IBM Layoffs (or Replacement With Low-Cost Labourers) Far Greater Than Reported by IBM
THE latest comments on the above thread are revealing because they serve to confirm what we've long said not only in relation to IBM but also Microsoft. They push people out - especially the "expensive" staff (that cannot "justify the cost" or "match the value of the salary") - and then pretend that layoffs are a lot smaller (in scale, total numbers) than they actually are.
The first comment says: "I’ve know 2 [IBM] Fellows in the last 8 years who were forced out. As another commenter mentioned, they were ‘asked to retire’. In both cases I just think they weren’t towing the line of the new leadership and in both cases I believe the Fellows were in the right. Last year we axed a bunch of DEs and debanded some others, but again they are pretending that they left voluntarily."
The next one says: "I suspect that this treatment is pretty common among all senior employees, no matter what organization they are working for. In the US military services for instance, officers who commit misconduct are not given "dishonorable discharges" like the enlisted men. Instead, they are either "dismissed" or are "encouraged" to retire.
"The IBM of today is much smaller (in both personnel numbers and IMHO in corporate vision) than it once was. The idea of hundreds (or even dozens) of "Fellows", "Distinguished Engineers" and even "Senior Technical Staff Members" doesn't seem to make much sense anymore. So all those people being forced out should not be a surprise."
The former two comments speak about deterioration of education (and the relation to globalism). Those are less relevant to layoffs and they're worth reading for other reasons. █
