Slashdot Mirror
IBM Training Employees To Leave IBM?
lucabrasi999 writes "IBM just launched a new program that will encourage some employees to earn teaching certificates and degrees. IBM will help defray the costs of these new degrees. With those newly earned degrees, the IBM employee would then become a 'former' IBM employee who moves onto a career as a public school math or science teacher. While it seems odd that IBM would encourage employees to switch careers, the point is that IBM is trying to help offset an expected shortage in the number of math and science teachers in the United States." From the article: "While many companies encourage their employees to tutor schoolchildren or do other things to get involved in education, IBM believes it is the first to guide workers toward switching into a teaching career. The company expects older workers nearing retirement to be the most likely candidates, partly because they would have more financial wherewithal to take the pay cut that becoming a teacher likely would entail."
My guess is, they're just trying to pick up some good karma, "encouraging" people to pick up a teaching career and leave, instead of just laying them off life HP did. That way, they'll be able to cut their employment costs, at the same time still retaining a positive image.
Man is a slave because freedom is difficult, whereas slavery is easy.
If there's anything America needs, it's more science teachers.
This definitely sounds like one of the most altruistic actions of a company I've ever heard. This will certainly lead to some happier employees. But it can also lead to more college professors having IBM experience, which could lead to students better educated to work at IBM. Not only does it help the industry, in the very long term it can come back to help IBM. This seems like fantastic foresight on IBM's part.
Developers: We can use your help.
My (engineer) father was axed from his company one year before retirement. No one wants to hire an aging engineer in this market, so he took up high-school teaching as a last resort. It was a huge pay cut, but at least he could maintain medical benefits. He has an 70 mile commute every morning, since entry-level teachers were not in high demand.
I don't know about you guys, but every year a greater percentage of the engineers that I work with are Indian or Asian. A few decades ago, we were world technology leaders, all with home grown talent.
Now we're less educated than ever before.
The government could double the existing education budget and fix our school systems, get more teachers, and build the infrastructure that has been lost and not rebuilt for decades. There are plenty of places that we spend money that aren't as important.
At least IBM sees the crisis as it looms over us, if the government doesn't. An educated populace means there's a country worth defending, move a tiny portion of the defense budget to education, dammit!
Kudos, IBM. At least somebody has an eye on the ball.
That's nicer than firing them.
And that's precisely the idea. IBM figures if they "encourage" their most senior and skilled (read: most expensive) employees to go elsewhere, they can downsize without the PR unpleasantness of layoffs. It's the same logic as "early retirement" programs, but rather than buying out a contract you pay someone to go into teaching instead.
Frankly, IBM can have all the good PR they want from this move. Helping your employees to get another job before you fire them is great from a social responsibilty standpoint, and helping them into teaching, a field that always needs *experienced* people in it, is even better. Sure, IBM is doing it for primarily financial reasons but everyone wins in the end, so I'm perfectly fine with that.
--GrouchoMarx
Card-carrying member of the EFF, FSF, and ACLU. Are you?
Okay, companies and and should do GOOD, they just can't do altruism at the shareholders (owner's) expense, that's being a bad fiduciary. That said, there is a wide range of good you can do and justify it...
That said, this actually should accomplish a LOT for IBM.
The target is near-retirees, people that are leaving anyway.
1. If you lay them off, you risk a age-discrimination class-action suit (SCOTUS just allowed disparate affects in age discrimination, though the bar is set high).
2. If they join the public workforce, then they probably snap up the yummy government provided benefits, which gets them off IBM's benefits, at least until they retire from their new profession... Who knows, the ludicrous school retiree benefits may kick in in a short-enough time, that this may get some of the people off their benefits long term.
3. It NEVER hurts to have someone with a MAJORLY positive image of IBM teaching youngsters, the future's consumers and employees. IBM is an old established company, planning for 3 decades isn't unreasonable.
4. Brain Drain - if the person is going to retire soon anyway, you are losing their skill set. If you keep them on "leave of absence" for two years, you can pick their brain (even if not contracted to help, who wouldn't help their company that they were on leave for when called with a question). Also, if they moved into teaching with IBM's help, they are probably very happy with IBM, and may remain accessible for years helping people with arcane problems.
This looks like a HUGE win. IBM is able to do something good for the world, and there are enough plausible business benefits to justify it as a proper fiduciary activity.
Alex