September 18th, 2024

IBM is quietly axing jobs, source says

IBM is discreetly laying off thousands of employees, mainly in its Cloud division, affecting senior-level staff, particularly those aged 50-55, while shifting jobs to India amid a U.S. hiring freeze.

Read original articleLink Icon
IBM is quietly axing jobs, source says

IBM is reportedly laying off thousands of employees in a discreet manner, particularly within its Cloud division. Sources indicate that these layoffs are significant, with one employee noting that affected staff were required to sign non-disclosure agreements. IBM's spokesperson acknowledged a "workforce rebalancing" charge earlier this year, which is expected to result in a minimal percentage of job cuts, but did not provide specific numbers. The company had previously announced plans to cut 3,900 jobs in 2023 and took a $400 million charge for planned layoffs in 2024. With approximately 288,000 employees globally, potential layoffs could range from 2,880 to over 8,640 positions. The cuts appear to target senior-level programmers, sales, and support roles, with many affected employees being in the 50-55 age range and holding significant seniority. There are indications that jobs are being shifted to India, where hiring continues, while a hiring freeze is reported in the U.S. Despite ongoing age discrimination lawsuits, IBM maintains that it does not engage in systematic age discrimination.

- IBM is laying off thousands of employees, particularly in its Cloud division.

- The layoffs are being conducted discreetly, with employees signing NDAs.

- IBM's spokesperson confirmed a workforce rebalancing charge but did not specify the number of layoffs.

- Job cuts primarily affect senior-level positions, with many employees in the 50-55 age bracket.

- There is a trend of shifting jobs to India while hiring freezes are in place in the U.S.

Link Icon 9 comments
By @myth_drannon - 5 months
And they say we don't have ageism in the industry... :

"As with prior layoffs, or "resource actions" to use IBM's euphemism, we're told those affected are substantially in the 50-55 age bracket with 20-24 years of seniority.

"It seems exclusively people in L7 and L8 and L9 bands, at the top of the band in payment structure," the insider said.""

By @holografix - 5 months
They’ve been doing it for so long I’m surprised they have any jobs left to axe.

Sam Palmisano skinned IBM then too a knife to its belly and gutted it. All in the name of his “Roadmap 2010” which was a plan to double the share price by 2015.

So basically the pharaoh said “fuck it, we need a new pyramid. Get the whips out and all worker carcasses are to be dump on the left please”.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2014/05/30/why-ibm...

Edit: roadmap 2010 not 2015

By @farceSpherule - 5 months
NDA's don't matter. There are ways to leak the information anonymously.
By @javiramos - 5 months
I always thought that IBM was a declining giant. I just looked up their share price and it has done strikingly well over the past 2 years. Their revenue has also been growing, albeit slowly. Maybe capitalizing on the AI buzz?

https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/IBM/

By @rowanG077 - 5 months
Why would you sign an NDA when beeing fired? So you het some severance pay?
By @xyst - 5 months
With the fed rate cuts, IBM will probably be hiring back those same folks
By @datavirtue - 5 months
Are these the jobs axed by AI? Would seem to make sense, since the CEO said they were going to replace 5800 jobs with AI.
By @zeptian - 5 months
why is this news ? they do it twice a year.

they have way too many employees, and it will take them a decade of such cuts to "rightsize"

By @alphazard - 5 months
> As with prior layoffs, or "resource actions" to use IBM's euphemism, we're told those affected are substantially in the 50-55 age bracket with 20-24 years of seniority.

> Despite numerous past and ongoing age discrimination lawsuits, IBM maintains it does not systematically discriminate on the basis of age.

Lawsuits of this sort are a little ridiculous. If you work at a company that pays people more just for being older, then you shouldn't be surprised when the "more experienced" people are the first to get laid off.