It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.”
She remarked that she couldn't understand how they were still in business several times.
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?
originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: interupt42
Thats a sure way to eventually meet your demise especially with competition in todays market.