Thread regarding IBM layoffs

RA - August 25

If you are RA today please let us know country, division and age.

by
| 4988 views | | 32 replies (last ) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1io59SOO

32 replies (most recent on top)

Ginni didn't have a guts to divest GTS.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @egak+1io59SOO

Yeah, and what has Arvind achieved in these two years… NADA or the same things that the previous CEOs did which is divesting stuff. The great IBM playbook.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bfgt+1io59SOO

My bad, time flies when having fun at IBM! It has been over 2 years since Arvind became the CEO and a little under 2 years since he became the chairman.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bxnd+1io59SOO

@awp, technically not 2 years yet. And if you take into consideration when Arvind took over as the chairman of the board, that's even shorter.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @binw+1io59SOO

@amoo+1io59SOO

“ He brought in Grestner for a re-org workshop for senior leadership after he took over as a CEO and they should be already aware of how it's played.”

AK has been CEO for 2 years now, where is the action?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @awpl+1io59SOO

@7gsz

No doubt, the question is what is AK really going to do about it?

I believe Arvind will do something about it. It's a matter of time. He brought in Grestner for a re-org workshop for senior leadership after he took over as a CEO and they should be already aware of how it's played.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @amoo+1io59SOO

Rob Thomas comes to mind immediately

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @9zkj+1io59SOO

@7bkv+1io59SOO

Agree with you. Most IBM employees at the bottom are a lot smarter and intelligent than these id--ts in management. I think IBM takes first place when it comes to id--tic management.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @8pph+1io59SOO

IBM didn't have to spend a ton of money to Bain and McKinsey. We could have told them the same at $0.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @7bkv+1io59SOO

No, IBM Execs are addicted to their TCs

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @7jcv+1io59SOO

IBM is actually addicted to revenue. They are unwilling to make cuts in unprofitable parts of the business which would reduce revenue, but reduce costs even more. Since 2019 two consulting companies (Bain and McKinsey) have both told IBM they are carrying excessive costs (unprofitable non-strategic businesses and excessive executives) for the amount of revenue they generate. Until AK and the CFO can get past that issue, IBM is doomed to more of the same. IBM has always had this problem as they were organized around the Watson Sr 10-1 management structure. Only one outsider has ever addressed the 10-1 structure (Gerstner) who moved it to 20-1. That’s the advantage of hiring an outsider for CEO. (no sacred cows and an acknowledgement that business environments evolve). Management is a pure cost of doing business, and AK needs to look in the mirror and make some hard choices.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @7ucr+1io59SOO

@6luq+1io59SOO

"IBM has an executive problem, way too many of them. AK even said it on a recent call. "

No doubt, the question is what is AK really going to do about it? Probably nothing, but surely he will keep on laying off the people at the bottom who actually bring revenue to the company... oh yeah I forgot, IBM does not even like revenues, it is only about cutting costs (people)!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @7gsz+1io59SOO

IBM has an executive problem, way too many of them. AK even said it on a recent call.

Everyone in Consulting should be assigned to a client, everyone in Tech should be assigned to a Client or a Product, get rid of the overlays on top of overlays and the VPs reporting to VPs reporting to VPs.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @6luq+1io59SOO

@5pgh+1io59SOO

We all know that the costs are in management. IBM will never do anything about it. Management at IBM is like the mafia. There is no hope.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @6iwb+1io59SOO

Even if IBM RA’s, it’s going to be hard to move the free cash flow needle. IBM has been cutting for 10 years now so all of the excessive/unnecessary personnel should be long gone. IBM has a cost problem, not a head count problem! If we take a look at Watson Health, it demonstrates this quite nicely. They sold WH for 1.05 billion, but only booked a 230 million bottom line transaction. Essentially Watson Health was a commodity employer and after deducting costs (pay, benefits, etc etc) there is just no way to save your way to prosperity. As Ginni said long ago, Commodity employees are just empty calories. Until IBM really addresses where the true costs are (unproductive overhead (Managers we are looking at you), and unnecessary non-strategic businesses), you will never bring down your costs, but rather will just push the problem out into the future.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @5pgh+1io59SOO

The layoffs are happening this week before the long weekend here in the US.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @5opi+1io59SOO

There are families on their 4th Generation on welfare Nuff said

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @3fiy+1io59SOO

@2ctm Wake up di-----k what do think the covid weed payments were

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @3mqb+1io59SOO

a, b, 22

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2pco+1io59SOO

Unemployment (most states) require "not for cause" to pay benefits.

That said 6 years ago I filed and told my version of the story. The company said "wrong" but when the agency asked them for details - to adjudicate - they never responded.

Hence I won. The agent said it's quite common for companies to not follow up. Indeed the HR rep I was exiting through told me exactly that.

So RA for PIP/performance is easy to challenge and unlikely your company will follow up. Just not worth their time - esp since it's a gnat on their unemployment insurance stats - and no overt cash flow etc.

That said - do the math. NC is pathetic on payment amounts and caps - so anybody reading here would probably make more money just taking the 30 day (while, yeah, signing away some rights). So for your state - what are the payments and caps - and how does that compare. Another factor is job search or not (retirement etc) on time to equivalence (if even possible).

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2hmr+1io59SOO
But they'll pay people not to work as long as youve never had a job

No one is doing that. Show us proof if you think they are.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2ctm+1io59SOO
You will get unemployment after a PIP or an RA.

Not in my state. If you get fired for reason (PIP - performance), no unemployment for you.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2tmc+1io59SOO

1TDD Yesterdays fed governors speech confirmed a higher interest rate and lower growth scenario for the remainder of the year. That equates to higher head winds and stronger FCF actions are needed. Everyone in peripherals are signaling slow down (cisco, hp, intel, AMD, Nividia, etc etc). This doesn’t effect IBM directly as they have longer term contracts, BUT it means no new growth for a bit, which means restructuring actions are inevitable. IBM can most likely stop hiring in consulting and weather the storm for that division, BUT something has to give for SW and Infrastructure. As for timing, the music has already stopped, and folks are scrambling for open chairs. Given IBM’s history of 3rd quarter announcements next weeks date has a high probability of happening. I wish everyone good luck as IBM has to shrink to survive.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2trx+1io59SOO

If you are fired for performance (PIP) you can be denied unemployment But they'll pay people not to work as long as youve never had a job That's how f'd up things are

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2gno+1io59SOO

To Einstein,

You will get unemployment after a PIP or an RA.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1jjn+1io59SOO

Why RA when you can PIP??

Also, IBM can save a ton of money by not getting dinged for Unemployment Insurance, if they PIP 'em rather than RA 'em.

Look how smart those pencil pushers are! They should get a bunch of RSUs

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1ulg+1io59SOO

Loser.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1xvk+1io59SOO

When you make sh-t up like this, you have to at least sound somewhat intelligent.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1geu+1io59SOO

Nope… layoffs announcements are scheduled for Tuesday, Aug 30th. So, now you know.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1tdd+1io59SOO

Yawn

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1nke+1io59SOO

to Post ID: @zxk+1io59SOO:
This is suppose to be a layoff site.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @kiz+1io59SOO

So, have you ever, ever, had someone come back and say they got RA'd?

If I was your manager, I'd rate you a zero. Out you go!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @zxk+1io59SOO

Post a reply

: