IBM To North American Employees: To Keep Your Job, Move To India(alleyinsider.com)
alleyinsider.com
IBM To North American Employees: To Keep Your Job, Move To India
http://www.alleyinsider.com/2009/2/ibm-to-north-american-employees-to-keep-your-job-move-to-india-ibm
6 comments
I think it was Wozniak in Founders at Work who described the proper way to cut personnel costs, as Hewlett-Packard used to do. Everyone (including the CEO) took at 10% pay cut, and got alternate Fridays off.
Not surprising. This is the same company that gave a substantial portion of its employees a 20% paycut when they were forced to start paying over-time then acted like it was a pay raise because most employees work over 40 hours a week.
> From the article: "It's more of a vehicle for people who want to expand their life experience by working somewhere else," said [an IBM] spokesman. "A lot of people want to work in India."
A lot of people want to move to a foreign country to make less money? IBM is either lying, or the people they hire aren't very smart.
A lot of people want to move to a foreign country to make less money? IBM is either lying, or the people they hire aren't very smart.
Keep in mind that many IBM employees are from India or China originally, so it's not a foreign country to them.
That is the most pungent bullshit I've read in months.
I'm sure there are people who will gladly move to India for a few years, but if they are improving their careers, which is not necessarily (although, in practice, it usually is) mutually exclusive with a pay cut. However, no one talented is going to travel to a foreign country for the same job, much less a step back. Also, giving enough pay and perks that they can afford to see family in the US for at least 4 weeks out of the year is a must.
Sorry, I was too ambiguous with my use of "that." I was agreement with fallen_times...I was in disagreement with the quote from the IBM spokesperson.
You could get smart people to move to Third World countries for 50-70 cents on the dollar. Plus two round-trip plane tickets per year, 6 weeks of vacation (with a guarantee that this perk persists upon return to the US), increased leadership responsibilities and creative control, spousal job placement, and a guarantee of the option to return to the US with at pre-cut pay, plus 25 percent, in 5 years (when the economy has improved). This might actually be a very smart way of cutting personnel expenses in the short-term while giving people an opportunity they'll enjoy.
If you don't offer such a package, your talent is going to vanish and you'll only be able to send utter mediocrities overseas. No one with options is going to move to another country while remaining a subordinate code monkey doing grunt work for "the palace" an ocean away (which happens in branch offices of many multinational companies). Which means that your New Delhi office will be trained by the cast of Dumb and Dumber. Epic fail.
If you don't offer such a package, your talent is going to vanish and you'll only be able to send utter mediocrities overseas. No one with options is going to move to another country while remaining a subordinate code monkey doing grunt work for "the palace" an ocean away (which happens in branch offices of many multinational companies). Which means that your New Delhi office will be trained by the cast of Dumb and Dumber. Epic fail.
"the palace"
Heh.
I can't agree more with your characterization. I work for a company whose main office is overseas, and almost every single dealing with the central office (especially if any work on their part is involved) is encountered with a "let them eat cake" attitude. You get used to the idea that they don't think any of the satellite offices exist.
Heh.
I can't agree more with your characterization. I work for a company whose main office is overseas, and almost every single dealing with the central office (especially if any work on their part is involved) is encountered with a "let them eat cake" attitude. You get used to the idea that they don't think any of the satellite offices exist.
I don't like IBM at all, but this article sounds overblown and not properly based. The original InformationWeek article sounds more realistic:
The document states that the program is limited to "satisfactory performers who have been notified of
separation from IBM U.S. or Canada and are willing to work on local terms and conditions." The latter
indicates that workers will be paid according to prevailing norms in the countries to which they
relocate. In many cases, that could be substantially less than what they earned in North America.
IBM is the Walmart of the consulting world - they'll do anything to ensure their prices are the lowest. In a few years, they're going to consist of one guy in New York forwarding mail to the other hundred thousand in India.
Since when does IBM have low prices?
Compared to the other national consulting agencies, IBM typically bids low, making up the difference with rigid project management and aggressive outsourcing.
I recommend to get license for a hand gun if you are moving to India.
That put's a new spin on:
"Multiple IBM staffers have written in to SAI to claim the company has a program in place of demanding deliberately difficult relocations, with the company saying anyone who refuses to move will be considered a "voluntary departure" and denied severance benefits."
"Multiple IBM staffers have written in to SAI to claim the company has a program in place of demanding deliberately difficult relocations, with the company saying anyone who refuses to move will be considered a "voluntary departure" and denied severance benefits."
If companies can legitimately do that, what keeps them from just throwing in the paycut to drive workers away without the potential hassle of relocating people?