Slashdot Mirror
Massive Layoff Underway At IBM
Tekla Perry writes: Project Chrome, a massive layoff that IBM is pretending is not a massive layoff, is underway. At more than 100,000 people, it is projected to be the largest mass layoff by any U.S. corporation in at least 20 years. Alliance@IBM, the IBM employees' union, says it has so far collected reports of 5000 jobs eliminated, but those are just numbers of those getting official layoff notices. According to anecdotal reports, IBM appears to be abusing the performance appraisal system to cut additional employees without officially laying them off.
We just can't find enough tech workers here in the USA! Honest!
Love sees no species.
Dear Cynical,
Please refrain from discussion on a personal level regarding my recent purchase of another yacht. I would not ask you to give back the single dollar menu hamburger you are feeding your three children, that just wouldn't be ethical on my part. So I ask you please give the same respect back to your 1% overlords.
Thank you for your time in this matter,
Make it a great day!
I'm sure many Slashdot readers will be directly affected by this, either being laid off themselves, surviving the layoffs only to go work in turmoil every day, or have their spouse or other loved one laid off. That's hard to deal with. Times will get better, of course, but it sure may not seem like it right now. Our hearts go out to you.
Your math doesn't work out. The global population is roughly 7 billion, 1% of that is 70 million. There are more than 70 million people with flushing toilets, computers, and homes in the US alone, and there are other places where our standard of living, or better, is just as common (i.e. Canada, Japan, a surprising amount of the Mideast, most of Europe, ect.) At best what you describe is the global 1% is now the global 10%, and is probably more like the global 25%. Why do I bring this up? Because the old "you don't know how good you have it" is getting really old. Americans have been told that for fifty years now, as other countries have steadily overtaken us in quality of life, and as more and more of our income flows to fewer and fewer of our citizens. It's nothing more than a distraction, a rhetorical trick to try and avoid conversation about what's really been going on.
They didn't need to do this to stay profitable.
Companies exist to produce profits, not to provide employment. If an employee is not providing net value, then it is better for the company, and the overall economy, for that employee to go somewhere else. In the long run, it is better for the employee as well.
You do know that layoffs lead to your most experienced productive staff leaving, because it's easy for them to get employment elsewhere right? So while a big corp thinks layoffs are a way of losing the chaff, it's more effective at losing the wheat. Slowly hiring if you want to grow and slowly losing staff through attrition if you want to get smaller is the right way. If your business sucks, get your staff to start new ones internally. If they're competent, they'll have plenty of ideas.
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
The management responsible for these layoffs don't care that much if they're out of a job. Every C-level manager only has to work 1 year after which they could afford never to have to work a day in their life.
People below that... not so much.
When Carly was CEO at HP, she had a 4 million dollar salary and at some point she gave herself a 16 million dollar bonus for saving lots of money (almost all HP employees waived 1 day's worth of salary at Carly's request just a few month's before she gave herself that bonus).
The current HP CEO on the other hand already has a 16 million dollar salary package. If HP goes tits up tomorrow, she's really not going to lose any sleep over it.
The mountains of madness have many little plateaus of sanity - Terry Pratchett.
I would mod this up if I wasn't boycotting the mod system.
About 15-20 years ago, a gig in the US was a great opportunity for a Canadian IT worker. Now the big US companies bring in cheap Indian and Chinese workers, and it's the few American IT workers who find a gig in Canada that are lucky.
I'm not saying that Indian or Chinese workers are less qualified (it doesn't take a PhD to figure out how to configure Exchange anyways) but the fact is that money is bleeding out of the country instead of pouring in.
lucm, indeed.
Right, but if you are the top 10% performance rating and you see layoffs, you start looking. Regardless of how much profit they are making, you see that they are going to grow their profit by downsizing and that says a lot right there to someone with a long career ahead of them: 1) it may one day be you, 2) They're probably going to "core competancy" themselves into stagnation, your skills will degrade and you will get bored, 3) If you were upwardly mobile, your chances of promotion are going to shrink, 4) New projects, new development, etc. are all going to be shelved in place of band-aids for what exists, not good for you personally, 5) They'll use this as an excuse to reduce bonuses and give fewer RSUs/stock options, you probably can get a better deal elsewhere.
In a nutshell there's never a good reason to stay around a company that is laying off like this. The only reason is comfort.
No. IBM is not asking for volunteers. They are cutting their under-performers. Employees usually know which of their coworkers are deadwood, and if done right, some pruning can lead to a morale boost. The big risk is if you don't cut deep enough and have to come back for another round.
This certainly was false in my area during the last big round of layoffs. (No word yet on whether we'll be seeing layoffs this time round or not.) High performers were cut as well as low performers. You're right that we know who falls into which category -- and it is very obvious that they're not just cutting underperformers.
In addition, whenever there are ill-conceived layoffs in process, there are always some employees that decide that they have had enough of taking on extra work while waiting for the axe to fall on themselves, and jump ship of their own accord. We've seen a couple of those already, and they tend to be high performers themselves -- since they're the ones who are confident of being able to find another job.
How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
That may be true, but they're being very underhanded in the way that they're conducting these layoffs. Apparently some employees took a deal in the past couple of years that protected them from layoffs, in return for early retirement after a few years of reduced hours. The only exception was if they got the lowest score on their evaluation. Suddenly competent employees are being found incompetent, so that they can be fired.
That's one example. I don't work for IBM, never did, and after they pull this, they'll have trouble convincing anyone who has another option to work for them. They've screwed themselves for years, any agreement they make is clearly not worth the paper it's written on.
I think IBM's management must know the company is in its death throes, they're just slowly shedding people to minimize chaos.
The right to protest the State is more sacred than the State.
Companies exist to produce profits
Nope. Companies exist for the benefit of society. There is no natural limit of liability and there is no natural corporate personhood. These are all artifices of law because it is believed that it is to the benefit of the country with those laws that such things exist.
That and only that is why companies exist.
SJW n. One who posts facts.