IBM Bans Remote Work Company Wide – Move or Leave

> In a video message to her troops, seen by The Register, chief marketing officer Michelle Peluso said "there is something about a team being more powerful, more impactful, more creative, and frankly hopefully having more fun, when they are shoulder to shoulder."

Sounds like a lie. If it's clearly a win for everyone, then remote employees wouldn't be working remotely to begin with...

IBM's most prolific female patent filer works from home. http://lisaseacat.com

Facepalm.

Working in the office is something I have always wanted as a frequent remote employee. I think it is great for communication and for the culture.

This specifically is very heavy handed. IBM apparently had a culture that supports this, so it is probably more akin to a layoff than a policy change. It says 30 days to conform-- not nearly enough time to make such a decision nor have this properly aligned culturally.

This may be good for morale among those disallowed remote work, feeling the company now provides "fairness" across all departments. I still think this looks like a layoff/ageism as they are comitted to hiring 25k more employees and married folks with children likely to be less mobile.

I like on site teams. I think remote work has a place, especially for those who have absorbed a companies culture, but this doesnt seem like the way to do it.

IBM has about 700+ people in two different development centers in Louisiana, with a goal of 1200 total. There has been no word here about the employees having to relocate to one of the locations listed in the article, nor has there been any mass layoffs.

It was published around may of 2016, that IBM was planning to layoff roughly 14000 people, I'm willing to bet, this is more a part of that strategy than it is about people working together.

This sounds like: we have to reduce headcount but we don't want to be seen having a "layoff." We choose, therefore, a headcount reduction strategy which we can brand as something other than a layoff. We'll make it about "coming together" which sounds much better than, hey, the wheels are coming off the bus. This is just a layoff by another name.

How can telling your employees "move or leave" be good for morale?

Then IBM is not worth working for. It is time for workers to demand more sensible conditions from employers.

There are many, usually older companies, where managers have stopped doing their jobs long time ago. In these kind of companies, workers find out about what they need to do and who has the right know-how from their peers. As such, they can not work remotely. Of course top management, instead of fixing it's own problem, they are just forcing everyone to be in the "office" (more like holding enclosure). Of course, this is also a sure way to get rid of your top talent.

IBM frequently hires graduates from my university.

I was offered a place, but there was a caveat. I have MS, and stairs are my personal demon.

As the building was heritage listed, they couldn't alter it. So no lifts or elevators.

They offered me a remote contract.

I didn't take it at the time, but others I know had similar deals.

This will probably affect them. They might be made redundant, to bypass the problems of firing them.

The way this will work out if mind boggling too. Many employees would be told to go into an office only to then collaborate remotely with their peers in other cities. As a remote IBMer I'm hoping this rumor is false. I was forced remote a few years ago because my local office ran out of room and now I enjoy it.

This hasn't hit me nor anyone on my team yet (I'm an IBMer)

IBM stuck in the 90s. What a retarded idea.

And so the centralization of our tech industry continues...