If you have been let go, How old were you when you were laid off, and what was your years in service?
157 replies (most recent on top)
34/7
42/7
41/5
36/4
60/20
59/40
37/6
52/21
46/2
39/3
@c9 You're not interpreting that correctly then. That says the majority are under 40, that's hardly "sacrificial"; it's who is "targeted". You're not the center of the universe.
32/9
40/17 and in my papers there was a section that showed me the age spread of the entire group that I was let go with. Apparently it’s required for all employees over 40 per the OWBPA, was very interesting to see.
57/10
40/20
@c4 if i was trying to avoid lawsuits, I'd endeavour to target high tenure/high cost individuals (which would skew older), while throwing in enough sacrificial younger workers to keep the age distributions looking right. Your summary seems consistent with this
35/6
51 / 29
31/7
62 at the time. Turned 63 at end of the 60 day non working notice. Will be paid up to my 64th birthday. Couldn’t be happier.
Based on the data provided from the 39 individual posts, here is the statistical breakdown:
Data Summary
Average Age: 40.88 years
Average Years of Service: 10.51 years
Age Range: 25 to 73 years old
Tenure Range: 1.5 to 38 years of service
Distribution by Age
GroupUnder 40: 21 people (53.8%)
40 and Over: 18 people (46.2%)
50 and Over: 8 people (20.5%)
Commentary on Age Discrimination
Based strictly on this sample, the evidence for systemic age discrimination (specifically targeting older workers) appears inconclusive and varied:
Wide Distribution
The layoffs affected a broad spectrum. Over half (53.8%) of the participants are under the age of 40, including several in their 20s with very low tenure (2-3 years). This suggests that youth or lower salary/tenure did not provide a "safe harbor".
High-Tenure Impact
While there is a significant group of younger workers, there is also a visible cluster of "lifers"—people with 20-38 years of service. For these individuals, the impact is often perceived as age discrimination because their higher salaries or pension eligibility might make them targets for cost-cutting.
Conflicting Anecdotes
The comments within the thread itself are contradictory. One user claimed "everyone under 50 on my team got got," while another complained that the company "kept the boomers."
Conclusion
The data shows a nearly even split between those under and over 40. While individual departments may have different patterns, this specific dataset suggests the layoffs were widespread across all age brackets and experience levels rather than focused solely on one demographic.
Is this going the way you expected OP? Which way was your agenda swinging that now, assuming the responses are truthful, has been debunked?
40 years old at the time and just shy of hitting 20 years with the company.
28/2
41/3
36/11
50/23
40 years old, 19 years with First Union, Wachovia, Wells Fargo.
Less than one year shy of my 20 year anniversary. I was in shock, eventually realized that working for Wf was a prison sentence. Glad to be let go.
41/9
37, almost 6 years. Everyone under 50 on my team got got.
29/5
was 32/5 years exp
30/6
49 w/26 years
26 years - 63 years old
36 at the time/8 yrs
38/12
39/ 7
43/7, but they kept the boomers sadly
31/6