IBM wanted to avoid the 90 days notice

I know everyone's got tunnel vision about their own job security right now and that's about all most can see or care about, but here's a question worth considering.

IBM desperately wanted to dodge the 90 day notice they're required to give. Simple question.

Why?

What does IBM gain by avoiding this requirement? And before you're tempted to pass this off as a minor detail, consider that it was no minor detail to IBM Execs, who took the time to do their best to avoid complying with it.

I see this kind of thing going on at many companies, much more than ever before. A desperation to hide layoffs, conceal the true state of the company, downplay, spin, and sometimes outright lie about the number or severity.

It's as if major corporations are united in an effort to convince the public that "Everything is AWESOME!" when it isn't, and I can't help wonder where the government gets their stats about lowest unemployment in history, with so many layoffs happening, from retail to healthcare and Tech and much more.

Call me crazy, but I don't just accept what I'm told when my own eyes tell me a different story.

Comment! It's anonymous!

8 replies (most recent on top)

Where is the 90 day warning law? What requirement are you talking about specifically? (post a link or name the requirement)

To clarify: You wouldn't do anything else besides job search

You wouldn't if you're remotely smart about it. And that's a big reason why they want to avoid 90 days notice.

Why would you do anything other than look for a new job during the 90 days. I would stop answering calls and tell IBM to FO.

Can a mod remove -ywk’s offense and unintelligent political hack of a post please? It’s devoid of truth and quite frankly, the “Blame Trump Blame Bush” nonsense doesn’t help matters.

As far as IBM, they fake, fraudulently engineer everything so they wanted to get folks out the door NOW and keep this quiet. Too bad.

As far as the rest of corporate America, guess what folks. Almost all companies are sitting on a house of cards, extremely overvalued due to playing financial engineering games like IBM has - stock buybacks, etc. Their worth and EPS aren't driven by great new products or new customers, just buybacks and handouts from trumpty-dumpty. Soon that house of cards will collapse, just like the Bush-given deregulation caused the 2008 Great Recession. Sound familiar? "Hey, we're cutting regulations, isn't that great?" No, because those regulations keep our food, air, bridges, water, tunnels, and kids safe. I cashed out at the end of a nine-year bull run and just recently moved to short-term bonds, laddered CDs, and cash savings (now that rates are coming back up), and other safer investments.

check this out #SixtyDaysNotice - there is a ton of posts on the topic (different companies, the same strategy)

One simple reason is that folks who get the 90 day notice effectively stop working. Their priority becomes finding another job, or, if able to retire, doing the minimum work as possible since they are no longer in it for the long run. The execs see this as a big hit on productivity, and 2 weeks of low productivity in their eyes is better than 90 days.

Thread regarding IBM layoffs

IBM wanted to avoid the 90 days notice

8 replies (most recent on top)

Post a reply