In Reply to: ............. my conclusion posted by GrumpyGuts on 26 February 2006 at 07:20:40:
: My apologies for the delay in replying.
: I received some very useful and interesting information. I want to thank those who took the trouble. The input fell into two categories.
: 1. Documents, mostly MILS and the like relating to what was promised..
: 2. Detailed background information with respect to other claims bought against IBM and how they were dealt with.
: I'm naturally not going to post what was sent privately.
: I conclude:
: 1. There is no real chance of us succeeding with a case to the ombudsman based on the nature of his previous findings and the water-tight nature of what IBM actually wrote.
: 2. Under civil courts test ie balance of probabilities I believe there is a strong but uncertain case that IBM promised more than it delivered. There is very little chance that IBM would allow us to win this. I conclude that the cost to mount a claim against the likelihood of success makes the venture ill-advised.
: 3. The only course left is "publicity". I think this doubtful because I think our case could be twisted to make us look as though we're actually quite well off and being greedy. I don't think our case would get sympathetic public reaction.
: I might be getting old, but personally I only take on battles I think I can win.
: GG
Thanks for the work. I agree with your conclusions except for #3. We could certainly make ourselves look greedy if the publicity is wrongly presented. But we don't have to do that.
As an example, contrast the position of a retired secretary or admin clerk who retired around 1990 and has already had their pension devalued by 10% against RPI, and IBM's high flying ideals and claims of ethical conduct as exemplified in their Business Conduct Guidelines no doubt used as a selling tool.
We need a Public Relations specialist to help here. Does anybody know of one who would lend a hand?
Brian