laying off 334 people at RTP (2015, health insurance, credit)

[block911]

Report: IBM lowers Sun bid - Triangle Business Journal:

[tigerlily]

I received this article through email the other day. The article linked has apparently been modified from the original. The original article stated that 5,000 would be laid off from the services division nationwide, 334 people from RTP. These jobs are being transferred to India. The laid off employees can transfer to India. However, their salaries will be at India's pay scale, not what they are making here. I hope IBM loses its tax benefits.

[sls76]

Originally Posted by tigerlily

I received this article through email the other day. The article linked has apparently been modified from the original. The original article stated that 5,000 would be laid off from the services division nationwide, 334 people from RTP. These jobs are being transferred to India. The laid off employees can transfer to India. However, their salaries will be at India's pay scale, not what they are making here. I hope IBM loses its tax benefits.

That's one perspective. Another alternative might be to lower the corporate tax rate which effectively lowers US labor costs and gives less incentive to outsource. The US has a very high corporate tax rate.

[Sant]

And another perspective would be why doesn't IBM move its operations to India where it can be under constant threat of attacks by Pakistan, ethnic/religious/caste tensions, and labor stikes,and deal with India's poor infrastructure. If IBM wants to enjoy the benefits that the US offers it needs to help pay for them! You could lower IBM's tax rates to zero and it still couldn't compete with India's labor rates.

It's sucks what these multi-national companies are doing. They operate out of western countries where they enjoy safety, the rule of law (e.g., patent protection), and easy access to capital but they move the jobs to places like India, China, and Eastern Europe where there are low wages and little to no regulatory concerns. Great for fatcat CEOs and investors but not so good for the workers.

[sls76]

Originally Posted by Sant

And another perspective would be why doesn't IBM move its operations to India where it can be under constant threat of attacks by Pakistan, ethnic/religious/caste tensions, and labor stikes,and deal with India's poor infrastructure. If IBM wants to enjoy the benefits that the US offers it needs to help pay for them! You could lower IBM's tax rates to zero and it still couldn't compete with India's labor rates.

It's sucks what these multi-national companies are doing. They operate out of western countries where they enjoy safety, the rule of law (e.g., patent protection), and easy access to capital but they move the jobs to places like India, China, and Eastern Europe where there are low wages and little to no regulatory concerns. Great for fatcat CEOs and investors but not so good for the workers.

That's untrue. I know a Fortune 500 company that pays over $40/hr (total cost) for help desk positions in India--we're not talking about $5/hr. I completely disagree that lowering corporate taxes (which reduces employment costs) would do nothing on the margin. What do you think would happen if the top corporate tax rate went from 39% to 50%? Since you believe lowering the cost wouldn't bring back or prevent more jobs from being outsourced, I assume you must think that raising the rate would have no effect as well.

Oh, and as far as the investors go, I'd bet a whole lot of us common people own IBM in our IRAs and 401ks.

[Sant]

Originally Posted by sls76

That's untrue. I know a Fortune 500 company that pays over $40/hr (total cost) for help desk positions in India--we're not talking about $5/hr. I completely disagree that lowering corporate taxes (which reduces employment costs) would do nothing on the margin. What do you think would happen if the top corporate tax rate went from 39% to 50%? Since you believe lowering the cost wouldn't bring back or prevent more jobs from being outsourced, I assume you must think that raising the rate would have no effect as well.

Oh, and as far as the investors go, I'd bet a whole lot of us common people own IBM in our IRAs and 401ks.

Veractiy asisde, one example does not disprove the whole notion. Do you think the average Indian worker gets paid $40/hour? Not even close. Also, a study (I believe by OMB) showed that 2/3 of corporations don't even pay ANY coporates taxes! Lastly, let's remember that the common people investors are also workeers who produce and consume the products these coporations produce. If they keep moving jobs overseas it reduces the ability of the common people to continue to invest in IRAs/401Ks and buy the goods being produced.

[sls76]

Originally Posted by Sant

Veractiy asisde, one example does not disprove the whole notion. Do you think the average Indian worker gets paid $40/hour? Not even close. Also, a study (I believe by OMB) showed that 2/3 of corporations don't even pay ANY coporates taxes! Lastly, let's remember that the common people investors are also workeers who produce and consume the products these coporations produce. If they keep moving jobs overseas it reduces the ability of the common people to continue to invest in IRAs/401Ks and buy the goods being produced.

Oh, sure, I'm lying about this and know nothing about the topic. I said "total cost". I did not imply an average Indian worker was making $80k / year. Lower corporate taxes, make this country more business friendly (unfortunately the opposite direction we're currently going) and the jobs will be here. BTW, what's the relevance of 2/3 of corporations not paying corporate taxes unless you can show those same companies are outsourcing? I'm talking about companies like IBM that pay taxes (IBM paid over $2 billion last year on income from US operations).

BTW, those companies that pay no corporate taxes pay a lot of other taxes (county and state taxes, payroll taxes, unemployment taxes, etc.) My husband has three employees in NY state and he pays $4k/employee/year in unemployment tax. Kind of makes you wonder if it makes sense to have employees in NY (replace NY with the USA and you've got offshoring).

[dansdrive]

Its all about two words, 'HEALTH CARE'. Little to do with Corporate Taxes, Employee Productivity, or employee skills and knowledge for that matter. Its the only way corporations have to manage yearly double digit increases in Health care. Can't double their charges to their Customers and stay in business. Can't stop paying back their debt to the Banks. Can't stop paying their Federal, State, and Local Taxes to the government. Can't stop paying their Suppliers for goods and services. But what they can control is where they spend their dollars for labor.

They manage their bottom line better than people give them credit for. The management tool they use to control 'Out of Control' Employee Health care cost is to move where the Heath care cost is stable. That my friends is not the US of A.

Solve the Health care crisis in American and there will be more jobs than our country can possibly fill. We won't be building Medical Arts Building on every street corner and hire workers on top of workers just to do the CYA paperwork in the event of a lawsuit. No America would be building factories to make things! We will manufacture things in this country again. Companies cannot carry the burden of double digit Health care cost increases and still keep everyone employed. To save jobs and our way of life take Health care offerings away from companies and Nationalize it. Not a solution anyone wants to hear but there is no other in the short term until we get this fixed. We are already doing it for Banks, Insurance Providers (AIG), and the auto industry.

Let's cut to the chase and get on with the work of rebuilding our companies which in turn will rebuild our economy. Allowing or better said forcing companies to pay employees Health Care is broke. One company offers 100% coverage while another company offers employees the bare minimum but does allow them to 'Buy Up' their coverage with out of pocket money. Another company just uses Contractors and pays nothing to them regarding benefits. So IMHO that is broke! Coverage should be coverage. Why should one person be denied a certain coverage based on the company they work for versus their needs?

Fix Health Care and we will not seen these type of Articles.... Just my opinion.

[sls76]

Originally Posted by dansdrive

Its all about two words, 'HEALTH CARE'. Little to do with Corporate Taxes, Employee Productivity, or employee skills and knowledge for that matter. Its the only way corporations have to manage yearly double digit increases in Health care. Can't double their charges to their Customers and stay in business. Can't stop paying back their debt to the Banks. Can't stop paying their Federal, State, and Local Taxes to the government. Can't stop paying their Suppliers for goods and services. But what they can control is where they spend their dollars for labor.

They manage their bottom line better than people give them credit for. The management tool they use to control 'Out of Control' Employee Health care cost is to move where the Heath care cost is stable. That my friends is not the US of A.

Solve the Health care crisis in American and there will be more jobs than our country can possibly fill. We won't be building Medical Arts Building on every street corner and hire workers on top of workers just to do the CYA paperwork in the event of a lawsuit. No America would be building factories to make things! We will manufacture things in this country again. Companies cannot carry the burden of double digit Health care cost increases and still keep everyone employed. To save jobs and our way of life take Health care offerings away from companies and Nationalize it. Not a solution anyone wants to hear but there is no other in the short term until we get this fixed. We are already doing it for Banks, Insurance Providers (AIG), and the auto industry.

Let's cut to the chase and get on with the work of rebuilding our companies which in turn will rebuild our economy. Allowing or better said forcing companies to pay employees Health Care is broke. One company offers 100% coverage while another company offers employees the bare minimum but does allow them to 'Buy Up' their coverage with out of pocket money. Another company just uses Contractors and pays nothing to them regarding benefits. So IMHO that is broke! Coverage should be coverage. Why should one person be denied a certain coverage based on the company they work for versus their needs?

Fix Health Care and we will not seen these type of Articles.... Just my opinion.

Health care costs certainly are a component of competitiveness, but I completely disagree that it's all about health care. Basically you're arguing that if our health care costs were under control and everyone were covered under a socialist program where we'd all wait in line for cancer treatment it would not matter what our corporate tax rate was, how skilled our workforce was, etc. Wonder why we aren't offshoring to Canada or Great Britain if that's the case.

[Sant]

Dansdrive, you make a good point about healthcare costs. But it's not corporations that is the economic and employment drivers in America, it's small businesses. Making health insurance affordable and portable and it will unleash tremendous entrepreneurship in America.

Sls76, I didn't say you didn't know anything of the topic. But given the anonymity of the internet, I imagine when you read something that starts with "I know a guy who..." you take it with a grain of salt-- as everyone should.