Slashdot Mirror
IBM Europe Workers Strike
csimoes writes "IBM employees in Europe are on
strike today. This is in response to the 10,000-13,000 job cuts that IBM is planning, most of them in Europe. Strikers will be wearing black and blue to signify their struggle. Here is their main union web site. Now I can't say I'm big union guy, but they do make some interesting points on their site. Such as: "IBM is a wealthy and successful company. Its first quarter profit for 2005 was $1.4 billion, and $9 billion for the whole of 2004. It increased the dividend to its shareholders, recently bought back $5 billion in IBM stock, and acquired 19 companies in 2004." The union also questions if other cost cutting mechanisms could achieve the same effect without cutting so may jobs."
Corporations don't give you vacation days in Europe, governments do. It's regulated by law. I know the word "law" is a difficult one for Americans to grasp. :-)
If you mod me down, I *will* introduce you to my sister!
I go past an IBM campus on my way to work every day. This morning the carpark looked as full as it ever does. Someone needs to tell these people that a strike means you don't turn up at work. Wearing black and blue is what people normally do, it does not constitute a strike.
That is how it works in USA, but IBM is a registered company of UK too and they have to follow the laws of the country. UK, as all the rest of the European cuntries have laws that regulatre what a corporation can do when it comes to layoffs. You can't simply dump employees for no reason and this is a no reason.
If you mod me down, I *will* introduce you to my sister!
http://www.marketwatch.com/tools/quotes/insiders.a sp?symb=IBM&vc=0&siteid=mktw&dist=dropmenu
$13 million in the proceeds of a stock grant sale and options exercize to J. Bruce Harreld alone.
Bruce Harreld came from Boston Market several years ago where he also helped drive that company straight into the shitter.
Most IBM employees got no annual increase last year and variable pay e.g. bonuses which is what most people count on, were cut to the bone - average awards were half what they were the year before and about one fifth of the people got them. This year IBM suspended annual increases to executives but stock and other equity awards were not frozen. In the meantime the employees are bracing for another year of no increases and no variable pay. Simultaneously, benefits cost were increased about 15-20% to employees. Moreover any employees sitting on options that were awarded after 1998 have worthless paper - priced around $132 which is where the stock was headed in 1999 before it had its relentless crash since then ($76 as of today). And there is a strong push to force employees to work from home so IBM can sell their real estate. Employees are expected to give up one room of their house to for a home office and the reimbursement of their office supplies to the employee is now imputed income.
It is improper for one individual to use extraordinary means (going on strike in this case)
Where exactly are the extraordinary means here?
Their right to strike is enshrined by law, provided due ballots have taken place (which I believe is the case)
RTFM (strike-HOWTO-1.4.23, by N. Kinnock)
Author, Shell Scripting : Expert Re
I work in Europe although originally from NYC. Europeans get 2 weeks paid leave a year. THAT IS ALL! You are spouting typically ignorant US Anti-European sterotypes.
My guess is that you come from a part of the US that doesn't really get out much.
If life is so good over here then why not make the right career move and get a job here?
I'll bet you starve to death within the year.
I don't hear people screaming about someone quitting IBM when they take their experiences there and help another company use that knowledge.
Oh bullshit. I hear plenty of people screaming and complaining. That's why many companies require you to sign a non-competition clause before you take many jobs involving the companys intellectual property.
94% of Repubs and 21% of Dems voted to renew the Patriot Act
The unions (multiple) in Europe are doing the striking. They are faced with these layoffs and are responding.
The IBM employees in this country that have joined CWA through Alliance@IBM (a grassroots group that _choose_ to affiliate with CWA) are simply supporting their fellow employees - at the very least by publicizing the strike. That is what workers in unions do - they help each other out. That's the point. To work together to make things better for everyone at the workplace, even in the industry. Instead, the parent chooses to throw stones. Nice guy.
. This sig unintentionally left blank. I meant to put something here, but I'm busy.
That really works well when you can evaluate how much a particular division generates in hard numbers. It works great in consulting firms since revenue is tied directly to hours billed. However, in a lot of large firms, entire divisions of people are support people who are not in a position to generate revenue for the company. They may be there to book the revenue or to prevent losses from legal issues or theft, etc.. The value that they add isn't so easy to measure. Now, you could argue that each division could hire their own set of such people, but many companies find that they get an economy of scale from having them all in one divison.
That being said, not every layoff is a terrible thing. I have some friends who were dying to get laid off from Deutsche Bank because of the generous termination packages and the abundance of positions elsewhere.
I suggest you re-think again. Preponderance of the evidence is that both parties are essentially identical in their economic ideas, except that Republicans are blunt about pissing people off.
Can you really say we are the wealthiest nation in the world, given that about 40% of us can't go to a doctor? Or that about half of us can't take any vacation in a year? Or that we have a savings rate of 0.6%, a consumer credit debt of $2 trillion, and a government debt approaching $8 trillion?
Does our economy end at our borders? Do Malaysian and Central American sweatshops count as part of our economy? How about the gazillions of goods sold at Walmart made in China?
Will you be able to retire before you are 60 and enjoy the same standard of living as you had at 40? Can you take more than two weeks vacation without jeopardizing your performance rating? Is your house paid for? How about your car?
What are you, some kind of communist? Our forefathers bled and died wishing to secure for us as rights corporate life, liberal profit margins and the pursuit of the almighty dollar, not your bleeding heart life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And we're all better off for it. Just consider the $8,000,000.00 USD a year CEO who improves the company's bottom line by getting rid of 250 of us who make $32,000.00 USD a year. It's better for everyone because the CEO rents or buys 250 houses and 350 cars, buys enough groceries to feed 750-1,000 people, buys enough clothing to clothe 750-1,000 people, pays on 350 auto insurance policies, buys 1,200 magazine subscriptions, goes to see thousands of movies, eats a couple thousand meals at local restaurants, and so on, all of which dumps tons of money into OUR local economy, whereas the 250 of us all live in one giant house and spend most of our time out of the neighborhood on the beaches of sothern France. Oh wait...
when you are making $9 billion in profit a year it is bloody unethical to lay off the people who help make that profit
How is running a corporation a privilege?
Roosevelt said so over a century ago:
It is no limitation upon property rights or freedom of contract to require that when men receive from government the privilege of doing business under corporate form, which frees them from individual responsibility, and enables them to call into their enterprises the capital of the public, they shall do so upon absolutely truthful representations as to the value of the property in which the capital is to be invested. Corporations engaged in interstate commerce should be regulated if they are found to exercise a license working to the public injury. It should be as much the aim of those who seek for social betterment to rid the business world of crimes of cunning as to rid the entire body politic of crimes of violence. Great corporations exist only because they are created and safeguarded by our institutions; and it is therefore our right and our duty to see that they work in harmony with these institutions.
People can freely do business all they want. But a Corporate Charter exempts one from certain rules and taxes, and more importantly, liabilities (ie. RESPONSIBILITIES) - and it is, indeed a PRIVILEGE granted (and FAR too infrequently, revoked) by the government.
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
From the article:
The data's a bit old, but I don't think things have changed that much since the survey.
You always include payroll tax when comparing across countries. Europeans have higher salaries put has to pay a larger portion to the government and end up with less to spend for themselves.
I didn't even include all the other hidden cost for hiring in the US. When hiring anything more than a slave a company in the US needs to pay for all the basic services the US government fails to provide, such as health care, pentions and various insurances.
Something you have left out which is significant are the following: local income taxes and property taxes. Certainly compared to the UK both are higher in the USA than the UK. I don't know how they compare with rates in other European countries.
Also with regard to sales taxes it is important to note that whilst VAT is higher in Europe on some goods, typically a smaller range of goods is covered. So over a typical household spend the ratio of VAT to sales tax is quite a bit closer than the headline VAT rates would suggest.
As far as the average person goes then the thing to look at is the proportion of tax paid by the average person relative to the benefit received, e.g. factoring in all the above forms of tax but also taking into account that you generally have to top up health care with more insurance costs in the USA. For median incomes you still end up with the USA having a lower tax take, but the difference compared to some European countries (notably the UK) narrows somewhat.
Looking at healthcare (since you mostly need to have it it isn't very voluntary), it's probably worth looking at the total percentage spent as a proportion of GDP for both private and public healthcare. This puts the USA on 14.6% of GDP, and the EU average around 8%. The difference is that in the EU a greater proportion is public. In terms of health outcome France (9.7% GDP) ranks better for healthcare outcomes than the USA, so the money seems to be spent more efficiently. In both Europe and the USA healthcare spending is likely to increase with changes in population demographics and the USA is (unless provision is cut) likely to be spending around 15% of GDP on Medicare and Medicaid (public provision) by the middle of the century.
While anticdotal, notice that IBM is cutting jobs in Europe, but not the US or developing nations.
In 2002 they whacked about 16,000 people in the US.
And it's "anecodotal".
Slashdot quality declines as the number of hot grits posts decreases. - Provolt's Law, Apr-09-2005
And before you say "Just another Eurotrash Dimwit who hates the US". I am a naturalized US citizen, and I lived, went to school, and worked in the US for over 14 years. Quite frankly the US is not what it used to be. Sure some companies lay people off, sure in some areas of Europe unemployment or inflation are high. But things move on, new companies hire workers and people get jobs. I'll take the over 5 dollars per gallon fuel cost and the higher taxes with a huge grin on my face, just to get out of the insanity that the US has become.
Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
The figure of 80% for employers national insurance contribution is a complete fabrication.
The employers NI rate for the UK is between 11% and 12.8% and that is without any allowances which typically reduce this by more than half.