Given that many of the posters on this board are either IBM employees or former employees and that the typical message is ignorant and repetitious, I think that is the biggest red flag about IBM. How is it that they hired so many immature whiners? People who can't move on if they don't like a situation or investment are crippled mentally. WW
An exception sir. You remember those old rules and the LSP? You qualify as a dedicated IBMer. I worked for a Hudson Valley Business Partner (AS/400 and MAPICS/DB) back in 1990 and 1991. Knew many fine sales reps in the 17 Fox Street office all of whom were terminated in the bloodbath of 1992 when Akers was forced out. I recently met an IBMer in Atlanta over the summer who was from the same area and vintage, turned he we knew a great many common names. A bygone era.
The IBM of today is soooooo far different it is not funny anymore.
You are correct that the managemet of the auto companies was where the real problem was. While it is the cost of the labor contracts that makes them uncompetitive, it was the management that signed those contracts so as to get peace long enough for them to get fat and to hell with the later consequences. (ie Roger Smith) All that said, today the problem can only be fixed by labor agreements equivalent to their competitors. The big three are making quality cars and have even better on the drawing board. I have been driving Toyotas since 1971, but think today, unlike in the past, that Ford and G.M. are building cars that are equal and in some models better. WW
Good ol' Wixie's right-wing ideology often gets ahead of the facts. Unsustainable union contracts have a role in the demise of the Big Three; so do incompetent management, uninspired designs and lousy marketing. Chrysler is a dead man walking; the accountants who run GM have made Pontiac and Buick brands with no reason for existence after they did the same to Oldsmobile; even Bill Ford couldn't move the insular management at Ford to do the right thing. The car companies did it to themselves; if you let the editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal do your thinking for you, only intellectual bankruptcy can result.
No they cannot.
>When an employer ends a pension plan
Employers can end a pension plan through a process called “plan termination.” There are two ways an employer can terminate its pension plan.
The employer can end the plan in a standard termination but only after showing PBGC that the plan has enough money to pay all benefits owed to participants. The plan must either purchase an annuity from an insurance company (which will provide you with lifetime benefits when you retire) or, if your plan allows, issue one lump-sum payment that covers your entire benefit. Before purchasing your annuity, your plan administrator must give you an advance notice that identifies the insurance company (or companies) that your employer may select to provide the annuity. PBGC’s guarantee ends when your employer purchases your annuity or gives you the lump-sum payment.
If the plan is not fully funded, the employer may apply for a distress termination if the employer is in financial distress. To do so, however, the employer must prove to a bankruptcy court or to PBGC that the employer cannot remain in business unless the plan is terminated. If the application is granted, PBGC will take over the plan as trustee and pay plan benefits, up to the legal limits, using plan assets and PBGC guarantee funds.<
Source: Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation
Wrong sir. Just because the old culture is gone by itself (blue suit, white shirt, red tie) and the old Logical Sales Process does not mean it does have value. See my post about the three rules of Watson. They have real meaning but are now forgotten in the belief that India does it cheaper,faster,better (one word), IT is a commodity industry and that Americans are too highly paid compared to Bangalore. (Cost of living does make a difference ya know).
Just because change happens does not mean it is change for the better either. The Weimar Republic was flawed but look what followed it.
I was being a smart A*&.
These retired IBMers receiving the lucrative at shareholder expense 'old IBM pension plan' distributions, that beat up on this board current employees for their whining as to their "expecting to receive something for doing nothing", also that are making snide remarks to IBM employees about "moving on" when IBM lays off employees and reduces benefits ,are receiving something for doing nothing.
A lucrative IBM pension.
If their receiving that IBM pension was ever threatened, then they would be raising holy hell as to IBM 'breaking its promise' to them.
They would not be willing to just "move on'.
I agree fully with every single poster that indicates there is a degree of whining as to all the anti-IBM.
I suggest that IBM consider terminating its "old IBM pension plan" payout to retirees like lastdino1 who now are feeding at the shareholder trough, they contribute nothing to the company now.
Retirees contribute nothing to the IBM bottom line, their pension plan payouts are a drain on shareholder return.
They then can whine all they like on this board same as the ones that they beat up for whining as to how IBM owes them something for nothing.