Re: IBM Cuts Employee Salaries
HERE! HERE! Let's do away with those golden parachutes as well Ron Wells wrote: cutting salaries ... u. since I know IBM has lots of fatand on the top end as well like many other firms ... I would also suggest bonus's and the mill. dollar salaries be cut as well money back in the company to expandmake more job's ... OK I get that ... but top guys not taking a hit as well I have a problem with it -- Email Disclaimer This E-mail contains confidential information belonging to the sender, which may be legally privileged information. This information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity addressed above. If you are not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of the E-mail or attached files is strictly prohibited. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: IBM Cuts Employee Salaries
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 21:06:21 -0500, Arthur T. wrote: Many companies abuse their salaried workers by increasing workload until many extra (unpaid) hours are needed. Those 7600 folk are being punished by *not* making family-killing demands on their time? No, but every one of those employees who had achieved a work/life balance that contained less than 5 hours of overtime a week have to now *start to make family-killing demands on their time* to break even on weekly take home pay. To achieve equivalent total compensation is likely impossible, there will not be enough overtime hours to do that. They've now lost: 1) Their salary potential for any week where they take a vacation 2) Their salary potential for any week where there is a company holiday 3) Their bonus potential has been reduced by 15% (determined by base salary) 4) The magnitude of any raise has been reduced by 15% (determined by base salary) 5) The value of certain benefits (e.g. disability, life insurance, 401K match) have been reduced by 15% Let's use some funny numbers and see what happens: Assume an average 7600 employee was making $70K. Assume an average 5% end of year bonus rate. Assume an average 2% salary raise rate. After the change, these employees are making $60K (well, $59.5K, but let's not quibble over small change). Also grant that they all work the 5 hours of overtime (however unlikely) to make it back to $70K, so off the top, the weekly payout doesn't change for IBM. At the end of year 1 the bonuses for the employees at a 70K salary would be: $26.6M, at 60K salary: $22.8M (savings: $3.8M) At the end of year 2, the 70K employees would be making 71.4K, 60K employees only make 61.2K. End of year bonus differential grows to almost $3.9M. These numbers don't include the reduction in cost to IBM for the other benefits (disability, life insurance, 401K match, etc.) which all have equivalent reductions, as they are determined by base salary. Forcing a company to pay for the amount of time required can help them decide that they're understaffed and need more people. It definitely tends to keep them from overworking their existing employees. (Tends to, not does.) Yeah, right. I have a bridge for sale, you sound like you're in the the market. More than likely, the boss will lower appraisals in direct correlation to the number of overtime hours worked. Sally got her stuff done in 5 hours of OT/week, you needed 10. Therefore you are a lower skill than Sally. Some of those 7600 undoubtedly would rather be overworked rather than underpaid. Some would not. Non-sequitur. Many years ago, my father considered changing jobs. At his interview, he was told that they couldn't match his current base rate, but he could have all the overtime he wanted. Recognizing that money isn't everything, he opted to stay where he was. Your father got to make the choice. These folks did not. You have to consider all of the ancillary effects of such a company action. IBM saw a legal means to grab money back from its employees. No different than when Gerstner looted the pension fund. IBM was sued and settled ... ergo they were culpable for bad behavior. Here, IBM was violating fair labor laws. IBM was sued and settled ... ergo culpable for bad behavior. A company which takes actions that it knows are going to piss off *customer facing* employees is, for all intents and purposes a company that has little regard for its customers. Unhappy customer facing employees take it out on the customers, generally not in an overt way, but schedules elongate, phone calls don't get returned so quickly, 15 minutes of overtime turns into an hour, which turns into real dollars for the customer, especially if the problem is, say, a hardware outage on a hot weekend at your favorite retail store and the cash registers go down... SB http://www.cxoamerica.com/pastissue/article.asp?art=25417issue=141 when asked how he measures his companys success, IBM Chairman and CEO Sam Palmisano said he monitors four measurements. In addition to market share, consistent financials and being a valuable corporate citizen, Palmisano includes attrition rates and being an employer of choice. People want to be here and want to make a big difference, he says. And these 7600? -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: IBM Cuts Employee Salaries
On 29 Jan 2008 07:54:59 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Scrood Blued) wrote: No, but every one of those employees who had achieved a work/life balance that contained less than 5 hours of overtime a week have to now *start to make family-killing demands on their time* to break even on weekly take home pay. To achieve equivalent total compensation is likely impossible, there will not be enough overtime hours to do that. It is quite possible that IBM created a cost-neutral solution, and will pay out the same amount of money for the same amount of work - for the company. If so, some people will gain and some people will lose (this is the nature of choices).Those who put in more than the average amount of overtime will earn more, and those who put in less than the average amount of overtime will earn less. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
IBM Cuts Employee Salaries
I work in California, and their state law has forced my company to move me, a sysprog, from salaried to hourly. I hate it. I am a workaholic, and suddenly HR is reporting me to management for working more hours than I am putting down on my time sheet. Its insane. I have gotten around it by getting them to agree that I can stay extra hours if I use the time for personal study to develop my work skills. Honestly it is about a wash, but I would prefer getting the same paycheck every time just to make budgeting easier. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: IBM Cuts Employee Salaries
I guess there is a need to increase the funds required for those GOLDEN parachutes??? Howard Brazee wrote: On 29 Jan 2008 07:54:59 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Scrood Blued) wrote: No, but every one of those employees who had achieved a work/life balance that contained less than 5 hours of overtime a week have to now *start to make family-killing demands on their time* to break even on weekly take home pay. To achieve equivalent total compensation is likely impossible, there will not be enough overtime hours to do that. It is quite possible that IBM created a cost-neutral solution, and will pay out the same amount of money for the same amount of work - for the company. If so, some people will gain and some people will lose (this is the nature of choices).Those who put in more than the average amount of overtime will earn more, and those who put in less than the average amount of overtime will earn less. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: IBM Cuts Employee Salaries
While I have sympathy for the affected employees, no one is holding a gun to their(your) head saying You *WILL* work for IBM. They(you) are free to make whatever choices suit their(your) personal needs and go to work for someone else like a customer or another vendor! It sounds to me like you are on of those affected. Make whatever choice suits your personal needs. In the meantime, do what needs to be done, and deal with it! snip Subject: IBM Cuts Employee Salaries Wonder how happy these guys will be when it's time to come to your shop to roll in a new System z machine... http://www.vindy.com/news/2008/jan/24/ibm-cuts-salaries-of-those-eligibl e-for-overtime/ In my view, the defining value that IBM has provided over the years has been the way we think. Today, as in the past, when people turn to our company, I believe they are looking for how IBMers approach problems, as well as for the types of problems we choose to approach. They seek a kind of relationship, in addition to the outcomes of that relationship. And they are drawn to a set of values that reflect their own. -- Sam Palmisano from http://www.ibm.com/ibm/sjp/ /snip -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: IBM Cuts Employee Salaries
cutting salaries ... u. since I know IBM has lots of fatand on the top end as well like many other firms ... I would also suggest bonus's and the mill. dollar salaries be cut as well money back in the company to expandmake more job's ... OK I get that ... but top guys not taking a hit as well I have a problem with it -- Email Disclaimer This E-mail contains confidential information belonging to the sender, which may be legally privileged information. This information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity addressed above. If you are not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of the E-mail or attached files is strictly prohibited. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: IBM Cuts Employee Salaries
OT--U can not remember when I recv'd OT Oh ya---when I was an Operator in 60's... As for Bonus not against it... it is the amount to the chosen few ...just hot under the collar for those that get Millions and the company is doing bad ... but then I just can not see the reason for all that money being given out .. when expansion , RD and so forth can be done . Salary does not get OT ... Benefits compensate for it ... Hourly...then yes... I would expect they would ... -- Email Disclaimer This E-mail contains confidential information belonging to the sender, which may be legally privileged information. This information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity addressed above. If you are not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of the E-mail or attached files is strictly prohibited. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: IBM Cuts Employee Salaries
Allen Staller let fly with the following bleating: While I have sympathy for the affected employees, no one is holding a gun to their(your) head saying You *WILL* work for IBM. They(you) are free to make whatever choices suit their(your) personal needs and go to work for someone else like a customer or another vendor! It sounds to me like you are on of those affected. Make whatever choice suits your personal needs. In the meantime, do what needs to be done, and deal with it! Fortunately, I do not work for IBM. However the 7600 folks who are being punished for a subset of them exercising their *rights* under US labor law are all _customer facing_ personnel. To manage costs, IBM will manage overtime downwards (these employees were free to work whatever extra hours were required to get the job done). Do the math: less pay, less overtime = more unhappy grunts, installing and maintaining _your_ big iron. IBMer refs: http://www.allianceibm.org/salarycomments.php You want one of these guys/gals coming in when the fecal matter impacts the oscillating air mover? See: http://www.ecommercetimes.com/rsstory/61342.html One IBM document, labeled a confidential QA for customers, lists this sample question that an IBM client might ask: What has been the reaction of employees who are being reclassified? The suggested response for managers: They understand this is something we must do under current interpretations of the law and to remain competitive within our industry. It is clear, however, that many employees are furious. Birger Heede asked: Why would the bonus be cut? Bonuses are typically calculated as a percentage of base salary, not total compensation. This translates to a 15% reduction of bonus, as well. SB -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: IBM Cuts Employee Salaries
-Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Kopischke Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 11:47 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: IBM Cuts Employee Salaries On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:57:35 -0600, Ed Gould wrote: What wasn't posted was the fact that the salaries are being cut as a result of a lawsuit claiming that IBM didn't pay overtime and classified employees incorrectly so they couldn't get overtime. There was much ado about OT (and not getting paid for it and the lawsuit (IBM Lost and had to cough up millions). It goes to the root of when people should get paid for OT. The way I understand this came about is a few salaried employees sued IBM because the weren't being paid overtime. SNIP Perhaps if one were to actually read the laws relative to what constitutes salaried exempt vs. salaried non-exempt vs. hourly, one might come to understand what constitutes abuse in this area. For instance, salaried employees are to be paid in whole day increments. So if you take off half a day for a medical thing, you are considered to have worked the whole day. Yet if you work an extra hour or two, you are not to be compensated for such. Sick time, work day, and vacation are supposed to be on a day by day basis, not hour by hour. Companies that force the hourly tracking for pay purposes open themselves to a lawsuit similar to what it appears that IBM has just lost. Now if I remember the wording of the law correctly (Fed and states word this differently, and the one that provides the most protection to the employee wins); if you are salaried non-exempt, and you are assigned more work that causes you to have to work, say an extended work week, then you may only be eligible for straight time, but if your base compensation is below some floor, then you are subject to the hourly pay scales (and then Federal contract verbiage modifies this too, should your employer be a US Federal contractor). Another area of abuse, which has occurred in California: the law (at least up to 1996 when I left the state) was that once vacation was earned, it could not be taken away, regardless of what company policy may say. Yet companies regularly attempt (and get away with it) a use it or lose it policy. Various other states have similar laws. Just thought I'd throw my 1/2 cent in here. Regards, Steve Thompson -- All opinions expressed by me are my own and may not necessarily reflect those of my employer. -- -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: IBM Cuts Employee Salaries
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:57:35 -0600, Ed Gould wrote: What wasn't posted was the fact that the salaries are being cut as a result of a lawsuit claiming that IBM didn't pay overtime and classified employees incorrectly so they couldn't get overtime. There was much ado about OT (and not getting paid for it and the lawsuit (IBM Lost and had to cough up millions). It goes to the root of when people should get paid for OT. The way I understand this came about is a few salaried employees sued IBM because the weren't being paid overtime. The judge agreed with their points and IBM made a huge number of employees hourly employees. That way they know how many hours they work and can pay them for overtime as required by the ruling. I also understand that this change to hourly resulted in about a 15% pay cut. But hey, all they have to do is work a bunch of overtime and they're back to their previous earnings and maybe beyond. Be careful of what you ask for. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: IBM Cuts Employee Salaries
On Jan 28, 2008, at 11:46 AM, Dave Kopischke wrote: --SNIP The way I understand this came about is a few salaried employees sued IBM because the weren't being paid overtime. The judge agreed with their points and IBM made a huge number of employees hourly employees. That way they know how many hours they work and can pay them for overtime as required by the ruling. I also understand that this change to hourly resulted in about a 15% pay cut. But hey, all they have to do is work a bunch of overtime and they're back to their previous earnings and maybe beyond. Be careful of what you ask for. Dave, This may turn rather interesting over time. *IF* this was the case then it might open IBM up to various labor laws. If anything, it will probably lead to unions. IBM opened a can of worms, IMO. Ed -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: IBM Cuts Employee Salaries
In a message dated 1/28/2008 1:34:58 P.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Another area of abuse, which has occurred in California: the law (at least up to 1996 when I left the state) was that once vacation was earned, it could not be taken away, regardless of what company policy may say. Yet companies regularly attempt (and get away with it) a use it or lose it policy. Various other states have similar laws. There have also been some new interpretations to existing law. We had one weekend supervisor that had 25yrs and was thinking retirement, but by the new interpretation was allowed to move to non-exempt and keep salary and benefits and work eight less hours. **Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape. http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp0030002489 -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: IBM Cuts Employee Salaries
On Jan 28, 2008, at 8:51 AM, Ron Wells wrote: cutting salaries ... u. since I know IBM has lots of fatand on the top end as well like many other firms ... I would also suggest bonus's and the mill. dollar salaries be cut as well money back in the company to expandmake more job's ... OK I get that ... but top guys not taking a hit as well I have a problem with it Ron (and others)... What wasn't posted was the fact that the salaries are being cut as a result of a lawsuit claiming that IBM didn't pay overtime and classified employees incorrectly so they couldn't get overtime. There was much ado about OT (and not getting paid for it and the lawsuit (IBM Lost and had to cough up millions). It goes to the root of when people should get paid for OT. If it were an issue of cost savings it would be one thing but to take it out because IBM refused to step up to the plate and being the good guy is a different story, IMO. Ed -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: IBM Cuts Employee Salaries
Why would the bonus be cut? This is what Sam (SJP) told the employees: As a result of our strong overall performance in 2007, I am pleased to tell you that the company's employee bonus pool is being increased. Birger Heede IBM Denmark Ron Wells wrote: cutting salaries ... u. since I know IBM has lots of fatand on the top end as well like many other firms ... I would also suggest bonus's and the mill. dollar salaries be cut as well money back in the company to expandmake more job's ... OK I get that but top guys not taking a hit as well I have a problem with it -- Email Disclaimer This E-mail contains confidential information belonging to the sender, which may be legally privileged information. This information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity addressed above. If you are not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of the E-mail or attached files is strictly prohibited. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: IBM Cuts Employee Salaries
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:44:14 -0600, Ed Gould wrote: On Jan 28, 2008, at 11:46 AM, Dave Kopischke wrote: --SNIP The way I understand this came about is a few salaried employees sued IBM because the weren't being paid overtime. The judge agreed with their points and IBM made a huge number of employees hourly employees. That way they know how many hours they work and can pay them for overtime as required by the ruling. I also understand that this change to hourly resulted in about a 15% pay cut. But hey, all they have to do is work a bunch of overtime and they're back to their previous earnings and maybe beyond. Be careful of what you ask for. Dave, This may turn rather interesting over time. *IF* this was the case then it might open IBM up to various labor laws. If anything, it will probably lead to unions. IBM opened a can of worms, IMO. Ed Ed, In my opinion, IBM workers got what they asked for. Or in this case, a few changed the lives of several thousand. As was also pointed out, the labor laws vary by state. I didn't really look far enough into this to see if it was a federal judge or a state judge. More to come, I'm sure. It will be interesting to watch, but you gotta feel for those who are being impacted through no fault or action of their own. Thanks, Dave K. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: IBM Cuts Employee Salaries
On 28 Jan 2008 09:42:25 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main (Message-ID:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Scrood Blued) wrote: Fortunately, I do not work for IBM. However the 7600 folks who are being punished for a subset of them exercising their *rights* under US labor law Many companies abuse their salaried workers by increasing workload until many extra (unpaid) hours are needed. Those 7600 folk are being punished by *not* making family-killing demands on their time? Forcing a company to pay for the amount of time required can help them decide that they're understaffed and need more people. It definitely tends to keep them from overworking their existing employees. (Tends to, not does.) Some of those 7600 undoubtedly would rather be overworked rather than underpaid. Some would not. Many years ago, my father considered changing jobs. At his interview, he was told that they couldn't match his current base rate, but he could have all the overtime he wanted. Recognizing that money isn't everything, he opted to stay where he was. -- I cannot receive mail at the address this was sent from. To reply directly, send to ar23hur at intergate dot com -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
IBM Cuts Employee Salaries
Wonder how happy these guys will be when it's time to come to your shop to roll in a new System z machine... http://www.vindy.com/news/2008/jan/24/ibm-cuts-salaries-of-those-eligible-for-overtime/ In my view, the defining value that IBM has provided over the years has been the way we think. Today, as in the past, when people turn to our company, I believe they are looking for how IBMers approach problems, as well as for the types of problems we choose to approach. They seek a kind of relationship, in addition to the outcomes of that relationship. And they are drawn to a set of values that reflect their own. -- Sam Palmisano from http://www.ibm.com/ibm/sjp/ I guess this approach to a problem (IBM screwing employees out of rightfully earned income) represents the values of the business community at large, no? SB -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
