IBM's Desperate Bid to Create Younger Organization - Big Blue's Woes with Age Discrimination

K B S Kumar
Assistant Professor, Department of Human Resource & Soft Skills, IBS Hyderabad (Under IFHE - A Deemed to be University u/s 3 of the UGC Act, 1956), Hyderabad, Telangana, India. E-mail: kumar@ibsindia.org

Indu Perepu
Assistant Professor, IBS Hyderabad (Under IFHE - A Deemed to be University u/s 3 of the UGC Act, 1956), Hyderabad, Telangana, India. E-mail: indup@ibsindia.org

In 2018, US-based multinational information technology company International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) faced a series of lawsuits filed by former employees. These lawsuits accused IBM of discriminating against the employees who were over 40 years old, in order to make way for new talent and tech-savvy millennials in the workforce. The case explains the different ways that IBM used to target older employees and discriminated against them. With many employees approaching the courts and senior personnel testifying to the deep-rooted age discrimination prevailing in the company, IBM's future course of action remained uncertain. The verdict in these cases would have wider repercussions for the aging employees and age-related discrimination not only in the US but across the world.

Age discrimination is an open secret like sexual harassment was until recently. Everybody knows it's happening, but often these cases are difficult to prove because courts have weakened the law. The fact remains it's an unfair and illegal way to treat people that can be economically devastating.1

- Victoria Lipnic, the acting Chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission2 in 2018

Introduction

When people look at IBM, we're blue and we are 100 years old. So it is a question of in the eyes of people coming to join the organization, how do we show IBM as a different place to the one they have in their mind? One way to show millennials that IBM was not 'an old fuddy duddy organization' was to make itself appear 'as [a] cool, trendy organization' like Google and Amazon. To do that, IBM set out to slough off large portions of its older workforce using rolling layoffs over the course of several years."3 These were the words of Alan Wild (Wild), former vice president of HR at the US-based multinational technology company International Business Machines Corporation (IBM).

This startling revelation was made by Wild while testifying in an age-discrimination lawsuit filed in Texas against IBM by Jonathan Langley (Langley) aged 60 years, a former world program director and sales lead for IBM Bluemix, who was laid off in 2017. Langley's lawyers argued that the company targeted older employees to make way for the millennials. Denying age-bias in the company, a spokesperson for IBM said, "We have reinvented IBM in the past five years to target higher value opportunities for our clients. The company hires 50,000 employees each year."4

IBM was facing several lawsuits from employees, who had been laid off. These employees who were above 40 years old, alleged that IBM had fired them regardless of how well they had performed in order to make way for millennials. A class action suit was filed against IBM at the federal court in Manhattan. The lawsuit claimed that the company had started replacing the older workers with millennials as they were "generally much more innovative and receptive to technology than baby boomers."

With revenues from its traditional business falling rapidly, IBM ventured into the new technologies of cloud, analytics, mobility, and social, which were referred to as CAMS. To become a pioneer in CAMS, IBM realized it needed young professionals and millennials. According to the company, "The fundamental distinction between millennials and older employees is their digital proficiency. Millennials are the first generation to grow up immersed in a digital world. Using mobile and social technologies, immediately accessing data, ideas, and inspiration and instantly communicating and collaborating is second nature for these digital natives."5

It was alleged that to make way for them, IBM resorted to laying off older employees who had been with the company for several decades. The employees accused the company of purging old blood to attract millennials. According to an observer, "I doubt IBM lays off its older workers solely to appeal to millennials. It's more likely that older workers are laid off because they are more expensive due to higher pay, have more paid time off, use more healthcare and are more politically calibrated to their organizations than younger workers."6

IBM's 100-Year History

For over a century, IBM had been synonymous with the American dream. It was founded in 1911 as The Computing-Tabulating-Recording Company, a result of the merger of four companies. Thomas J Watson Sr became its president in 1915. Watson Sr, was instrumental in launching several employee-friendly initiatives like an education program for employees, voluntary activities, family outings, incentives for achieving targets, etc. He hired disabled people, women, and black people-the sections that were discriminated where employment was concerned. Over the next few years, the company expanded to Canada, South America, and Europe. It was renamed International Business Machines in 1924.

During the Great Depression (1930-38) when companies were firing employees, Watson hired more employees to support the administration plan of the government. He provided group insurance, survivor benefits, and paid vacations to employees. He also opened facilities to provide training to the employees. In 1935, a woman professional was recruited and was paid the same salary as her male counterparts. In 1943, the first female vice president was appointed, and the first black salesman in 1946.

In 1952, IBM released the first commercial computer and in the next two decades, it became a top player in computer storage.

From the beginning, the company strove to provide equal employment by hiring women, black employees, disabled people, etc. Watson Sr. promoted equal pay for men and women. The handbook of the company stated, "When recessions occur or there is a major product shift, some companies handle the resulting workforce imbalances by letting people go. In over 40 years, no person employed on a regular basis by IBM has lost as much as one hour of working time because of layoff. People are a treasured resource. They are treated like one." The company was known for its employment practices and thrived on racial equality, a women-friendly culture, equal wages, and lifetime employment.

In 1952, Thomas Watson Sr. passed away and his son Thomas Watson Jr. became the CEO. He created a modern management structure and introduced several policies which included the equal opportunity policy. He also introduced employees' feedback on several issues through a program called Speak up! He codified three basic beliefs of the company-respect for the individual, customer service, and excellence.

The magnetic stripe technology developed by IBM in the 1960s became the standard for credit cards. It introduced the floppy disk, which became a standard to store personal computer data. The IBM personal computer was introduced in 1975. Its technology and machines were precursors to supermarket checkout systems and automatic teller machines.

By 1980, IBM had a share of 62% in the mainframe computer market. This helped the company gain traction in the PC market. It was at that time that the financial press started calling IBM 'Big Blue'. According to a customer, "No company in the computer business inspires the loyalty that IBM does, and the company has accomplished this with its almost legendary customer service and support. ... As a result, it is not uncommon for customers to refuse to buy equipment not made by IBM, even though it is often cheaper." The customer asserted, "I don't want to be saying I should have stuck with the 'Big Blue'. The nickname comes from the pervasiveness of IBM's blue computers."7

By the end of the 1980s, IBM had 400,000 employees. But the business was starting to show signs of strain. Most of its businesses were low margin ones. Revenues had dropped from $5 bn in 1980 to $3 bn by 1989. IBM then sold some of its businesses like typewriters, keyboards, and printers. In 1992, it introduced notebook computers under the brand Thinkpad. In 1993, Louis V Gerstner became the CEO. He concentrated on mainframes and reduced the workforce by 100,000 by 1994. He shifted the focus of the company toward high-margin businesses. He also concentrated on software businesses. In 1997, IBM first used the term e-business to signify a new industry that would use the Internet as a medium for business. In 2005, the PC business, including Thinkpad, was sold to Chinese manufacturer Lenovo.

In March 2002, Sam Palmisano, then COO, was made the CEO of IBM. He steered IBM toward new businesses like data mining, analytics, and consultancy which gave the company high profit margins. He was also instrumental in introducing on-demand computing, a precursor to cloud computing.

In 2012, Ginni Rometty became the CEO of IBM. She steered IBM away from equipment sales and services areas like information-technology-support services, industrial-strength mainframe computers. But the company did not fare well in these. Rometty attempted to revitalize the company by entering into the emerging technologies like artificial intelligence cloud services, Big Data, mobile, security, and social media. IBM had been finding it tough to make a foray into these areas, which were dominated thoroughly by the likes of Amazon and Microsoft. By the first quarter of 2017, IBM had reported 20 straight quarters of declining revenue. Its net margins took a deep plunge in the third quarter of 2017-18. Further, in the middle of 2018, IBM's revenue went down. Its shares fell 2.7% to $141.21. Several of its lines of business, including cloud and ITES, declined. IBM's growth and recovery remained uncertain, with only about 25% of revenues coming from growth areas. While commenting on IBM's future prospects, analyst Lisa Ellis said, "At least 1/3 of revenues - and a larger fraction of profits - in likely irreversible structural decline."8

Ring in the New

A few years before the start of the the millennium, rapid changes were witnessed in the global business environment. Companies from the developed countries realized the benefits of operating from countries like China and India. Several companies shifted some of their processes to these countries, where their tasks could be completed at a fraction of the cost that was being incurred in their home countries. After the 1980s, technology shifted rapidly. The first challenge emerged from Macintosh of Apple. Steve Jobs co-founder, Apple, directly attacked IBM in 1984. This was followed by a slew of technology companies like Microsoft, Google, Facebook, and Amazon, which competed directly with IBM. While other companies were nimble and moved swiftly, IBM lagged behind.

One challenge that IBM faced that none of the other companies did was that of an aging workforce. The top management was of the view that the company was burdened by a workforce that was aging, and was characterized as uncollaborative, uninnovative, and technically unsophisticated. Any foray into new technologies would need a younger workforce. On several occasions, IBM hinted that it intended to make its workforce younger and wanted to attract millennial developers to its fold.

As the company moved toward new technologies-Cloud, Analytics, Mobility, and Social (CAMS) in 2014, it was looking at a workforce consisting of 'Early Professionals', meaning recent college graduates.

In 2014, the company started a blog titled 'The Millennial Experience' and started a group called 'Millennial Corps' who were a set of younger employees who would advise the senior leadership of IBM on business decisions. IBM also published a study-The Real Story Behind Millennials in the Workplace. The study claimed that digital proficiency was the fundamental distinction between millennials and older employees. It also pointed out that millennials would wield increasing influence over organizations by 2020. The report claimed, "Today's business leaders need to begin planning for this shift by creating a workplace environment that will maximize the Millennial generation's unique strengths."9 The management's stress was on hiring millennials as they were considered as most suited for the new technologies. The presentations made during that time specified the positive traits of the millennials like their ability to adapt to technology and the use of multiple devices and the myths surrounding them (Refer to Exhibit I for myths about millennials). One of the goals mentioned in a presentation at the planning stage of CAMS was shifting the headcount mix to include more early professional hires. To achieve this goal, the means was to employ an aggressive performance management approach to 'hire and replace where needed, and fund an influx of Early Professionals to correct seniority mix'.

The company went out of its way to attract millennials into its workforce by placing advertisements, and starting blogs and posts brandishing the millennial-friendly face of IBM. It also adopted several policies like better benefits, parental leave, etc. to attract the younger breed of professionals.

Ring Out the Old

Several such presentations were made specifying the "need for re-profiling current talent" and "making room for new talent". In these presentations, it was maintained that to offset the hiring of early professionals, a steady rate of attrition had to be maintained. This reportedly meant the old employees and those who had been with the company for several years were to be replaced.

As the people had spent several years in the company, their salaries were high. There was a view among the top management that the older workforce was pulling the company back. By then it had 400,000 employees across the world. To address this issue, the top management went in to 'correct the seniority mix' in the organization. As a part of this plan, 25% of the employees were retrenched. Most of the vacant positions were given to youngsters.

Prior to 2014, whenever IBM decided to lay off people, it followed the practice of making a list of employees who were being laid off. The list showed the positions and ages of people being laid off from different units of the organization without specifying their names. There was another list with the position and age of people who were being retained. These lists were made according to the specifications of Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), which required employers to disclose this information to workers aged 40 and above who were part of a group layoff, along with details about the criteria used to pick employees for discharge. This was to ensure that the employees would be able to understand if they were being laid off based on their age (Refer to Exhibit II for more about ADEA).

The employees could not receive severance until they had waived their right to pursue legal action against the employer. Employees who waived off their right were given details of other employees and a severance package. The employees waived age-discrimination claims and took their severance.

Though there were apprehensions that older employees were being replaced and jobs were being moved out of the US, there was no concrete proof of this. However, the reduction in the US workforce soon became noticeable and drew a lot of flak. From 2010, IBM stopped reporting country-wise employee numbers. In its 2010 annual report, it just stated that it had 399,409 employees across the world, which was 10,000 less than the previous year.

From 2014, employees did not get the details of other employees leaving or being retained. The company wanted the employees to sign away their right to sue for age discrimination in exchange for the severance package. Thus, by waiving the right to go to court, they could only pursue their cases through confidential arbitration. It was also mandated that they could only do it alone and not join forces with other employees who had been laid off and were claiming age discrimination.

IBM, however, claimed that it had stopped disclosing the details as it intended to protect employees' privacy. Doug Shelton, spokesperson for IBM, said, "IBM addressed concerns raised by employees that the age/title information the company previously provided infringed on employee privacy. IBM complies with all applicable laws in all aspects of its business."10

Experts claimed that by not disclosing the details, IBM was giving less information to the employees, which could come in the way of their building a strong case against the company. According to a lawyer, "It's a new twist. A company like IBM can just wear you down. It's a way for them to control their cost and avoid exposure to a jury."11 Observers also said that IBM, by opting for arbitration, had ensured that the proceedings were out of court, and more importantly kept from public knowledge (Refer to Exhibit III for more about Arbitration).

Make Way for the Millennials

In order to ensure targeted layoffs, IBM brought changes in the performance review process. The managers were reportedly asked to give older employees lower ratings compared to the younger employees. According to one of the lawyers who represented the plaintiff in one of the lawsuits, "IBM is relying on unlawful and unjustified stereotypes to remove older workers who have decades of tech experience, and this suit is also challenging that."12

The managers did not act alone, but were guided by upper level executives. The managers maintained detailed files about each employee and constantly updated these files.13 Against the names in some of these files, were written the words 'lift and shift', meaning these employee were to be removed and the job moved overseas. Some of the employees were marked REBAL, meaning rebalancing, which called for laying off the employees. American non-profit organization Pro-Publica, which did a thorough investigation into the allegations of discrimination against IBM, was able to access a file with such markings. It further investigated each employee by name and found from their profiles (in websites like Linkedin) that 70% of them were older than 40.

According to the lawsuit filed by Langley, "IBM's primary method for taking out its older workers is surprisingly simple. A directive comes down to first and second line managers to reduce headcount. Using IBM's 'staff reduction methodology', first and second line managers generate secret ratings of employees eligible for reduction using predominantly subjective evaluation criteria." The suit also claimed, "IBM managers sometimes reverse engineer their staff reduction worksheets by first selecting the employees they wish to terminate, and then creating ratings and rankings that purport to justify their selection decisions."14

"You are not productive. You better leave."

According to one of the employees who worked in technical support, after IBM acquired a company called Netezza, several young people had become a part of the tech support team. These young employees were given higher salaries than IBM employees who had been with the company for several years. He said, "IBM started to give me less and less work to do, so when my performance review was done, they said I was not as productive as my much younger coworkers, imagine that! So to me, it was quite obvious they were essentially pushing me 'out the door'."15

"You are being laid off, instead opt for voluntary retirement."

Cheryl Witmer, who joined IBM in 1984 and was a program manager in the cloud division, had to retire from the company due to a bad rating. When she said that she had no plans to resign, her manager asked her to retire. She then opted for voluntary retirement, as she needed the money paid as part of the severance package. She claimed that several layoffs had been shown as retirements, as more layoffs would call for a public disclosure.

IBM was reportedly worried about winning the talent war and attracting young executives into its fold. With many layoffs, the company was of the view that it would be unable to attract a new crop of professionals. So it reportedly converted many of the layoffs into retirements. Many employees felt that retirement was better than a layoff so they opted for it. Though the employees were actually ousted, the records showed that they had retired voluntarily. In the US, mandatory retirement was banned, so any retirement had to be voluntary.

"You have got less points. You have been identified for permanent layoff."

One of the business units reportedly used a point system to fire the older workers. According to this, all the employees were given points for attributes that the company considered important. One of the criteria for which points were given was for being relatively new in the organization. Those who had worked for a long time at the company were given lower marks compared to the new employees. The number of years a person had served was taken from the company's records and those with higher scores were asked to leave. When their performance sheets were looked at, the older employees had been rated good by their superiors and had also been recommended for promotions.

"You will land up in Personal Improvement Plan (PIP), your performance will be reviewed every week. If you fail to reach your targets, you will be fired and lose your benefits." The employees set goals for themselves each year in consultation with their superiors and at the end of the year compared their achievements with the goals. These were graded from 1 to 4 with one indicating highest performance. Usually employees who received a rating of 3 or 4 were put through PIPs. If the ratings were low due to circumstances beyond the control of the employee, like changes in the environment or economy, the managers were lenient. But from 2014, the scenario changed. Managers were allegedly asked to be more stringent with the appraisals and increase the number of employees who were given a rating of 3 or 4 to more than 6%. Usually outright dismissal or resignation cost the company less than formal layoffs. So the managers were asked to see to it that 80% of those who got low ratings were forced to quit or were fired.

"You leave with severance or other parting benefits, else, you will be given a bad review and risk being fired without severance."

The managers threatened the employees that in case they did not leave, they would be given a bad review. In that case, the employee would have to leave without a severance package. Some of the employees were just asked to leave inspite of their good ratings and consistently good performance.

"Instead of being fired you can opt for retirement, and rejoin as a contract employee."

It was alleged that some of the employees were asked to leave the organization after being told that their skills were inadequate and were not needed for the organization. But many of them were taken back as contract employees at a lower pay. One of the employees who left the organization claimed that just after eight days he was asked to leave, he had received the offer to work for a third party company that was under contract with IBM. He claimed that he was doing exactly the same kind of work, which he had been told was not necessary for IBM. These employees said that the package they received as contract employees was about 20% lower and did not cover health insurance.

At the same time, they said, IBM had not been fair to the subcontractors either. For one or two weeks a quarter, the contract employees were asked to go on furlough, during which time they were not paid. If the work was outsourced to a subcontracting firm, IBM forced these companies to reduce the fees when the work was half done, or lose the work. "You are being laid off. Look for another position within the company."

There were several employees who would receive substantial benefits like retiree medical coverage and other benefits, if they stayed for more than three decades. Employees who were on the verge of completing the specified tenure were moved from their jobs. They were asked to look within the IBM system for a similar job. When they took up that job, they had to leave the earlier position with a severance pay and take up the new position, losing substantial benefits in the process.

While the employees who had been fired were told to apply in the company, the managers were asked not to hire internal candidates to fill the positions. Adding insult to injury, those who were asked to leave had to first train employees at overseas locations -the employees who would be taking away their jobs.

An employee claimed that she had been ordered by her superiors to not disclose the information about the staff leaving to the US Department of Labor. When she pointed out that age discrimination laws were not being followed, she got her first ever negative performance review, though she had met all her targets. The next year, she was given a mediocre performance review. She came to know that the manager who was doing her review was directed by the general manager of Global Technology Services to give her bad rating. She was fired after she had worked in the company for four decades.

"Report to work every day."

Another way IBM targeted older employees was reportedly by cutting down telecommuting for them. These employees who had been working from home for several years were asked to report to work daily, often to offices located at a distance. Those who were unwilling to do so were asked to retire. With many older employees refusing to move, IBM's records made it seem as if they had quit the service, instead of being laid off.

What Did the Employees Do?

Many of the employees who were fired chose to remain silent or got busy searching for other employment opportunities. Some of the employees approached the independent federal agency that administered workplace anti-discrimination laws in the US, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). These employees complained to the agency that IBM had fired them in order to make room for younger employees. In its reply to the agency, IBM insisted that age was not the only factor that had led to the removal of these employees from the company, as the managers who had fired them were also older than 40. The company said that the decision about who would be laid off was strictly based on performance. Boston class action lawyer Shannon Liss Riordan filed a class action on behalf of IBM's employees. Sixty former employees who did not sign the severance agreement argued that they had been discriminated against because of their age. Some of the ex-employees who had signed the severance agreement had approached Shannon to file a claim in individual arbitration.

A group of employees filed a lawsuit in the federal district court in New York City in March 2019, saying that the company had not followed the law under which companies needed to disclose the age of laid off employees who were older than 40. The suit also alleged that by doing this, IBM had prevented the employees from coming together to challenge the company. Observers said that if the district court agreed that the agreement IBM had entered into with the laid off workers was invalid, it could result in several more lawsuits. Several arbitration claims were filed by the employees who had left the organization.

IBM's Reply

On allegations of older workers being fired, Edward Barbini, vice president, corporate communications of IBM, said, "We have reinvented IBM in the past five years to target higher value opportunities for our clients. As part of this reinvention, we have made major investments in our skills and in new businesses, such as Watson Health, and in people with expertise in critical new areas such as cloud, analytics and quantum and blockchain technologies. We have also transitioned to a less labor-intensive business model and have divested some of our operations."16

IBM, in answer to the lawsuit fired by the employees, said that several people who were older than the employee (who had filed the lawsuit claiming that he had been fired because of his age) were still with the company and that the company made employment decisions based on the skills of the employee and not age. According to a company's spokesperson, "In fact, since 2010 there is no difference in the age of our US workforce, but the skills profile of our employees has changed dramatically due to our heavy investments in skills and retraining."17

The company also maintained, "The company hires 50,000 employees each year, and spends nearly a half-billion dollars on training our team. We also receive more than 8,000 job applications every day, the highest rate that we've ever experienced, so there's clear excitement about IBM's strategy and direction for the future."18

What Lies Ahead?

In August 2019, Wild said that IBM had fired 50,000 to 100,000 existing employees, while hiring new younger talent. He also said that a team of very senior people had been formed and their main task was to see to it that older staff were blocked from moving to other positions in the company, irrespective of their qualifications and skills. As a result of these changes, 50% of the staff in IBM, as of 2019, had been in the company for less than 5 years which showed that the company had gone in for aggressive hiring. Experts also noted that 50% of the staff were millennials.

The company continued to fire employees in spite of the ongoing lawsuits. In July 2019, it terminated 2,000 employees citing performance issues. Some of the employees said that IBM replaced those who were terminated with much younger staff, as it had been doing for years.

On September 23, 2019, a federal magistrate judge in Austin, Texas, hearing a lawsuit filed by Langley, asked the company to provide the required documents. Langley's lawyers asked for internal documents, which the company refused to give. The judge said, "IBM has been given many opportunities to provide a reasonable means by which to define the universe of relevance for this case, and has failed each time."19 Langley's team was granted permission to access documents from IBM's executive team, including those of Rometty, CFO James Kavanaugh, and former CFO Martin Schroeter.

According to some experts, however, finding evidence of age discrimination was very hard as a careful assessment of a large number of layoffs needed to be carried out before a conclusion could be drawn. Though the final judgment in this case was yet to come, observers warned that if IBM got away with such practices, it could be showing the way to other companies to follow suit and discriminate against the older employees.

Suggested Readings and References

1. Thomas Claburn, You've Got (Ginni's) mail! Judge Orders IBM to cough up CEO, Execs' Internal Memos in Age-Discrim Legal Battle, www.theregister.co.uk, September 23, 2019.
2. IBM Age Discrimination Case Heads To Court, www.wbur.org, September 3, 2019.
3. IBM Fired 100,000 Employees to Make Way for Millennials: Report, https://insights.dice.com, August 2, 2019.
4. Nate Swanner, "IBM Fired 100,000 Employees to Make Way for Millennials: Report," https://insights.dice.com, August 2, 2019.
5. Iain Thomson, As many as 100,000 IBM Staff Axed in Recent Years as Big Blue Battles to Reinvent itself from IT's 'Old Fuddy Duddy', www.theregister.co.uk, August 1, 2019.
6. Julie Bort, Another Group of Older Ex-Employees are Suing IBM Alleging it Targeted Older Workers for Layoffs, www.businessinsider.in, Mar 28, 2019.
7. Peter Gosselin, "IBM Accused of Violating Federal Anti-Age Discrimination Law," www.propublica.org, March 27, 2019.
8. IBM is Being Sued for Age Discrimination, Fortune.com, September 17, 2018.
9. Iain Thomson, As many as 100,000 IBM Staff Axed in Recent Years as Big Blue Battles to Reinvent Itself from IT's 'old Fuddy Duddy'," www.theregister.co.uk, August 1, 2018.
10. Peter Gosselin, Ariana Tobin, Cutting 'Old Heads' at IBM, https://features.propublica.org, March 22, 2018.
11. www.propublica.org

1. "What Does Age Discrimination Look Like? ProPublica Examines IBM," www.thatcherlaw.com, May 2, 2018.
2. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is an independent federal agency that administers Workplace Anti-Discrimination Laws in the US.
3. "Plaintiff's Response Opposing Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment," The United States District Court for The Western District of Texas Austin Division, https://regmedia.co.uk/, July 2019.
4. Olivia Carville, IBM Fired as Many as 100,000 in Recent Years, Lawsuit Shows, www.bloomberg.com, August 1, 2019.
5. "Millennials, Gen Xers, and Baby Boomers share many workplace preferences and behavior patterns," www.ibm.com.
6. Amrata Joshi, "IBM Continues to Layoff Older Employees Solely to Attract Millennials to be at Par with Amazon and Google." https://hub.packtpub.com, August 02, 2019.
7. "The Making of International Business Machines," www.ibm.com, Accessed on October 12, 2020.
8. Fred Imbert, "Sell IBM Shares Because its Profits are in an 'Irreversible Structural Decline,' Analyst Says," www.cnbc.com, October 4, 2018.
9. "IBM Study: The Real Story Behind Millennials in the Workplace," PR Newswire, February 19, 2015.
10. Alex Barinka, How IBM Handles Age Disclosure, Employee Privacy, Job Bias Claims, www.insurancejournal.com, May 13, 2014.
11. Ibid.
12. Nate Swanner, IBM Faces New Age Discrimination Lawsuit for Targeting 'Gray Hairs', https://insights.dice.com, March 29, 2019.
13. Richard Borge, "Inside IBM's Purge of Thousand of Workers who have one Thing in Common," www.motherjones.com, March 2018.
14. Frank Chung, "IBM Worker Sacked for 'Not Being a Hip Millennial'," www.news.com.au, July 6, 2018.
15. Comments to the Article Nate Swanner, IBM Faces New Age Discrimination Lawsuit for Targeting 'Gray Hairs', https://insights.dice.com, March 29, 2019.
16. Andrew R McIlvaine, "IBM is Being Accused of Widespread Age Discrimination," https://hrexecutive. com, August 2, 2019.
17. Gerrit De Vynck, IBM Managers Discussed Ways to Thin Older Ranks, Documents Say, www.bloom berg.com, January 09, 2019.
18. IBM Fired 100,000 Older Employees to look 'Cooll Alleges Lawsuit, www.business-standard.com, August 2, 2019.
19. Thomas Claburn, You've Got (Ginni's) mail! Judge Orders IBM to Cough up CEO, Execs' Internal Memos in Age-Discrim Legal Battle, www.theregister.co.uk, September 23, 2019.