Slashdot Mirror


IBM: Remote Working Is Great! (For Everyone Except Us) (theregister.co.uk)

An anonymous reader writes: IBM, the company that just weeks ago said it was doing away with its work-from-home policy, is now preaching the benefits of telecommuting to customers. Big Blue's Smarter Workforce Group says a recent panel it hosted at the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP) conference concluded that customers who work remotely are "more engaged, have stronger trust in leadership and much stronger intention to stay. These findings mirror what an IBM Smarter Workforce Institute study found," the group wrote. "Challenging the modern myths of remote working shares employee research revealing that remote workers are highly engaged, more likely to consider their workplaces as innovative, happier about their job prospects and less stressed than their more traditional, office-bound colleagues." This is posted without any apparent sense of irony, as IBM said just weeks ago that remote workers were not part of its "recipe for success" and could no longer be permitted to work anywhere other than its six regional offices in various techie hubs around the US.

18 of 109 comments (clear)

  1. Finding remote work is hard by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I never had trouble finding a job as a programmer until I started looking for remote work.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    1. Re:Finding remote work is hard by djrobxx · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I've worked from home almost my entire 24 year career (about 20 years at home, 4 years doing in-office work). But, every WFH position I've had, including my current one, came out of a previous at-office work relationship, where I'd already established the trust with my superiors that I know what I'm doing, and can be productive without supervision.

      If a company is just "blindly" hiring, they're going to pick someone who will work in-office every time, unless you have an extremely specialized skill set that's tough to find.
       

    2. Re:Finding remote work is hard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      but it makes many managers uncomfortable.

      Managing remote workers is often different, and to many that means harder, and the average manager (like the average person) prefers easy.

    3. Re:Finding remote work is hard by computational+super · · Score: 4, Insightful

      but it makes many managers uncomfortable

      Yet having remote workers on a different continent, in a different time zone, who don't necessarily speak the same language, is perfectly logical.

      --
      Proud neuron in the Slashdot hivemind since 2002.
    4. Re:Finding remote work is hard by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yet having remote workers on a different continent, in a different time zone, who don't necessarily speak the same language, is perfectly logical.

      Things don't need to be logical these days . . . they just need to be cheaper. The cheapest suggestion, which saves the most operating costs, wins.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
  2. Not as hypocritical as it sounds... by erac3rx · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...when you know the real reason for removing their work-from-home policy and asking that everyone go to physical IBM offices.

    They're not doing away with employees working remotely because they don't believe in it, they're doing away with it to encourage their oldest employees to retire or quit. Possibly also to weed out some employees who weren't really doing any work, which happens plenty with any job that offers telecommuting.

    Once their oldest employees who aren't willing to relocate or move to keep their job quit, they'll offer telecommuting to their employees again.

    1. Re:Not as hypocritical as it sounds... by Baron_Yam · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's not exactly the first time this type of thing has been done. It's a page out of the HR version of Sun Tzu's The Art of War.

      PetroCanada, for instance, bounced its offices back and forth between Toronto and Calgary a few times (back in the 80s or 90s). Lots of people tried to hang on and lost their shirts on moving expenses because the housing markets happened to be going the opposite way of the moves.

      Companies will sometimes hire an 'axe man' who gives them advice on the best way to get employees to leave for the least possible expense to the corporation. Forcing them to choose between moving and quitting is not uncommon.

    2. Re:Not as hypocritical as it sounds... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Of course, they are more likely to lose their best employees (regardless of age) in this process as those are the ones that can get a local job that is as good or better by this time tomorrow. The ones who will move for the job, esp. if generous relocation is not offered, are likely to be the least employable.

  3. The real reason by tomhath · · Score: 4, Informative
    This article in The Register (yea, I know) suggests the real reason behind IBM's decisions:

    By requiring that workers move to hub cities such as San Francisco, Austin, or New York, IBM could both rid itself of older workers and make the jobs more appealing to younger, lower-salaried professionals...

    Coincidentally, an internal IBM video distributed to staff, and seen by The Register, advocates working in an office. Funnily enough, it features a lot of young folks...

  4. IBM is extremely badly managed, apparently. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 4, Informative

    Story about IBM Chairman, President and CEO Ginni Rometty: At IBM's annual meeting last week, shareholders agreed with a proposal to increase her salary more than 60 percent to $33 million. (May 5, 2017)

    From the story:

    Her $33 million paycheck this year puts her ahead of tech CEOs like Microsoft's Satya Nadella ($18 million), who is successfully steering the company back towards growth, as well as leaders at fast-growing tech giants like Alphabet's Larry Page ($1), Apple's Tim Cook ($9 million) and Amazon's Jeff Bezos ($2 million).

    Rometty has presided over 20 straight quarters of declining revenue growth.

    Since she became CEO in January 2012, revenue has declined more than 26 percent on a trailing 12-month basis compared to the year before she took over, and net income has fallen nearly 27 percent.

    1. Re:IBM is extremely badly managed, apparently. by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Funny

      In fairness, you would have to pay me a lot more to work for IBM, too.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  5. Big Blue Brother: Do as we say... by ilsaloving · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Do as we say, not as we do. Because we have some great software to sell your telecommuting workforce.

  6. Big Blue WFH Policy by cogeek · · Score: 5, Interesting

    During my time at Big Blue, we asked to be allowed to work from home one day per week. We were told that if we were saying our jobs could be done from any location that we needed to keep in mind that our jobs could be done from ANY location. At that point our entire team agreed that our jobs required us being at our desk 5-7 days a week. Go Big Blue!

    1. Re:Big Blue WFH Policy by Dog-Cow · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A job workable from anywhere is not synonymous with a job workable by anyone. The more companies that think otherwise, the more companies will slowly fail.

  7. they're cheap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    They're cheap.

    If they TRULY wanted to lower salary requirements, they should move to Smallville, KS. I heard it was a super place to live :)

  8. Unfortunately, for IBM . . . by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 5, Interesting

    . . . they spent the last decade closing smaller sites world-wide, and consolidating everything in giga-sites. Part of this action was changing the office space into "e-workplaces" or "flexible offices". This basically meant tearing out the cubicle dividers, leaving a big full-floor room filled with just empty desks.

    Employees get a locker room type closet with a trolley suitcase like thingy to stash all their junk that workers usually leave on their desks. IBM employees are not allowed to leave any items on the desk, since it is not their desk. Every morning they play "musical chairs" and everyone tries to grab a desk in a good position. If you are a programmer and need to concentrate in silence . . . and a salesperson sits down next to you doing "LOC = Lines Of Calls" instead of "LOC = Lines Of Code" like you . . . well, that is just tough shit for you.

    IBM managers know that this is a stupid idea, but the goal was to save money, and that trumps everything. So they tried to sweeten the deal a bit by letting folks work at home. Basically, IBM has outsourced its office space building services to its employees. Well, guess what . . . if you can't at least put a picture of your wife and kids on your desk . . . you don't get "attached" to your "place of work". You also don't feel very much attached to the company either . . . so guess what that does to turnover rates.

    So now, IBM wants to lure its employees back to work at IBM locations. But too many don't even have an office to go back to. If IBM wants to haul them back in, all they need to do is give their employees real offices to go back to.

    These IBM e-places are just as pleasant to visit as a trip to Dachau: very loud, greying chipped concrete colored paint, rickety desks and chairs that make IKEA furniture look like luxury items.

    Of course, they can always threaten to fire the employees, if they don't come back. Which is probably going to happen, since even Warren Buffet threw in the towel, and declared IBM to be a basket case. They desperately need another Lou Gerstner, to turn them back around again.

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    1. Re:Unfortunately, for IBM . . . by avandesande · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What sad times we are in when we are proud to have our own cubicle...

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
  9. IBMer for 4 years - Ran screaming away by Seven+Spirals · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I worked at IBM for about four years from 2000-2004. I have friends that just left about a year ago. They had begun the India-shift at that time already, but didn't have any W@H policy. The key thing to understand about IBM is that it's like a small city. They have more than 300,000 employees world wide. Like all cities there are good and bad parts of town. You work at Watson? Okay that's upscale. You work for IBM Global Services as a NOC engineer, sysadmin, or Java dev? That's the slums. If you work for IBM "true blue" you'd probably have an easier time W@H in the past than a red-headed stepchild working at IBM Global Services. The clients in IBM GS are the table pounding types and mostly in financial industries. They'd just have to complain to the sales reps that they heard a dog in the background of a con-call and W@H ends for everyone. I saw incidents occur like that while at IBM. You can also bet your ass that the Ph.D researchers at Watson who have any W@H privs are keeping them. IBM was always scared shitless to upset that apple cart. When I used to do security scans at IBM, those guys would always get a pass, no matter what. Bottom line: it's where you are at in IBM that will ultimately matter, I promise.