It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

IBM cutting 111,800 of its staff.

page: 3
20
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 12:37 PM
link   
I wouldn't trust IBM to accurately report on it's hiring. From 2011 to 2014 they hired close to 25,000 H-1B foreign workers, but they have a way to bypass reporting other visa hires, through their subsidiaries like "IBM India";

IBM: "The Cost Difference Is Too Great for the Business Not to Look for" H-1B Workers

An American IBM employee sent me an e-mail chain among the employee, IBM hiring managers, and IBM HR that shows how IBM flagrantly violates the law in regard H-1B usage and immigration status discrimination.

First a little background. IBM has a built-in source to import foreign labor. IBM's Indian subsidiary (IBM Global Services India) is one of the largest importers of foreign workers on H-1B visas.

When IBM is staffing projects in the United States it can hire locally or use imported labor on H-1B visas provided by IBM India.


I found some other IBM subsidiaries like "Daksh Eservices Private Limited" which also provides H-1B hires to IBM, IBM's TATA subsidiary also hires, and lays off, thousands of Indian tech workers.

What they're about: This web site explains how H1-B visas are used by companies to bring in foreign workers at lower salaries and benefits than you have. IBM's TATA subsidiary is near the top of list of companies that have H1-B workers, even though IBM lays off hundreds to thousands of skilled workers each year. Moreover, IBM and other companies are lobbying Congress to allow many more of these workers into the country.


Source: www.endicottalliance.org...




posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 12:39 PM
link   
a reply to: FlyersFan




I'm calling BS on this. No way could a company lay off that many people all at once. It doesn't work that way.


I would say its more of a transition than layoff.

I worked at IBM over 5 years ago and one of my last task they wanted me to do before I left was to design and architect solutions here in the US then outsource the actual work to Africa and supervise the results.

That was over 5 years ago, fast forward 3-4 years from that point and the US used tax payers money to redo African infrastructure.

IBM,Microsoft, and Oracle to name a few all have stakes in Africa I think its the upcoming outsourcing country, I bet a lot of those jobs will be going to Africa if not other countries. Glad we use our tax payers to make it easier for them to outsource jobs.

BTW , I stayed with IBM for about 2-3 years after our company was acquired to see how it wen't, but they were a horrible company to work for. I was very glad to have left when I did. I kept in contact with many of the employees and they all hated working for IBM, Majority of the original employees all left IBM.

IMO if you work for IBM its because you don't have other options, I did not meet one employee that liked working for them from engineers to directors.
edit on 43131America/ChicagoMon, 26 Jan 2015 12:43:26 -0600000000p3142 by interupt42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 12:56 PM
link   
Ah the joys of a recovering economy.

Yeah sure...



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 01:01 PM
link   
a reply to: douglas5

If the shares are rising and the only thing that changed was the employee pay ratio than guess what? Did they magically get cheaper freight or material cost?

Employee cost, freight cost, and material cost are probably the top 3 expenditures for that company so if any money is to be made its to be made in one of those margins. So if the stock value of the company went up sustainably or trends up than they are making a change in one of those departments.

Am i right?



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 01:31 PM
link   
Drop warren Buffett a line and ask him whats going on. The way i understand the situation he has between 12 and 13 billion invested in IBM. They likely keep him in the loop...



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 01:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: texasgirl
My brother got laid off from IBM back in October. He was a contractor and they started letting go all the contractors first. (He is still unemployed)

He hated it there, says they have no idea what they're doing and the customer service is getting worse.


My aunt was involved in an extremely long project involving IBM. She said they were the most unprofessional and disorganized company it had ever been her misfortune to work with, and in her line of work, she has worked with a LOT of major corporations.

She remarked that she couldn't understand how they were still in business several times.



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 01:36 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

There's a gigantic IBM place near Poughkeepsie. I'm wondering how many will be laid off from there or did they specify where they'll be cut from?



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 01:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
That's funny, because IBM just hired 6,190 H-1B foreign workers from India last year. This is not a sign of IBM struggling or failing or going under - this is just another American company gutting its American work force in favor of dirt cheap tech workers they can import for a fraction of the cost of their traditional American worker. Guarantee you, that if you compare the hiring of H-1B workers at IBM in the past few years to the number they have laid off or fired, there will be a strong correlation.


The government is going to have to start fining companies double what the companies would have saved by hiring offshore, otherwise, the government is going to lose its entire tax base. We know what happens after that...

Cheers - Dave



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 01:52 PM
link   
a reply to: bobs_uruncle

That wont matter because most of the business comes from global consumption not just US consumption. With the middle class in other countries growing stronger like China and India, they have more buying power which means they are more valuable investments for advertisers with a higher potential return on capital.

Actually what needs to happen to attract them back to the US is two thing, A buying power which means a stronger middle class or B lower taxes and cheaper labor. Take your pick.
edit on 1/26/2015 by onequestion because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 01:58 PM
link   
So, I looked up the journalist who wrote the source of this mess.

Robert X. Cringely (AKA Mark Stephens)

It appears he's basically a tech blogger and consultant who submits articles for Forbes and the like.

I'm thinking one of two possibilities:

1. This "news" story was some shameless self-promotion that either cost or made folks a lot of money today. For him... he got his name in the press. I'm not sure he's going to like the type of publicity this gets him, though.

2. I could be wrong, but obviously news like that is going to affect a stock and you'd want to be super confident of your information prior to publishing. Maybe someone planted this information knowing he'd report on it.



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 02:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zarniwoop
So, I looked up the journalist who wrote the source of this mess.



Robert X. Cringely (AKA Mark Stephens)



It appears he's basically a tech blogger and consultant who submits articles for Forbes and the like.



I'm thinking one of two possibilities:



1. This "news" story was some shameless self-promotion that either cost or made folks a lot of money today. For him... he got his name in the press. I'm not sure he's going to like the type of publicity this gets him, though.



2. I could be wrong, but obviously news like that is going to affect a stock and you'd want to be super confident of your information prior to publishing. Maybe someone planted this information knowing he'd report on it.






Robert Cringely is confident of his numbers and stands by his story. I guess we'll find out Wednesday.

www.money.cnn.com...
edit on 26-1-2015 by texasgirl because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 02:28 PM
link   
GOP senators block Dem ‘insourcing’ bill

thehill.com...


And a certain party stopped a bill going through congress that would give incentives to companies NOT TO DO THIS.




The Bring Jobs Home Act would have created a new tax credit for companies that spend money to bring overseas jobs back to the United States, and eliminate a tax credit for companies that spend money to move jobs overseas. Under current law, companies can deduct the cost of moving people and equipment overseas from their taxes. S. 3364 would have eliminated that deduction, and created a new 20 percent tax credit for all costs associated with moving overseas jobs back to America. Republican Sens. Susan Collins (Maine), Olympia Snowe (Maine), Dean Heller (Nev.) and Scott Brown (Mass.) voted in favor of the measure. But other Republicans called the bill “political” and “misleading.”


When were all starving to death out of work and no hope I wonder will people still be saying the tired old canard:

The parties are the same...there all the same

or will people finally wake up

The Greeks are fighting back but Americans will go down in ignorance



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 02:35 PM
link   
That is very bad for the people who get unemployed there. I don't have the source anymore, but I believe the government is also changing the US unemployed calculation method. Therefore it looks like it is improving, while it is even worse than that of the Great Depression.



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 02:45 PM
link   
a reply to: texasgirl

Yep. It will be interesting to see what happens.

Either "I told ya so" and he sells more of his a nti-IBM book


or an excuse for why he was wrong.
edit on 1.26.2015 by Zarniwoop because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 02:55 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko




She remarked that she couldn't understand how they were still in business several times.


Liability.

When things go bad, gov't and corporate executives like to be able to say "hey its not our fault, we hired consultants from the company that created and owns the software" .

This is how and why they are able to get away charging the billable hourly rates they charge.

Even-though I don't any longer work for IBM I'm still associated with projects that involves IBM. I can tell you most of their customer are not impressed by the IBM consultants nor their products.

IBM is in the business of buying smaller companies with a good product to bypass the cost of research and development and the cost of hiring good people. Once the smaller company gets consumed by IBM their products gets stripped apart and forced to integrate with all the IBM pieces which diminishes the edge the product once had.

This is how they stay relevant: liability , consuming competition and buying up and coming technology.
edit on 11131America/ChicagoMon, 26 Jan 2015 15:11:40 -0600up3142 by interupt42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 03:12 PM
link   
a reply to: interupt42

Thats a sure way to eventually meet your demise especially with competition in todays market.



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 03:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: douglas5

If the shares are rising and the only thing that changed was the employee pay ratio than guess what? Did they magically get cheaper freight or material cost?

Employee cost, freight cost, and material cost are probably the top 3 expenditures for that company so if any money is to be made its to be made in one of those margins. So if the stock value of the company went up sustainably or trends up than they are making a change in one of those departments.

Am i right?


IBM sold off their various manufacturing divisions whenever they were the least profitable. They sold off their PC group to Lenovo, a Chinese PC manufacturer (previously known as Legend). So IBM continues to manufacture mainframes and sell "services". Even then, as the Chinese population ages, they'll become more expensive and multi-national corporations look elsewhere.



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 03:19 PM
link   
a reply to: onequestion

You forgot less hostile business environment in the form of less insane regulations and stability in policy. Right now, businesses aren't hiring because they have no idea what's going to happen down the pike.



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 03:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: interupt42

Thats a sure way to eventually meet your demise especially with competition in todays market.


They haven't yet. They got the money to buy the competition before they get to big.

Why gamble and invest in house with research and development when you got the capital to buy proven technology by smaller companies. Than they get their customer base and potential for doubling the consulting fees.



posted on Jan, 26 2015 @ 03:24 PM
link   
a reply to: onequestion

The drop in the price oil will help them offset a lot of the cost of plastic and transport fees , stock market price this time next year
.

May not even make a dent in their $ 70-80 billion profits next term , but the C.E.O and share holders will still rake it in if this report turns out to be genuine
edit on 26/1/2015 by douglas5 because: i am stupid



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join