Giving hope to employees who are RAd that they can get an internal job, although it is well known that only a few succeed at it - isn't that highly immoral?
4 replies (most recent on top)
I don't know if immoral is the word for this, but it is certainly disingenuous.
It is true that during a layoff period IBM removes most postings and almost never accepts a transfer-hire, especially if they are targeted for an RA.
If you are RA'd and told you can possibly find another job internally, don't count on it at all and immediately start looking outside.
I once heard it explained like this:
Any RA is primarily to reduce headcount and cut costs. Even very valuable, high performing employees can sometimes be let go in the interest of this, and IBM knows it.
So if headcount reduction is the overriding objective, if you were to transfer to another role or another part of IBM, even if they needed help and even if you were an excellent fit for their needs, your transfer would be counter to the main goal--reducing headcount, and your transfer would jeopardize that goal and would theoretically necessitate the RA of another person in the new organization.
Bottom line: RAs are short term business decisions and nothing more. If IBM wants/needs to reduce headcount and you are targeted, they do not want you to remain on the payroll. Period.
Simple answer. Yes.
While normally the case - I'd argue this time it was not.
In this particular case the ONLY way for approved/vetted internal requisitions could be filled was by internal transfer - and that in part the high re-deployments in Systems in Nov/Early Dec.
For this there was no HR record "mark" (as it wasn't a formal RA type action ... yet) and recruiters specifically told to not tell managers the person was "re-deployed".
Indeed several managers asked me "why are you looking" and It was very clear I was no different to them than some random folk. They knew about the re-deployment - but not about any person. I also know my 2nd line had to re-deploy roughly half of his staff (including some managers) and I know many hired.
The issues still are two fold
- - They re-deployed (empirical common belief) far more than there were GOM positions any any/all GEOs and particularly difficult (shortfall) in higher band.
- - A LOT of positions (as mentioned) are now filled - for example I find ZERO Sw Dev band 9 in US that I'm remotely qualified for. So the "newly RA'd" (read not re-deployed earlier) seriously DO have a paucity of GOM jobs to apply for.
The re-deployed had a chance and many succeeded
The newly RA'd (excluding us re-deployed that just got RA'd with the rest) don't have much of a chance.
So this time at least - the "re-deployed" weren't "marked"
It is, but this has always been IBM's MO. They'll never change!