Insiders say IBM's broader return-to-office plan hits older, more expensive staff hard IBM is looking to reduce expenses through what's described as a co-location program that, according to current and former employees who spoke with The Register, appears to be designed to drive out older, more expensive workers. The mainframe giant's recent return-to-office (RTO) push is already arguably achieving that, namely …
Just more endless lawyer work and decisions against IBM for systemic discrimination breaches against (around the world) lawfully protected characteristics - primarily age and sex so the Anti-Woke ‘DEI Hire’ brigade can just fuck the hell off.
Most companies build up skills by training their workfore according to their needs.
Not by hiring and firing.
So adjusting the company's skill set is not really what is happening with this forced relocations.
The skills actually go from many to fewer to even less to ...
That's usually called a "drain", not "rebalancing".
Most companies build up skills by training their workfore according to their needs.
Not by hiring and firing.
I'm not sure that's strictly true when it comes to American companies; at least in my (admittedly extremely limited) experience, hiring and firing seems to be very much part of the way of doing business over there.
It just depends on where you work. There are many companies that are well known for this tactic. The answer for that is simple; don't work at those companies.
For the rest, it really just isn't a thing so much. If you work for a large technology company then you should already be aware that it's their way of business to roll through these cycles. If you work for a large bank (let's just say Chase) then they are already well known for that kind of hiring/firing routine.
Shockingly to those that don't live here, there are plenty of companies that still offer decent employment. In fact, since I work at one of those companies, they have plenty of people that do so little that it makes you wonder why the hiring/firing thing isn't more widespread.
According to Chat-GPT, we need C-Suite because:
The roles of CEOs, CFOs, and other executive officers are not just about data and decisions—they also involve leadership, vision, strategy, and a deep understanding of human dynamics, all of which require emotional intelligence, creativity, and the ability to inspire and motivate people. These are areas where AI still has limitations, as it lacks the empathy, intuition, and nuanced understanding of human behavior that are often critical in these roles.
So we've proved 2 things here. Chat-GPT is full of shit, and C-Suite aren't using it anyway because their actions sure as hell don't bear any resemblance to the blurb. It might also prove a 3rd thing - C-Suite ARE using AI (because of the lack of empathy, intuition, and nuanced understanding of human behavior that are often critical).
300 a share so what?
Long term IBM damages itself more and more with every set of layoffs, so shares will eventually be lower value despite short time "efficiencies".
Consistently demonstrating that loyalty and experience are irrelevant.
They will ned up with a disloyal and inexperienced workforce where individuals continually jumping ship at sniff f a slightly better offer.
They will also learn that experience = high cost is a false dichotomy.... Experience means knowing how to quickly & efficiently fix many issues, & if its a "new" issue you have a good feel for best things to investigate based on other issues you have seen that are similar but different (rather than "headless chicken" problem of a novice who, through no fault of their own, has no idea what strategies' are best as they have never seen anything like it before ) , knowing which issues "matter most" (i.e. if not resolved will rapidly escalate into a major crisis as opposed to a "slow burner" with more "wiggle room" to fix ). You could argue maintaining a searchable "knowledge base" means such experience is no longer of value, but that relies on the "knowledge base" being maintained with full & accurate details of fixes, impact assessments etc. - which takes time & effort & some managers will see that as unproductive as they would sooner someone is hitting whatever flavour of the month metrics exist as that looks more productive (how often does decent documentation exist on key metrics to assess, very rarely IMHO). Plus if someone knows they are likely to be fired at any time, they have little motivation to maintain such a knowledge base as it makes their position even more fragile.
Sorry to hear there's a mandate to return to the office or worse yet, go to an office you've never seen. I have a WFH job now, and I like it. I do, however, miss being in the office with colleagues, I learn\absorb much more in the office. I'll trade the commute for working from home!
I remember when 1000 people worked at a large mid-west IBM center. Then there was a big push to relocate them to new global centers in Boulder, Dubuque, Baton Rouge, Columbia, ... No relocation money, 15% pay cut. Such a deal. Now those few people who still remain are forced to move again to keep their jobs. One has to wonder what is going to happen to folks based in Atlanta, Boston, Rochester, LA, SF, Seattle...
This all started in Sam Palmisano's tenure. Sam's business plan was to sell IBM to Wall Street. IBM turned its backs on its customers, its contracts, its commitments, its products, and especially its employees. Along the way IBM forgot the source of its revenue and made up for it by optimizing its quarterly statements for Wall Street instead. It should be very clear IBM is taking another big step away from its customers and workforce.
To anyone working at IBM or being recruited to work there -- RUN! There is no future for you at IBM. There are many more technical, professional, and career opportunities elsewhere.
To IBM's customers --- take a long hard look at what you are getting from IBM and how much it really costs. IBM is holding you and your company back. MOVE ON!
Ironically, I recently got an unsolicited job offer for mainframe work (not from IBM), stuff like DB2/IDMS/CICS, managing 100TBs of DASD plus PBs of tape. Stuff I have done, but not on a mainframe. All of my mainframe skills are over 30 years old. Salary in the 6 figures, W2, and 100% work from home.
This is driven by the Davos / Globalist sect to which IBM is a disciple, at the top-level anyway.
The short term share price rises at the expense of long term work for execs who can realise maximum value on their options etc, It works for the Davos sect which wants to dump democracy and install their technocracy (feudalism). They don't care if they break IBM beacause the game is not to maximise long term profitability, and the same investors own the competitors anyway, but to to extract all wealth from normal people and herd them into (15 minute) cities where they are more easily monitored.
If this sounds far-feteched to you, you need to start listening to some of the presentations at Davos, look at the 15 minute city programs around the world, look at CBDC's, look at centralised IDs, AI obsessions, chip implants, carbon credit scores, read Klaus Schwarb's book (The Great Reset) and Vaccine passport demands. Look at it all, where it's coming from and extrapolate. Are the people pushing this the caring democratic type? WIll they be nice to you?
I.e,, Please WAKE UP so this doesn't happen.
""The company is not going to pay to relocate anybody," the former employee said. "And you know, it's a way to get rid of a bunch of people and a bunch of older people."
Within IBM, as the corporation acknowledges on its website, employees have long joked that its initials stand for "I've Been Moved." But as we hear it, that came about at a time when IBM paid for relocations."
They are paying for it. And if they aren't now, they will be.
Friends of mine who are unfortunate to work for this ghastly company tell me that IBM stands of I've Been Moved.
This goes back over 30 years.
IBM forces employees to move so they cannot develop friendships at work.
I remember them being relevant back in the 70's, mainframe days, but Jesus.
IBM needs to go away along with Microsoft. I can't believe they are still in business.
I'm sure this will save money in the short term, but then they'll be hit with a problem that their experienced staff could have rapidly solved but the inexperienced staff that are left won't have a clue about. See RBS for an example: they got rid of their older, more expensive staff, then a database problem took their entire operation offline for well over a week. Hopefully the £42 million fine from the FCA, costs involved in keeping physical branches open for longer hours, compensation to people affected, etc. made an impression/
In more general terms, I don't understand what management are trying to achieve with return-to-office mandates. They're going to end up with offices full of people who hate their guts, doing the bare minimum amount of work necessary not to get fired.
IBM has been evil since the company was hijacked by Neo-Cons in the 90's.
This just another layoff by another name.
Probably to make room in the budget for even more glorious performance bonuses for execs.
Other corporations are ahead of the curve on this and being evil.
A large, well know food conglomerate whose name used to begin with "K" and rhymes with "Krap" did something like this back in the naughts.
They had management tell employees that they should WFH at least two days a week to improve "work life balance".
Its wasn't mandatory but came highly recommended.
This lasted for about three months when, without any warning, the board decided to layoff any of the employees that were actually taking advantage of WFH.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
