or limit payment to only certain types of conditions. In essence, you are running on pure luck.

  Current healthcare plans dictate the level of treatment one receives. My hospital employee friend can tell you story after story - including the one where a patient complained of severe headaches, was denied diagnostic tests by his insurance company, and died of an aneurysm. So your complaint would seem to be more about who would set those limits (government vs. insurance companies) rather than the existence of such limits.

  As for your "superior IBM Retiree health care plans," you do realize don't you that only a fraction of those retiring from IBM actually get them? As I recall, only those "retirement eligible" at the time of the '99 pension/healthcare disaster get the "old" retirement healthcare coverage. Everyone else get royally screwed and essentially have little to no retirement healthcare coverage from IBM. Your answer to that almost comes across as, "I've got MINE and it's too bad for you."

• Yahoo! IBM Pension and Retirement Issues message board: "Re: IBM Retiree Health Coverage vs. Government 'Single Payer'" by "flatsflyer". Full excerpt: Your answer to that almost comes across as, "I've got MINE and it's too bad for you."

  I don't think any "older" Retiree feels that way at all. What many of us do feel is that the people who could have cause changes in the way IBM treats employees, retiree's fail to do anything about the continual abuses, takeaways, clawbacks, etc. Those of us who do have the old plan where gone when this happened and the employees at that time and ever since failed to do anything, just laid back and continued to accept whatever IBM dished out. There was not much we could do other than voting our proxies, the active employee's could have done a lot, strike, sick-in's, etc. The least they could have done was to join the union. It's quiet clear now that anything the employee's could have done would have been better than what they got from Three Finger Lou and Slumdog Sam.

  It's possibly too lat now because IBM knows that the 100,000 remaining US employees are short lived and they have their strategy practically fully implemented. You have trained your replacements, you have failed to support your union. IBM management knew that employees would not do anything and therefore went ahead and changed the business model.

• Yahoo! IBM Pension and Retirement Issues message board: "Re: IBM Retiree Health Coverage vs. Government 'Single Payer'" by Linda Albury . Full excerpt: When your Congressman or woman seek medical care, they get the best care available, paid by you the taxpayer. It's certainly not the "third-world" care that someone else had mentioned. It's the care that I as an American citizen and taxpayer would also like to get. Since companies like IBM are dropping healthcare like a hot potato and putting the burden on the so-called retiree, I'll go with the government care just like our Congressmen and women take advantage of now.
• Yahoo! IBM Pension and Retirement Issues message board: "Re: IBM Retiree Health Coverage vs. Government 'Single Payer'" by Nancy Goodenough . Full excerpt: Don't drink the Rush/Republican KoolAid. President Obama is NOT considering Single Payer, much to the chagrin of many of us as it cuts out huge expenses, think IBM when they were totally self-insured.

  Obama wants to develop a plan where you can keep your private insurance and I can choose a public option, if i want. And I want. We pay over $13k per year for two, high-deductible, high co-pay. I'd dearly love to buy into Medicare. The Republicans are fighting that possibility tooth and nail because they say, if a public plan is an option, no one would choose the private plans. Ummmmm. Yeah. And so I shouldn't have the public plan as an option because most would choose it? Give me the choice.

• U.S. Department of Labor: Can the Retiree Health Benefits Provided By Your Employer Be Cut? (PDF). Excerpt: Providing for health care is an important part of retirement. Some employees are fortunate: they belong to employer-provided health care plans that carry over to retirement. However an important question arises for employees and retirees: How secure are my health care benefits after retirement? Under what circumstances can the company reduce or terminate my health benefits?

  Employees and retirees should know that private-sector employers are not required to promise retiree health benefits. Furthermore, when employers do offer retiree health benefits, nothing in federal law prevents them from cutting or eliminating those benefits--unless they have made a specific promise to maintain the benefits. The key to understanding your retiree health benefits lies in the documents governing your plan.

  If your employer has reserved the right in the SPD or controlling plan document to change the terms of the plan, you may lose coverage at any time during your retirement.

• Yahoo! IBM Pension and Retirement Issues message board: "Re: DOL: Can the retiree health benefits provided by your employer be cut?" by "ignatz713". Full excerpt: Does a promise made for 22 years constitute a promise? Does a promise made for 22 years under the guise of 'additional compensation' constitute a promise? Does a promise made for 22 years before the farce known as the FHA was shoved down the throats of those who were promised lifetime retiree medical constitute a promise? How funny. So how does IBM get away with disobeying the DOL? Never mind, that was a rhetorical question.
• Yahoo! IBM Pension and Retirement Issues message board: "Re: DOL: Can the retiree health benefits provided by your employer be cut?" by Kathi Cooper. Full excerpt: I think the 'promise' can only come in the form of a bargaining contract with employees, i.e. The Alliance at IBM (our union). It is up to IBM employees to go after their own protection. If you really care about your fate, join The Alliance.
• R News (Rochester, NY): Xerox Retirees Call Benefit Cuts Unfair. By Casey J. Bortnick. Excerpts: Starting Jan. 1 retired Xerox employees who chose to opt out of the company's flex medical plan will no longer be given compensation for it. Beginning in Jan. 2010, Xerox will also stop offering Medicare-eligible retirees an allowance used for supplemental coverage. Some retirees say Xerox is turning its back on them at the worst possible time.

  "Sadness, disappointment, and betrayal. We really felt betrayed by the company," said John Parsnip. Parsnip spent 33 years at Xerox. After retiring in 2001, he thought his health benefits were safe. "Sometimes we get a little naive about things, so from that standpoint you could say we were surprised," Parsnip said. Xerox sent Parsnip and close to 3,700 other retirees a letter informing them their benefits would be cut. "It's going to cost my wife and me three thousand dollars a year," said Parsnip.

  Jones retired from Xerox in 2006. He took an accelerated health benefits package because he feared this would happen. Jones received a one-time payment of $20,000. This change may not fully impact him, but he says it’s wrong. "We thought the employee benefits were part of the contract between us and Xerox, but unfortunately that turned out not to be true," Jones said. Xerox says the retirees will still be able to use the company coverage but will have to pay the full group rate.

• Yahoo! IBM Employee Issues message board: "Re: Out-Sourcing IBM Jobs" by "bits_bytes_and_bugs". Full excerpt: The problem which IBM executives conveniently ignore is that whether it is 8 or 80 or 800, the minimally skilled Indians, combined with the high turnover of 40% per year or more, and IBM's failure to pay competitively in India, means that IBM's India resources never will be able to truly replace experienced, skilled US technical resources.

  I believe that without experienced resources in developed nations like the US, Canada, Germany and the UK, IBM will never be able to design and build hardware or software products that will be able to be sold.

  I think by 2015, IBM will be in serious financial straits. Our products, particularly software will be junk. Service costs will be unsustainable. Customers will dump IBM from outsourcing contracts because of ongoing failures to meet service levels. IBM will be paying hundreds of millions in penalties for delivery failures. Account problems like the State of Texas won't be the exception, they will be the rule. There won't be enough service personnel to deal with the volume of problems.

  When that happens, the experienced technical employees that IBM has RAed will have jobs with clients or competitors or be retired. Even if IBM execs realize the low cost/low skill/offshoring approach has failed miserably, there will be very few experienced hands who will come back to save IBM. After IBM dumped them and treated them like trash, they won't come back. If IBM continues this strategy, the company will go eventually go bankrupt.