Live data from Hacker News

IBM layoffs strike first in India; workers describe as 'slaughter' and 'massive'

wraltechwire.com

21–30 of 142 posts

Re: IBM layoffs strike first in India; workers describe as 'slaughter' and 'massive'

#21
post #9
post #3

How many workers were actually cut?

According to article 'One analyst has estimated that IBM will cut 13,000 of its more than 434,000 workers'. Not sure how many (what percentage) is in India and how many are affected.

IBM is no longer a USA company and has not been for some time, logic would dictate that if they've only got ten thousand or so employees left in the USA, if they plan to downsize 13K, at least some citizens of India are going to have to go. They'll (probably) never get rid of the local USA sales force and some service techs, so by definition layoffs will now start to happen in India.

GE is the same way, as are some other former USA companies, when all the Americans are fired you have to begin firing in India and China, which is new to those areas.

Now if they really wanted inhumane, they'd make the Indian workers train their replacements, then fire them.

Re: IBM layoffs strike first in India; workers describe as 'slaughter' and 'massive'

#22
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do seem insensitive. Fuck their missed projections. Let all the managers quit for their failure. Did you look at the financials? Why are you pretending that you have the slightest clue what's going on in their business? If the employees were in charge like they ought to be, they could deal with their business properly and almost certainly avoid this fucking travesty. Tens of thousands of people losing their jobs…

Did you ever notice that when someone says "I don't want to seem/sound/look XXXXX", they follow it with a statement that can be perceived that way. You do seem full of hatred. If the employees had started IBM, bought out their division or otherwise owned the business, I'd agree with everything you say. In this case, management should also be sacked - On the other hand, maybe part of management's failure was hiring to…

You never know, maybe they will be sacked after these layoffs are taken care of. One place I worked at, two managers were each told to select one of their underlings for layoffs. After they made their selections, the managers were then laid off.

Re: IBM layoffs strike first in India; workers describe as 'slaughter' and 'massive'

#23
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you ever notice that when someone says "I don't want to seem/sound/look XXXXX", they follow it with a statement that can be perceived that way. You do seem full of hatred. If the employees had started IBM, bought out their division or otherwise owned the business, I'd agree with everything you say. In this case, management should also be sacked - On the other hand, maybe part of management's failure was hiring to…

You never know, maybe they will be sacked after these layoffs are taken care of. One place I worked at, two managers were each told to select one of their underlings for layoffs. After they made their selections, the managers were then laid off.

IBM is selling, consolidating and closing whole lines of business ... there's nothing that says anyone has to be employed when they're done. I saw a layoff similar to what you described once ... a few of the managers laid off everyone in their groups, then the next day, HR came in from corporate, laid them off and closed the building down.

Re: IBM layoffs strike first in India; workers describe as 'slaughter' and 'massive'

#24
post #9
post #3

How many workers were actually cut?

According to article 'One analyst has estimated that IBM will cut 13,000 of its more than 434,000 workers'. Not sure how many (what percentage) is in India and how many are affected.

IBM has around 120,000 employees in India, around 90,000 in the US and around 20,000 in the UK. Around 35 billion dollars of IBM's revenue ( ie: around 35% )comes from IBM India.

Re: IBM layoffs strike first in India; workers describe as 'slaughter' and 'massive'

#25
post #5

I don't want to seem insensitive but ... The quote at the beginning of the article describes pretty much every layoff I've ever seen (or been through). The person quoted describes it as inhuman, but HR and managers are told to keep it impersonal (don't induce more crying than there is). You don't get notice (on purpose), you have to turn in company-owned property and they want you out the door (it affects the morale…

You do seem insensitive. Fuck their missed projections. Let all the managers quit for their failure. Did you look at the financials? Why are you pretending that you have the slightest clue what's going on in their business? If the employees were in charge like they ought to be, they could deal with their business properly and almost certainly avoid this fucking travesty. Tens of thousands of people losing their jobs…

What the heck are you going on about? IBM sold a division of their hardware business to Lenovo, who apparently didn't agree to absorb all of the personnel IBM had supporting it, so they're -- poof -- redundant. IBM obviously wasn't making much, if any, money selling x86 servers, and it's perfectly reasonable that they couldn't find obvious positions for xx,000 people whose jobs and specializations suddenly don't exist anymore. This is as cut & dried as these things can be. Compare, for example, to the preemptive huge cuts many technology & manufacturing companies made in 2007 (the smart ones, foreseeing what their soft 2007 market would turn into in 2008++) and 2008 (the either less savvy or more empathetic/hopeful companies). "Sorry, we're cutting a large portion of our workforce because we're pretty sure the market is going to tank and we need to mitigate our risk exposure to the downside." That doesn't go over nearly as well with employees as "Sorry, we sold the division you work for and the buyer didn't want you."

I work in contract electronics manufacturing, for Sanmina, and in Oct-Nov 2007 we laid of 16% of our global workforce of ~50,000. Compared to our competitors who waited until 2008 (Jabil, Celestica, Flextronics, Plexus, Benchmark, etc), this ended up being a very smart decision. Just compare the stock prices of each company over the past five years. In 2003 we won the PC & Thinkpad manufacturing business from IBM, which accounted for about $3b/yr in revenues over each of the subsequent five years. Revenue, not profit. We only made about 1-1.5% profit on that ridiculously tight margin commodity hardware business. In 2008 we sold it to Foxconn & Lenovo, much like IBM just sold their x86 server division to Lenovo. It is a smart purchase for Lenovo because they have ready access to cheap manufacturing capacity and they operate at a scale that allows them to negotiate much better deals throughout their supply chain than IBM could. This is the same reason Foxconn, Pegatron, Compal, & Quanta are [roughly] the only ones making money hand over fist building consumer products: either they negotiate exclusive deals on high-demand, high-margin products (e.g. Apple) or they just operate on such a huge scale that they get optimal prices on direct material and freight. It's impossible to compete, which is why the smaller (say, $3-10b/yr revenue) EMS companies have intentionally focused on low vol / high mix / high margin areas over the past 5-7 years. This includes things like defense goods, medical products, network infrastructure (especially microwave & optical/fiber), robotics, and similar complex or highly regulated products.

In our deal, we had to layoff a few people, but not too many and mostly direct labor (factory workers) and lower level business management. We "sold" a full 10% of our global IT staff to Foxconn in the deal, and they took over a high percentage of the business folks responsible for the business, too. Why? Because they wanted to ensure continuity in the marketplace.

This just isn't something Lenovo needs very much of from IBM for server support. They're already a hardware company and already have the same or similar functions in their existing org. If these people being laid off are good, they'll be in demand and easily hired elsewhere. It's not like the Indian domestic market is suffering lack of demand, and it isn't like US companies aren't still clamoring for an increase in the H-1b limit (not to mention all the L-1/L-2 visas out there).

Re: IBM layoffs strike first in India; workers describe as 'slaughter' and 'massive'

#26
post #5

I don't want to seem insensitive but ... The quote at the beginning of the article describes pretty much every layoff I've ever seen (or been through). The person quoted describes it as inhuman, but HR and managers are told to keep it impersonal (don't induce more crying than there is). You don't get notice (on purpose), you have to turn in company-owned property and they want you out the door (it affects the morale…

> the severance and extended benefits are far more generous than any layoff I've been through here in the states

Interesting. Are big tech companies less generous than big engineering firms in other fields? When companies like BP, Boeing, etc. have had layoff rounds, 3 months is just about the minimum package for an involuntary termination, and it's common to first offer much higher voluntary packages to reduce headcount without having to actually fire (sorry, "terminate") people, especially longtime employees. My dad accepted a voluntary severance package equal to 18 months' salary some years ago (something like "1 month per year of service up to a cap" is a common formula for voluntary offers).

I think this is in part due to what you mention: the morale of the existing employees can be significantly impacted by how their former colleagues were treated. Many people know each other out of work, so escorting the employees out of the building by security with no warning is not going to successfully keep them from talking, and if anything will probably just make them more resentful when they meet up for a beer after work to discuss how the layoff was handled. The former employees may also turn up in other situations (college recruiting, industry organizations, consulting/sales, etc.) where it's not to your company's advantage for there to be a lot of people floating around who hold a grudge about the manner in which they were abruptly laid off.

Re: IBM layoffs strike first in India; workers describe as 'slaughter' and 'massive'

#27
post #9
post #3

How many workers were actually cut?

According to article 'One analyst has estimated that IBM will cut 13,000 of its more than 434,000 workers'. Not sure how many (what percentage) is in India and how many are affected.

Most IBM employees are in India, over the years they've consistently trimmed their US workforce (got the treatment) to the point that only the research arm and a relatively small consulting staff and management remains US employees.

I suspect that is how they've been able to impress financially given all the multimillion dollar troubled projects they've overseen. Should be interesting times to come. Apparently Watson is now the great software hope, we'll see.

Re: IBM layoffs strike first in India; workers describe as 'slaughter' and 'massive'

#29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do seem insensitive. Fuck their missed projections. Let all the managers quit for their failure. Did you look at the financials? Why are you pretending that you have the slightest clue what's going on in their business? If the employees were in charge like they ought to be, they could deal with their business properly and almost certainly avoid this fucking travesty. Tens of thousands of people losing their jobs…

Maybe you should read the article > "Announced today including managers" This is the failing X86 based server business (STG) which IBM has sold off to Lenovo, most likely duplicate test/support staff which Lenovo already have. They aren't just trimming - the departments are closing down.

IBM has sold the XSeries division, STG is a different division (storages and systems), and is not up for sale AFAIK.

Re: IBM layoffs strike first in India; workers describe as 'slaughter' and 'massive'

#30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you should read the article > "Announced today including managers" This is the failing X86 based server business (STG) which IBM has sold off to Lenovo, most likely duplicate test/support staff which Lenovo already have. They aren't just trimming - the departments are closing down.

IBM has sold the XSeries division, STG is a different division (storages and systems), and is not up for sale AFAIK.

Systems and Technology Group is the hardware wing and within contains X-Series Division. IBM is keeping the other power, storage and Z (mainframe) IIRC.
Post reply on HN