IBM's BS (Bait, Switch) Regarding Ways to Stay Onboard
PIPs, RTOs, and forced relocations are just an illusion of choice (or ability to recover)
The past week has been hectic at IBM. I saw dozens or articles (many turned out to be LLM slop) and read hundreds of comments. There are common themes: people say that irrespective of their performance (some won awards for their work!) they got laid off like everybody else. Many people comment on PIPs, RTOs, and forced relocations, which usher in "soft layoffs" ("RA" is the euphemism IBM uses; the fat-cat CFO says "workforce rebalancing"). Some say that only months after they relocated to another state (which sometimes means relocating the whole family and selling a home/defaulting on a mortgage in a hurry) they got laid off. Nobody signed a contract assuring them "X" number of years of guaranteed work - i.e. income - after going through the trouble of moving everything and everyone (out of desperation, fearing it's the "lesser evil"). There's this new comment about it today:
Some people say (anonymously) that they got laid off only a few months after relocating. IBM knows that alone (expectation of forced move being a loss of time and money; some people sell the home at a loss and buy one in a hurry for a high price) might encourage people to "retire" (earlier than intended) or resign rather then "obey relocation orders", ridding the company of severance obligations. Judging by this new comment about Canada layoffs, despite strong labour protections or safeguards people are left with almost nothing. A new comment says: "Yes, laid off today after 9 years, Band 8, Security division. One month notice + severance." There are comments there saying similar stuff.
IBM is not a desirable employer. As somebody put it a day ago: "Don't kid yourself. I worked for IBM for 8 years and let me tell ya, nobody out there cared that it was on my resume." █