Is it just me, or does it seem that people who have been laid off are primarily in their late forties and fifties? Not to mention, majority of the ones I know who've been shown the door are among our best employees.
It almost seems like this was done to get rid of older and more experienced employees who earn more to be able to replace them with fresh out of school folks who'll work for a third or a quarter of what they made.
Which verges on age discrimination and should be illegal.
That’s really how they did it down there in Denver that’s terrible.
That's right and that was common knowledge when Holly first took over. He would hold round tables and actively voice how he wanted to focus on recruiting and hiring the young and he had all of C-level management eating out of his hand.
Less old people is more for me.
It is the same everywhere. Welcome to the reality of layoffs.
If new grads are willing to do the work for a third or fourth of a senior, isn't there a legitimate reason to lay off the highly paid?
Each age group brings something unique to the table. But employee cost differential is huge.
Sorry to burst your bubble but I’m 28 and was laid off and I know of 4 other guys under 32 who were let go
40 and older is protected class by law.
0ver 40
Noble Energy is being investigated by the EEOC for age discrimination related to their 2015 layoffs. They pretty much cleared the decks of people over 50 who were not supervisors. Noble is c r a p outfit. Unfortunately for the Whiting folks, you picked up Chip Rymer from Noble. He has executed many layoffs in his lack-luster career.
Your better of being a 23-year old convicted felon & registered s-x offender than over 50 & no criminal record if you want to get hired by today’s oil industry. Love to see class action age-discrimination lawsuit against Whiting. O&G companies told me many times “we are looking for a more junior person”.
I do think this was a stupid move, considering how little costs savings they will get in the long run.
But every group thinks they are discriminated against. In any lay off, there are inevitably going to be certain groups that get layed off move than others. Could be young, old, men, women, white, nonwhite, professional, blue collar, working at headquarters, working at satellite office, engineering, finance, support, IT, field workers, those with advanced degrees, those without degrees, etc.
I think it just came down to older being much more expensive, and some not retiring on their own due to getting paid so much.
I think more than age discrimination it's about getting rid of the old Whiting. It would appear that it has been the plan since the start but couldn't be done overnight. All Whiting VP's are now gone from what I can see. Many power workers were cut. Huge gaps will need to be identified and filled. Good luck to those who are left who will need to incorporate all this work into their already overloaded workload. From where I'm looking, Whiting just took a ton of support out from under themselves by cutting some pretty awesome workers but the question is, who made the decisions? Whoever it was obviously did not take the time to educate themselves on the rolls of these employees, what they do or their work ethic. I do believe there will be chaos and lots of regret when and if the dust settles. Good luck to those remaining and to all of us who are now seeking jobs.
I don't know that there is a good way to lay people off but being restricted to your office until it was over (3-4 hrs) just sitting there waiting to see if you were next and especially after they leave your floor to come back around for a 2nd and 3rd swing and pick you off was just flat out disgusting. Not only to those who were cut but to those who had to watch.
True. At what age does it become age discrimination?