|
Posted by e.m.ployee on 09 November 2000 at 01:09:09:
There are a couple of issues that need airing: 1. There have been postings on US and other websites that allege that
people who held senior positions in the IBM UK Pensions setup resigned in a hurry
on seeing what was happening to the C-Plan.
It is also alleged that there are copies of their letters of resignation in the circulating, which
show how they tried to stop the so-called "raid" on the C-Plan. Do these letters really exist? If they do, shouldn't they be sent to the UK's Pensions Ombudsman
as evidence. If they are not forthcoming, it may be that this "documentary evidence" is being held close by
individuals who have little interest in the general good or specifically the C-Plan pensioners,
but is being kept as possible evidence to support personal vendettas against the Co. 2. It is suggested that the "independent" members of the Pensions Trust have been
made subject to a confidentiality agreements which preclude their
discussion of the issues with their constituents i.e. the pensioners and the
active members who are still ploughing their four percents in. Perhaps they need reminding where their duty lies. Specifically,
this site may choose to keep a note of how the elected members have
behaved. The question is: "Where does their duty lie?" There are people lurking in the shadows who may be seeking to
protect/advance personal agendas, for and against the Co. Now is the time to get everything out - we have a good process to
obtain a review and if appropriate, redress; the Ombudsman. It would be very sad if our good case is compromised by individuals
who have information which could help all the members but which is
held back by personal motives. Now is the time for honourable people to say what they know.
Posted by A C Planner on 09 November 2000 at 22:58:56:
In Reply to: Why not put everything on the table posted by e.m.ployee on 09 November 2000 at 01:09:09:
Note also there are employee members of the Pension Trust Board who represent both current employees and retirees; can't we canvas them for information on what is happening? Shouldn't we be pursing this claim from both within and without IBM?
Posted by e.m.ployee
on 04 December 2000 at 22:27:14:
In Reply to: Re: Why not put everything on the table posted by A C Planner on 09 November 2000 at 22:58:56:
I did approach a one-time employee director of the pensions trust, but "a imminent meeting" obliged him to rush on, unable to discuss the topic. I have not seen him since, but next time he will not get away so easily. As a current employee in the latter stages of his career it is just possible that he finds himself in a position of conflict?
Posted by Fran Wilson - Deferred
on 10 November 2000 at 21:47:54:
In Reply to: Why not put everything on the table posted by e.m.ployee on 09 November 2000 at 01:09:09:
Dear e.m.ployee I recall from my IBM career, what seems an age ago now (1), that IBM
employees had a great sense of what was proper but perhaps not
what to do when things weren't proper.
Don't take this the wrong way but I think you have to be outside
to see reality. IBM employees always looked to the Company to
do what as right. It seems that the "IBM Government and Judiciary"
have, for many in IBM, gone and a void left. That's how I sense
your position. "What am I to do? What is the right approach? Who
can I trust?" The only good news is that this type of problem is not
unique to you. Thousands go through it every year in Britain. I now have a second career counselling people in precisely your
situation. The loyal employee will always uphold the Company.
The question is a what point does a lifelong loyal employee wake
up? At what point does she/he say the Company is wrong? At what
point does she/he say .. it doesn't make sense anymore .. at what
point do they return to trusting their own judgment? It is not
easy. I deal with that every day. The human cost is enormous. I've
never met any employee in a crisis situation involving
their employer who wasn't devastated. You must be
aware of the statistics. You know the divorce statistics...
Moving house, moving job, death in the family etc... So what you
are talking about is right at the top of the stress scale. As an employee you probably wouldn't believe the character, sheer
professionalism and ability to bear pain that taking on an
employer involves. Most of my cases are nothing compared to what
you are talking about. But I have seen similar. Expect IBM like
others to trade on that pressure. Expect them to use every human
weakness to gain an advantage. That's the way these battles take
place. A classic tactic is to find a weak employee a few years
from retirement and make them work for the company by
infiltrating those who, at great risk to themselves, are trying
to expose wrong doing. How do Companies manipulate people?
Enhanced reitement packages, lucrative "consultancy" in
retirement, a move to Cornwall for example just before retirement
... I've seen a few. You can do it lots of ways if the people
are weak enough. Then of course there are some people who are
just obsequious. Those who love their colleagues yet will betray
them and then secretly hate themselves for it. It is a recognised
condition manifesting itself in a few unfortunates who have
often underperformed in relation to siblings. So make no mistake,
the moment you enter the World of employer confrontation then
your life changes. But those who do speak out are different. It is not for us others
to judge them. Either the information is valuable or it is not.
I've learnt not to even question their motivation, let alone
attempt to judge it. The only thing that is important is did they
act? Few people act. Be grateful for them because they are truly
the honourable ones. I should also say that it is totally naive to except public posting
of all material - any Company would love it. Still, as here,
enough has got around to warn many of a huge problem. In case
you are in any doubt IBM's legal department will no doubt tell
you that those bringing cases to the Ombudsman should not post
everything. That's plain rude if not contemptuous ... as you say
the Ombudsman is there for just this case. If you want his judgment
then you should respect his power to decide. Where this Group
comes in is to support those applications and bring pressure to
bear thereafter should it be necessary. Everyone here will learn a great deal form this experience.
|
