Fri, Sep 19, 2014, 4:10 AM EDT - U.S. Markets open in 5 hrs 20 mins

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

International Business Machines Corporation Message Board

  • Puppy_Play Puppy_Play Feb 5, 2001 3:43 PM Flag

    Re: IBM=retirement theft

    People would be far less dependent on Social Security if corporations like IBM were not allowed to renig on their private pension promises...

    As an IBM shareholder, please consider worrying a little bit more about what IBM is doing to increase and hoard their massive pension surplus. Shareholder resolutions related to this critical issue can be found at www.allianceibm.org\resolutions.htm

    Janet Krueger
    IEBAC (IBM Employee Benefits Action Coalition)
    507 529 8777 ext 110

    P.S. As an IBM shareholder, I am also outraged at the fact that the corporation is now charging the older retirees who built this company a larger and larger share of their medical expenses. Just one example: my dad just turned 78 and worked at IBM for 33 years. Effective in April, to retain the same medical coverage, his co-payment will go from nothing to $252/month. This is terrible treatment for retirees on fixed incomes!!!

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • As a shareholder I am angry about the damage that you are trying to do to IBM with yoor lawsuit. There is no way you are ever going to convince me that this is part of some 'grand plan' to save IBM. More like a grand plan to line the pockets of you and your lawyers.

      As an employeee of IBM, I just don't buy your line about how much worse off I am now. All I have to do is look at where I was financially 10 years ago and where I am now. It's like night and day, where I am much better off than 10 years ago.

      If you really want to help IBM, you should move on. Neither I, nor any number of other employees asked for your help, want your help or need your help.

      • 3 Replies to ironman_9999
      • Puppy Play doesn't speak for me either. I sure hope there is a way to "opt out" of this nonsense.

      • IM, crawl back into the hole that you came out of. The lawsuit was not brought by Janet, and you know it. As far as how well of you are today vs 10 years ago, imagine how much better off you would be today if LVG hadn't raped and pilaged this company.

      • "As a shareholder I am angry about the damage that you are trying to do to
        IBM with yoor lawsuit. There is no way you are ever going to convince me that
        this is part of some 'grand plan' to save IBM. More like a grand plan to line the
        pockets of you and your lawyers.

        As an employeee of IBM, I just don't buy your line about how much worse off
        I am now. All I have to do is look at where I was financially 10 years ago and
        where I am now. It's like night and day, where I am much better off than 10
        years ago.

        If you really want to help IBM, you should move on. Neither I, nor any number
        of other employees asked for your help, want your help or need your help."

        I second the motion! I'm not sure I'm really that "angry" though, because I'm not sure that it has much credibility anyway. There's not many companies that don't have a handfull of vocal employees who like to gripe. That's the American way.

    • Janet,

      There's got to be something that you're not telling. My father retired with well over 30 years in IBM and his impact is nowhere near that.

      As far as changes in IBM... How many people do you think would be willing to trade their 401K and VPP (not saying they are related, but they are part of the total compensation package) to get the pension plan that was in effect when they hired on? Things change... And overall, in my opinion, most, if not all, employees are better off than when they started.

      • 3 Replies to jetskiman123
      • When did IBM introduce 401K?
        What is VPP? Is that similar to defere salary and is vary from year to year? and when did it introduce?

      • -- There's got to be something that you're not telling. My father retired with well over 30 years in IBM and his impact is nowhere near that.

        My dad still has both a spouse and an adult dependent. That makes him a little exceptional, although more retirees than you might think either had a child late in life, ended up with dependent grandchildren, or had a child with disabilities that prevent that child from ever becoming completely independent. At the time my dad retired, IBM promised health care coverage, for him and all his dependents, for life. Does the fact that your dad has been hit several less make the wrong being done any less???

        -- As far as changes in IBM... How many people do you think would be willing to trade their 401K and VPP (not saying they are related, but they are part of the total compensation package) to get the pension plan that was in effect when they hired on? Things change... And overall, in my opinion, most, if not all, employees are better off than when they started.

        The 401K was started and funded as a completely different program. It was NOT done as a trade, and the fact that it exists doesn't make IBM any less of a thief. As far as VPP, I know of many employees who were involuntarily left without raises for years (at the same time as their medical co-pay was introduced and then increased) in exchange for the once a year variable payment based on factors they could neither control nor impact; many did NOT end up better off than before VPP!!! But there again, whether they are, or are not, better off has nothing to do with whether or not IBM should be allowed to break pension promises...

        If employees are truly so much better off, why has IBM virtually eliminated the annual opinion surveys??? Could it be because IBM truly doesn't give a ****???

      • How in the hell can you say with a stright face that IBMers are better off then when they started... #1 My 401k is MY 401k not IBM they only match a small amount.. I control the investment direction and the amount.. NOT IBM.. #2 My pension has been cut by %50 since 1992.. so do not give me that RA.. RA.. BS on how much better it is... I have been at IBM for Over 20 years and it i snot the change i mind it is the destruction to the employees I mind...

    • The employee or retiree contribution has gone up because the cost of MEDICAL CARE has GONE UP.
      Duhh..........
      The company (IBM) now pays more than ever for this benefit, more per individual than it did when your Daddy was employed.
      The villan is not IBM, it is the cost of the good health care your Daddy has enjoyed.

      I retired from IBM after 30 years. I now pay for health coverage. I adjusted my expectations for this benefit based on what is happening to heath care costs, not what I expect IBM to provide. If you and your Daddy thought the free ride health benefit was for ever without qualifications, then you did not understand the plan. Your ignorance, sorry.
      I am a stockholder also.
      I don't expect the companies I invest in to do any more than deliver positive earnings. Not carry the cost of ever-increasing health care.

      • 2 Replies to canner01
      • IBM didn't start talking about ceilings for their share of medical health insurance until long after many of these people retired. How were they supposed to guess, before they retired, when IBM was promising to take care of them for life, that IBM would renig on that promise years down the road???

        I'm glad to hear you were able to 'adjust your expectations', but many of the older retirees just didn't have the luxury of a crystal ball.

        Why should it be unreasonable to expect the companies you invest in to BOTH deliver positive earnings AND honor long-standing promises to employees and retirees???

        And if a company cannot keep promises to employees and retirees, what makes you think promises to customers and shareholders will be treated any differently???

        Is it too late for IBM to reinstitute ethics? I sure hope not... Because I don't believe there is a long term future without them.

      • Thanks for adding your input. There are several sides to every story. This board tends to focus on only one side (the IBM is a big bad monster side). It's nice seeing other views.

    • IBM was a leader, like GE is a leader, like Ford/GM is a leader.... Leaders should set standard for others to follow. Leaders should do the right things and not the things that others do..... I do not say that other company do not do some of the negative things that IBM did to it workers/retirees..... etc ... however that does not make what IBM did is right or justifiable.....

      If you do read other posts on other board about Moral/Ethical, many of us feel it is declining over the last few decade..... What happen at IBM and what IBM executives did is a contribute factor to this negative change in our society..... If you do not care or don't believe that the moral/ethical is rolling down hill, then that your opinion... I, on the other hand, do feel this negative change and do want the trend to stop and then reverse, and that is my opinion....

    • kiki... There is a difference between a "rumor" and jacka$$e$ coming on this board trying to prop up their stock positions in other companies with their SPAM.

    • Jetskiman: It is relational, you know I cannot compare my lifestyle with my friends and say I still doing good or poorly. I however can compare with my past, and if thing going well, my today is better than my yesterday, and my tomorrow will be better than my today.... You need to look at your company on how it treat it employees yesterday compare to today and so on, you cannot compare how your company treat it employee against MSFT or CSCO..... etc...

    • I see where you are going... I think we got a couple conversations crossed.

      But to be honest... I'm trying to arrange my finances in case the industry changes and retirement plans are reduced even more.

    • By any measure, IBM bookeeping is still very, very conservative. Always has been SUPER conservative. Many practitioners have suggested over the years that IBM loosen up, and they have adopted some provisions in keeping with the times. This is disturbing to some, like watching your grandfather using the DVD player. The pension dust-up is an example. Its legal, universally done, but, for IBM out of character. The CFO rollover is certainly a symptom of something negative, but most likely CEO/CFO relationship.

    • "Joining the IBM dental HMO only works if your dentist agrees to participate"

      Duh! Isn't that true for ANY HMO plan... Even if the employer isn't IBM?

    • "Plastic ... how can you let another family member go work for this horrible company?? why don't you impart your knowledge
      of all the terrible things IBM does on them?"

      Because the truth is that contrary to some people's belief, the grass is NOT greener on the other side of the street.

      Personally, I consider myself lucky to have BOTH a pension and a 401k matching plan. Only a very small percentage of the people in this industry has both.

    • View More Messages
 
IBM
193.75+0.95(+0.49%)Sep 18 4:01 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.
Oracle Corporation
NYSEThu, Sep 18, 2014 4:04 PM EDT
Rite Aid Corporation
NYSEThu, Sep 18, 2014 4:02 PM EDT
Concur Technologies, Inc.
NasdaqGSThu, Sep 18, 2014 4:00 PM EDT