Thread regarding IBM layoffs

How curious that I found this exact post, slightly modified for Cisco today... Guys, you're arguing with a robot, hate to burst your bubble!
https://www.thelayoff.com/t/10sHGujy

IBM CEO and management is clueless and the company revenue drops every quarter. The is no future there and Red Hat buyout will only accelerate the downhill spiral.

Just get a job on the client side and make sure that client never, ever, ever buys IBM. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

no age descrimination here, case clossed.

I know mainframe experts on both hardware, software, architecture who were RA'd in their late 40's early 50's. These skills are extremely difficult to find in the market. They posted for internal IBM jobs, had support of VP's but were denied being able to accept these new roles from HR or at an EVP level. They were clearly targeted due to their age and forced out otherwise they could have easily been absorbed into the positions IBM is now struggling to fill. These people moved outside of IBM to other IT vendors or clients and have been successful.

If you work in Legal at IBM, of course you agree with the hand that feeds you. You are part of the problem.

Impacted at age 48, white male with 2 kids and a mortgage.

RA’d at 40.

Just look at the facts from an IBM VP of HR. This was systematic layoffs based on age discrimination. End of story.

From Bloomberg July 31 2019. IBM Fired as Many as 100,000 in Recent Years, Lawsuit Shows

In a deposition in one of the civil cases, Alan Wild, former vice president of human resources, said IBM had “laid off 50,000 to 100,000 employees in just the last several years,” according to a court document filed Tuesday in Texas.

In his deposition, Wild said 108-year-old IBM faced talent recruitment problems and determined one way to show millennials that IBM was not “an old fuddy duddy organization” was to make itself appear “as [a] cool, trendy organization” like Alphabet Inc.’s Google and Amazon.com Inc., according to the document. To do that, IBM set out to slough off large portions of its older workforce using rolling layoffs over the course of several years, according to court documents.

IBMs chickens have come home to roost. It took a while but it’s happening.

IBM now has a notoriety problem with age discrimination. Whether it is defendable based on factors other than age, everyone knows a duck when they see one and ibm discriminates based on age.

IBM is starting to loose or settle multiple cases of refusing to pay sales commissions in states where IBMs practice of “not paying the commission due based on IPL” when said commission is over whatever they budgeted. Many states disallow this legally based on the LAW. IBM can’t hire good sales people because this is now widely known.

Customers now have alternatives to IBM and they are fleeing steadily year by year. If one eliminates revenue from acquired companies the revenue drop is a few percent per year. Over 10+ years this becomes huge.

IBMs best senior sales employees have left. The execs thought customers wanted to see a millennial in front of them. What they found out was clients valued seasoned sales reps who had depth of experience to guide customers with complex decisions AND could also understand all the new stuff. The reps who have these skills are now guiding Amazons customers.

This decline started under Sam and accelerated under Ginny. Shameful lack of leadership.

Red hat can’t save IBM. It’s just buying the execs another few years of excuses.

Remember last year when 200 CBDers got RAed? OP is correct that IBM has covered their bases with this one move and as such, age discrimination cases are not likely to hold up in court. They have made it seem like age discrimination doesn’t take place, but the fact is that RAs disproportionately impact older workers. OP appears to have great insight about what goes on internally, including the level of cover up that is implemented in order to protect the company from lawsuits. We can’t expect OP to spit the truth because OP has been conditioned otherwise.

@10uRYiMv-2vku Yeap, you are 100% innocent until proven guilty.

You're telling me that if I rob a bank, but I'm not convicted, then I have not broken the law. What state admitted you to the bar?

Management has gotten really good at working both ends of the equation. First, use unwinnable or dead end assignments to either encourage resignations or manufacture poor results. Second, give people 90 days working notice when they are laid off, so the quit voluntarily before separating and then don't count as laid off.

If there's no discrimination going on then why did the company stop complying with the law and no longer distributes the required demographic information about the impacted staff?

Nice try troll. Go back under your bridge ...

Next.

Nobody likes the cold, hard truth.

IBM was able to manufacture the "other factor" that it needed.

This is a well-known trick to older workers, it's called "suddenly stupid." Someone who's risen to become an accomplished expert, someone who knows the history of a place and has gotten decent performance reviews all along, suddenly gets a bad review out of the blue.

Someone's work conditions are changed, in ways that cause stress and make mistakes more likely.

Habits or mistakes that are ignored or treated lightly in younger workers are made into a federal case for the older worker.

And if that's not enough, the management can simply make stuff up. Even when the employee can prove that a statement is fictitious or exaggerated, or unfair, good luck getting the review revised.

Older workers were asking for training that was being given to others - and refused.

Older workers were told their positions were being eliminated but they could apply for other IBM openings. But it got leaked back to some that managers were told not to hire such people.

Terms like "railroading" and "entrapment" are not too strong for many of the situations that I saw being reported on discussion boards for IBMers.

You sound like a good candidate for the next RA. You sound incompetent.

What IBM does is find a way to lower your performance rating to a 3, even if you have been a 2 for 20 years. They do this in preparation to fire you, because your already on the list. They will never admit it but it is 100% true. Someone told me this and I did not believe them until it happen to me. Also, thye try to fire those who can retire, which is nice of them, but it doesn't work out for everyone.

Wow, someone has been drinking the Kool-Aid. Geez.

What a lot of c-ap. pull your head out of your A&$3

"I see dead people." Remember that kid in that 2000s classic movie? Well, I see old people.

I will be the first to say that everyone on this board is 100% incorrect about IBM being guilty of age discrimination.

Let's get this out of the way first : You are not a lawyer. It would be rare for anyone with legal training to suggest "100% incorrect about IBM being guilty". No client is 100% innocent or guilty. IBM is no exception. Please read: Contracts 101.

It is sad to hear that you are interested in the law - yet you are so naive. IBM is in such hot water these days because of bad behaviour. Spreadsheets list employee ages when they shouldn't. Meetings with Armonk executives describe methods for getting older employees to "leave on their own". Memos from others describe how workers over 50 can be shown to be technically inept.

A lawyer would know that few ADEA cases are prosecuted. Most cases - somewhere around 99% - are initiated at the state level. The majority are settled out-of-court. IBM has a loud bark but is rather famous for capitulating prior to having their dirty laundry aired in court. When a wronged IBM employee spends $5000 on a lawyer, they routinely get 20 times the return without going near a courtroom.

BTW: Nice try. Keep studying - and maybe get out of the office more often. Just don't stay at IBM too long. They will RA you too.

I will take your post and be a little more harsh than the first few who have commented.

The law is way more complicated than your post implies and if you actually passed the bar in any state in the USA you would know this. I for one question your credentials and your reason for posting.

Many folks who have been RA’ed over the years are not victims of age discrimination , yet many are. Anyone disagreeing with this statement , in my opinion, isn’t looking at the situation thru un objected lens.

Only people who "work in Legal" think breaking the intent of a law is fine if you don't violate the letter. The bad news is IBM has run into the very social pressure it so covets working against it, because they behaved in a disgusting way to older workers. Shining a flashlight on a pile of IBM dung is happening. IBM has started to run spin jobs internally on this, they know the mousetrap is closing. What happens in court at this point is interesting, but what has already happened in the court of public opinion is hopefully a warning to other companies.

You seem to be forgetting the multiple age discrimination lawsuits currently filed against IBM.

Sure, you go with that. Just because age discrimination is next to impossible to prove doesn't mean it doesn't happen. I'm sorry, but it's rampant.