If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CCN)   Tech giant IBM to overhaul pension plan by 2008, changes name to IBS: I've been Screwed   (ccnmatthews.com) divider line 150
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

6790 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Jan 2006 at 10:10 PM (8 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



150 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2006-01-05 11:05:48 PM
headsoldier

IBS = irritable bowel syndrome,

bad if you've been screwed "in an uncomfortable place"


The back of a Volkswagen?
 
2006-01-05 11:06:11 PM
Was that a bad attempt to insult me, or some wierd brand of sarcasm?

point proven.
 
2006-01-05 11:06:29 PM
worst headline evaar.
 
2006-01-05 11:08:24 PM
Potentially more money for retirement for all employees + saving for IBM = bad

/I just don't get some comments
//Some people need to go back to college
///Bet IBM starts spitting out more millionaires than any other company
 
2006-01-05 11:10:11 PM
BobtheFascist

It takes a little effort & the ability to actually prove your value but it's not that hard.


Very nearly half of all Americans make less than 15K a year.


Effort and proving your value don't mean shiat these days, because there's always someone who will do it cheaper.

I'm getting lucky, I got a temp job at a small company, then got hired full time for a dispatch position. I kept trying to get them let me help out with some of the coding, but they had one programmer and he wasn't enthusiastic about it. The luck part comes when that one programmer decided to go back to school, so now I'm pretty much taking over everything he was doing. Of course the chances I'll get anywhere near that 50K level are slim, given that the other guy they were going to hire got a better offer elsewhere...

(They were going to still have me move into a programming role, just working with this other guy until he pulled out.)
 
2006-01-05 11:12:24 PM
Telos: Yeah, not that anyone makes $50k these days...

That has to be the lamest troll ever. Considering that the median income is over $44,000 about half the people here just have to look at their paystub to know you're a farking retard.
 
2006-01-05 11:17:16 PM
Telos
Very nearly half of all Americans make less than 15K a year. Effort and proving your value don't mean shiat these days, because there's always someone who will do it cheaper.

I was at Safeway last weekend, and I talked briefly with this retarded guy that was stocking shelves (down syndrome).

He makes $14 an hour.

Plus benefits.
 
2006-01-05 11:17:23 PM
Oh, and my 401k matches 75% of the first 8% of my base salary. It's like a 6% pay raise. And the worst anual growth I've even managed was 15%. I have no problem at all with having a 401k.

/ also has a pension
// and no insurance premiums
/// and free tuition and books to any school I want
//// and bonuses
///// Boeing rocks.
 
2006-01-05 11:19:54 PM
DannySPAZ sez:
Will IBM pay 1-4% extra? Isn't that call stealing?

Yes. The company IBM pays the 1-4% company contribution.

I work in this industry. These benefits are still very generous.
 
2006-01-05 11:19:56 PM
Who in their right mind would want a pension anymore? At least with a 401K you can roll it over into an IRA and have control over it. I wouldn't trust any of these idiot MBA's with my retirement.
 
2006-01-05 11:24:25 PM
tphillips:
Who in their right mind would want a pension anymore?

The key selling point of a defined benefit plan is that you know exactly what you get when you retire. With a defined contribution plan, it's a crapshoot.

Why would you roll your 401k into an IRA?
 
2006-01-05 11:25:54 PM
Fish in a Barrel


That has to be the lamest troll ever. Considering that the median income is over $44,000 about half the people here just have to look at their paystub to know you're a farking retard.


Let's see... median... median... oh yeah, in a set of numbers the median is the one in the middle. So of this randomly made up set of numbers what's the median?

11k
12k
14k
16k
50k
100k
200k
1M
3M


What's the median? Right: 50k! Are half the people in this set making 50k? No, ONE is.



It's not that a 401K is a bad thing, but can you really tell me you wouldn't be pissed if your take home pay went down by 1k so they could use it as an excuse to remove your pension?


After all, if you still had that 1k you could still invest it yourself into an IRA or something.
 
2006-01-05 11:26:54 PM
I call bullshiat. If they were really looking out for the employee, they would continue the defined benefit plan for vested employees as desired. Even my crappy company did that much.
 
2006-01-05 11:27:35 PM
It's a good move on IBM's part.

Retirement benefits and health-care costs are destroying General Motors. If IBM doesn't do something to rein in future benefit expenses, it could end up in huge financial trouble.
 
2006-01-05 11:27:52 PM
Oh yeah, and let's all just hope the stock market keeps doing so well or all those 401k's are going to be worthless. (Yes, even the "safe" ones using CDs and such because they don't accrue enough interest to even really beat inflation...)
 
2006-01-05 11:32:48 PM
Fish in a Barrel


And the worst anual growth I've even managed was 15%.

Anyways, how is yours set up? I just got my 401K, and put everything into an S&P Index fund because I'd read some articles saying those were good. Then I just saw an article yesterday on MSN Money or something saying S&P Index funds could be pretty bad... so now I'm a bit worried.

Sorry, new at this... never managed to get a job with benefits before...
 
2006-01-05 11:35:22 PM
Submitter must have a terrific retirement plan if this one doesn't sound good to him. A 401k needs your money to work but the company contribution is yours when you get it. If the company goes down the tubes you still have your retirement.
 
2006-01-05 11:35:48 PM
According to Telos nearly half of all Americans make about $8.33 (assuming a 40 hour work week, 45 weeks a year). Unless he has some data to back that up, which is unlikely, he should be ignored.
 
2006-01-05 11:41:48 PM
Company pension plans? WTF is that?
 
2006-01-05 11:42:58 PM
Telos

Please try to refrain from telling me how bad people have it. I've been there. I'm still paying it off. I lost a GREAT $70K/yr job for a real stupid reason. (my own fault) It was 6 months after 9/11. Anyone making $40 - $70K /yr was out of work & nothing was out there. I ended up moving from a nice little middle class apt in a golf course neighborhood to a crime & gun infested inner city hell hole. I stayed there for 3 of the longest years of my life doing everything from temp jobs to f'in yard work for cash just to keep a roof over my head & some food in the fridge. It was a real eye opening experience. I blew thru my savings(down payment for a house)in a summer. Sold my car to lose the payment & replaced it w/ a POS 85 Jetta I picked up for $800. Shiat, I'm still paying off the debt I accrued from that whole mess & will be for the next 3 yrs minimum. Things can always be better. But I hate to break it to you, you have to do it for yourself. Your an adult now. If your degree didn't get you what you wanted, it's time to find another route to your sucess. Believe me, there isn't anything worse than hitting your 30's & falling to rock bottom. Not to be an a$$, but quit waiting for something to happen. Go make it happen.
 
2006-01-05 11:47:23 PM
$44k is not the median income. Household, maybe.
 
2006-01-05 11:49:14 PM
Retirement benefits and health-care costs are destroying General Motors.

But their shiatty products don't count right?

Even though Toyota, Honda, and Nissan all manage to build their products in North America while being able to fend off Unions by offering satisfactory pay and benefits.

The only problem GM has are the benefits they agreed to offer employees while they had the Lions share of the market and profits.

Why can't they keep their market share now or meet commitments they made? shiatty products.

Why are they not going to be able to survive even after screwing their employees? shiatty products.

What will be the death of GM? shiatty products.

Who are some people blaming? Not those who chose to continue with making shiatty products.

What would save GM? superior products.

Why hasn't GM remodeled to make superior products?

Their products do not even have to be better, just competitive. Americans are willing to support their own corporations, as long as their corporations are returning the favor.

GM, you pay your CEOs better than any other country, what is going on? Why are they not getting the point?
 
2006-01-05 11:56:10 PM
let's see... we go from a pension plan, which the company has acess to, and can spend.. to a 401(k) plan, which the only access the company has is to add to.. add roll over benefits, flexibility in fund usage, employee controlled (up to a point) investment options... and this is assinine? IBM could go bankrupt and the 401(k)ers will have money, while the pensioners... well... they'll be eating my tax money.

huh. Maybe I'm not looking at this right.
 
2006-01-05 11:56:23 PM
Old and busted: Working for the same company for 35 years, retiring at 65 and living the rest of your timid, risk averse life under the company's pension plan.

New hotness: Switching jobs every 5 years or less, keeping your skill set fresh in a globally competitive marketplace, and directing your own retirement with investments you make yourself.

The world is changing. Change with it, or watch it change around you. There's no such thing as an easy dollar.

/rant off
 
2006-01-05 11:56:42 PM
You're the jerk... jerk

Oh sure, ask for a reference. Bleh.

Well, I honestly saw it on some tv show about unemployment a few months ago and can't find a direct reference now.

However if you play around with the US census site you can find this: http://pubdb3.census.gov/macro/032005/perinc/new11_001.htm

Doing the math (adding the total population for men and women of all races, then adding the number of people in each of those woh are making less than 15k) I came up with:

41.5% making less than 15k a year.

So yeah, not quite 50% like I said, but still too close for my taste.

anyways, I need sleep now... the Nyquil is kicking in...
 
2006-01-05 11:56:45 PM
>>Then I just saw an article yesterday on MSN Money or something saying S&P Index funds could be pretty bad... so now I'm a bit worried.

Stop worrying. Leave it there.
 
2006-01-05 11:59:03 PM
>>Very nearly half of all Americans make less than 15K a year.

When people say crazy things, I don't know how to reply.

I guess this is one is true, though. In my family, 3 out of 5 people are 12 and under, and it's true--they don't make $15,000. So I guess my family is worse off than average.
 
2006-01-05 11:59:57 PM
2006-01-05 11:42:58 PM BobtheFascist

The point of my story was that all my effort basically counted for very little, and had the lead programmer not decided to go back to school I'd still just be stuck doing menial work. :(
 
2006-01-06 12:00:01 AM
Stocks, over the last 50 years, have appreciated at an averaged rate of 10% per year. Don't worry about index funds. The people saying the stock market is going to crash are the same people who tell you Osama's behind every tree. They do it to sell papers.

Leave it in the index fund.
 
2006-01-06 12:04:25 AM
valkore
...Switching jobs every 5 years or less


Yea. That's what it is all right. And that's great when you are 20, 30 or even 45 years old. Heck, I'd go further; I'd say that it's fun!

But when 50 comes around, your employability takes a nose dive.

Today, McDonald's counter service is really looking like a good career path.
 
2006-01-06 12:08:36 AM
At some point, most of corporate America decided that offering the cheapest product was superior to offering the best overall product.

A corporations success relies on their ability to outsell the competition, not their ability to screw their employees. Good employees are needed to produce the superior product.

What is becoming apparent is that price alone is not the deciding factor. Initial price alone is not superior to the cost of the product in the long run. Once people realize this, your product is going to lose. You will neither be able to retain or gain the good employees necessary to make a good product, a product good enough to retain the customers you need.

A race to the bottom is not the answer when you are competing with people who are aiming for the top.

It's pure self interest, retaining that level of competition requires sacrifice and effort from all levels involved. The rewards are reaped through the success you earn.

I am thinking that IBM is unwilling to take the hard road, because the short run is more beneficial to the few who are going to gain from the short term strategy. They are selling out the good name IBM built through a history of offering the best product, employees first.
 
2006-01-06 12:11:33 AM
Telos

Call it fate. Regardless, you ended up on the winning end. You have to make the best of it & network w/ people outside of where you are. There's still a lot of that "it's not what you know, it's who you know" out there. It's the only reason I was able to get a foot in where I'm at now. Use everything you can to your benefit. If you don't someone else will. Seriously though, good luck to you. I hope you get to climb another step soon.

/Time to stop Farking.
//My bottle of Makers is craving attention.
 
2006-01-06 12:13:25 AM
Gargoyle

But when 50 comes around, your employability takes a nose dive.


If you're unemployable when you're 50, I'd say you spent the last 30 years dicking off and it's your own goddamn fault.

/that is all
 
2006-01-06 12:15:02 AM
AllApologies
At some point, most of corporate America decided that offering the cheapest product was superior to offering the best overall product.

I would say that America's throngs of idiot Walmart shoppers decided that for them.
 
2006-01-06 12:15:26 AM
Telos, you realize your list includes all people who will turn 15 in the next year. I wouldn't expect the average college student to make 15k a year, nor would I expect the average 14 year old.
 
2006-01-06 12:22:10 AM
www.free-legal-grants.info
 
2006-01-06 12:25:09 AM
Telos:

I've checked your source, and you might want to check your math - it's not 41.5%, it's 31.5%.

Note though, approximately half of those apparently have incomes of less than 2,500 a year. That should raise a red flag as to what you're really looking at. Clearly if 13% of all US were attempting to live on less than 2500 a year, we might have heard about it before this.

I suspect you're looking at a breakdown of "declared income" reported to the IRS. This would then not include Social Security income and other undeclared income. The data would also be skewed down by data such as high school kids working part-time and college students on work study. Each one of them would count the same as the Head of a Household.
 
2006-01-06 12:28:20 AM
Perhaps y'all would rather IBM stick to their pensions like GM tried to do (because of the unions) and start laying off people, maybe even go bankrupt. Companies do this stuff for a reason, and it ain't to endear themselves to the world: it's because they can't afford it as originally planned.

Let IBM stock die and them lay off droves of workers, THEN ask yourself the wisdom of 'sticking it to tha man'.

What you anti-business types forget is that just as big business needs the everyday Joe Worker and would be screwed without him, Joe Worker needs big business just as much to feed his kids and pay his mortgage. It's a 2 way street. Rich people can't do anything without help from employees, and employees can't get jobs without rich people. If you choke the rich people, the regular folks inevitably suffer. Just ask anyone living in a socialist or communist country.
 
2006-01-06 12:30:35 AM
Submitter

so it's better to have a pension in the hands of a corporation that can always go out of business than a 401(k) under *your* control?

methinks you are a dependent socialist asshat.
 
2006-01-06 12:40:22 AM
I would say that America's throngs of idiot Walmart shoppers decided that for them.

What came first? The retailer willing to sell out local labor in order to make even more of a buck, or the idiot consumers willing to sell out their good paying manufacturing jobs in order to get a slightly better price on an inferior product.

The consumer is not without blame. At some point they decided to buy into this as well. Consumers tend to be led though, and not always in their own best interests.

At the same time, the quality of the competitions product continues to get that much better (through reinvestment of wealth gained from us) while the jobs that existed here making those same products continue to disappear. Who is winning in the long run? Aside from profit alone, the wealth is going in the wrong direction.

How was our wealth gained? Superior product, superior price(all other factors included). That is why the world was our consumer, that is how we earned more of their dollars than they earned of ours.

What made our market the strongest was the fact that the capital was spent making it here, giving our consumers the spending power.

The fact that foreign competitors are making that a reality is testament that local producers can do the same while supporting the local market. If they choose to model themselves in the most competitive way from the top down.

Given the head start we have, that should not have been too hard.
 
2006-01-06 12:41:19 AM
heinousjay

If you're unemployable when you're 50, I'd say you spent the last 30 years dicking off and it's your own goddamn fault.

/that is all


Well, the companies that I worked for during the prior 30 years were large fortune 500 corporatons: International Harvester and EG&G.

They downsize, rightsize, resize, rationalize, outsource and go bankrupt.

I'm not exactly sure how I would have gone about preventing that. Perhaps you're more skillful at seeing the future than I was.

/that's what happens
 
2006-01-06 12:41:59 AM
TheGoblinKing
Perhaps y'all would rather IBM stick to their pensions like GM tried to do (because of the unions) and start laying off people, maybe even go bankrupt. Companies do this stuff for a reason, and it ain't to endear themselves to the world: it's because they can't afford it as originally planned.

GM is going out of business because they're producing mediocre vehicles at best (totally shiatty at worst), and they refuse to kill off redundant brands (buick, oldsmobile) and cut production to increase profitability.

In addition, they're doing completely retarded shiat like selling off their GMAC unit, which is their main source of profit.

try and blame this on the unions all you want, but in reality, the blame rests solely on upper (mis)management.
 
2006-01-06 12:45:20 AM
Gargoyle
Well, the companies that I worked for during the prior 30 years were large fortune 500 corporatons: International Harvester and EG&G. They downsize, rightsize, resize, rationalize, outsource and go bankrupt. I'm not exactly sure how I would have gone about preventing that. Perhaps you're more skillful at seeing the future than I was.

Do you have a resume? Do you have marketable skills? Do you have any basic networking in place?

If not, then good riddance. The workforce doesn't need you.
 
2006-01-06 12:48:18 AM
Artcurus

Corporations are slowly killing this country.

try taking a look at who built it and keeps it rivch, asshat.

> They dont farking realize that society MUST deal with aging/infirm people

"society" is a code word for top-down socialist legislation. leave people free and keep your hands off!

> or the alternative is the streets.

you're hysterical. in both senses.

> America is the worst place to live

go to bangladesh - or belgrade.

> our quality of life is deteriorating because of BS like this

you people have been saying this for a century. when's it going to happen? what do you think *produces* "quality of life"? trade!

> We are the ONLY country that treats the poor/aged like crap.

ignorance revealed.

I am so farking tired of this elitist, RICH asshat thinking that people below them dont matter.
 
2006-01-06 12:49:55 AM
AllApologies
What came first? The retailer willing to sell out local labor in order to make even more of a buck, or the idiot consumers willing to sell out their good paying manufacturing jobs in order to get a slightly better price on an inferior product.

You know what? If the consumer doesn't realize that he's selling himself out when he won't spend the extra $2 for the Michigan-made Master(tm) combination lock vs. the generic chinese-made combination lock, I'd say he gets what he deserves.

/vote with your dollars, people
//that is, until it's time to vote with your euros
 
2006-01-06 12:51:11 AM
It's always because of the unions, because no other nation has been able to support their workers while being competitive right?

Unions can only come about if their is enough disparity to support the existence Unions being necessary.

Consider the successful companies who pay well enough to encourage their employees resisting the establishment of a Union. Beneficial for the Employer and the Employee through avoiding another level of unnecessary management. The companies who find that balance are, believe it, or not, more successful. They avoid the unnecessary conflict created by those whom a corporation is dependent upon.

Greed at one end of the equation results in Unions at the other end. It's kind of a self damning prophecy. The whole thing is.
 
2006-01-06 12:57:33 AM
The new plan looks great. I wish we could start it earlier than 2008.

Old plan: 5% of salary into cash balance plan and 3% into 401k.

New plan: 8% into 401k.

So.. We will get the same amount of money into retirement accounts but we will be able to manage all of it ourselves. What an evil corporation!!

Yes.. You have to contribute 6% to be matched to get the full 8% but if you are not saving at least 6% then you dont deserve retirement funds.

Everything already in the cash balance plan will stay there. I wish I could get that into my 401k too.

For the really old farts who stayed with the old pension plan the plan will stay exactly like it is and just will not grow any more (as IBM puts the new money in your 401k instead).

For people who joined 2005 or later there is no change. You are already getting 5% in your 401k and it will stay that way.

What's the problem folks?? This is a great move for the employees and IBM has learned its lesson from last time and is giving everyone a long head's up before changing the plan.
 
2006-01-06 12:57:45 AM
You know what? If the consumer doesn't realize that he's selling himself out when he won't spend the extra $2 for the Michigan-made Master(tm) combination lock vs. the generic chinese-made combination lock, I'd say he gets what he deserves.

Well that attitude is clearly what is going to benefit all of us. Because retaining wealth through production would not benefit us at all would it? I mean, retaining wealth in our market could not possibly be more beneficial than sending it overseas right?

And, btw, it's not that simple. Masterlock may not necessarily have to relocate overseas if they can keep the lead in quality of product to keep manufacturing here. It just may mean that Masterlock is making .50 cents more per lock by doing so, no matter how it affects the economy in the future.
 
2006-01-06 12:59:55 AM
IBM is a tech giant? Get outta here!!
 
2006-01-06 01:10:43 AM
My poor dad.

/IBM actually stands for "I've Been Moved".
//Moved 12 times cuz of IBM.
 
Displayed 50 of 150 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report