We all know it's illegal to discriminate against age, s-x, religion, bla bla bla for both hiring AND layoffs but, it's just blatantly obvious dell absolutely targets the 50+ crowd, those who are heavily tenured (15+ years) and those with too high of a salary.
For the last 7 years, dell has been on a layoff frenzy twice a year and the vast majority of those I know whom were laid off were 50+ and an i9 or above. With a small portion of under i9's.
@p5 57
I shake my head when I read those statements.
Top tip, people sound like a d1nk using AI to craft those announcements.
They say, "i'll be updating everyone in the coming days". Dude, it's not a bus station, no one cares.
you could take a straw pole here. I was let go at 60, as were others.
All I know is that my LinkedIn feed is completely inundated with old people "excited about finding out what is next after my xx year run at Dell".
I'm in my late 40s, and Dell WFRed me along with the other 40+ employee in my workgroup in one of the purges last year. Dell is probably not directly targeting older employees. However, there is an explicit move to reshape the workforce. Leadership would prefer to have a small group of fresh college grads and interns, offshore/low cost region support staff, AI agents, cheap H1Bs, and the smallest quantity of domestic US workers possible. None of thoese categories favor an I9 in their 40s carrying a higher comp/ben load. In a nutshell, Dell hates all traditional US-based employees more or less equally.
@k0 lol wtf does Trump have to do with ANYTHING here? Sure, he donated 6b to a program that helps children start a savings account, why is that a bad thing? Are you against helping children have a better start on life simply because the program is under Trump?
@k0 What in gods name does MD's 6b donation to Trumps program that benefits children hacve to do with layoffs, or age discrimination lol?
@a4 Dude, wtf are courts going to do about anything? It's essentially impossible to PROVE that a company is, has, or was discriminating due to age... It's as simple as saying their position was redundant and no longer needed, they were on a PIP, or their performance was lacking. Dell always makes sure to layoff a good handful who are of younger ages as well to make it look good.
Honestly, it's dang near impossible to prove a company discriminates against anyone, for any reason, for that matter...
@b9 Those are all field tech positions though. They are considered "remote" because they don't technically have a specific "onsite" location lol...
@b9 Go search again. 5 positions. All are customer onsite - meaning they don't have a specific "onsite location." They are not remote in regards to working at home.
@eg DEI is dead. Yes, age discrimination was a part of DEI. US Labor Dept used a fine tooth comb looking for age, gender, race patterns etc..That agency is bare boned now. DOJ won’t do squat. MD bought his way in with $6 bill donation to Trump accounts.
I can confirm, was a victim myself in ‘24. 55+, 15 yr tenure and I-9. I suspected that all along based on those that were on the chopping block prior years before me AND in ‘24. During a recent local networking event, noticed other new and younger folks in field sales roles that were eliminated in that and prior years. It’s clearly there strategy!🖕🏻
Better job and better company awaited me, so all good!👍🏻
They most definitely targeted +50 and those with unvested performance RSUs. And will continue to do so.
@gb Yeah, sure, you can't even spell the possessive form of "its" properly.
class action suit on it's way...stay tuned.
Wish they’d come for me
@e4 Are you delusional? HR couldn't be trusted to investigate a burned out light bulb. HR needs to be investigated by the DOJ for allowing executives to descrininate against employees on the basis of age, race, religion, and geography. It happens all the time.
TD needs to be investigated by HR. He is the Swalwell of ISM's.
@cc I agree it is more a salary thing. I have been around a few layoffs over the years as a manager and analyst. Typically you get a $ target to hit. It is more efficient to get rid of a low to mid performing I9 or I10 than a lower comped person. I9s and I10s have higher expectations as well so they can be solid, but seen as too expensive. Naturally, I9s and I10s tend to be older.
I don’t know if it’s an age thing so much as a level (salary) thing. Also, I think they try to hide it by including a certain percentage of younger people too. But yes, it is always more heavily weighted to older workers, for likely multiple reasons.
Dell is the biggest discriminator in the industry. They don't even try to hide it anymore. They get away with it because our corrupt government protects Big Corp tax base.
Any lawyers want data for a class action suit against Dell. You have enough people to make a case.
Strange I'm way over 50 and remote, I'm only an I6 which to be honest suits me I don't want any extra responsibiilty.
I'm planning on retirement in the next couple of years, which my manager is well aware of and we even discussed during my end of year.
Maybe works out better for them to keep paying me monthly rather than paying me off as that would cost them more.
We're hiring for lots of remote positions at all times:
https://jobs.dell.com/en/search-jobs/Remote/375/2/1000000000100/0/0/50/2
Yet Dell gets away with it every year because our corrupt Courts don't give a shiit about employer discrimination or employee rights.
@a2 I had my 1x1 with my director yesterday and I asked about layoffs and he said he had to let go 5 ppl, which was primarily due to them being remote. So, I have to agree with you on this. I guess I'm happy I go into an office?
There were layoffs this past Monday and of the people I knew who were let go, were all remote workers (10). Some fell into the categories you mentioned but as far as I know, were all solid employees but, also remote.
Which makes me wonder if they are now targeting remotes now as I feel at some point, they are going to go after remotes simply because dell wants everyone to be local to an office; and no positions are offered as remote anymore.
i drive an hour to/from the office daily and hate it but, i value my job and in a way am glad i'm forced to do so as it's obvious they are trying to get rid of remotes and have all employees local to an office.
this is just speculation and have nothing to back it up with other than the vast majority of people I know that have been let go in the last year, were mostly full remote.
imo, i do feel as if remotes are being, or will be targeted sooner than later. It's not a matter of IF, it's just when. It's inevitable at this point.
My guess is that they will start going heavy on remote lay offs (slowly) and/or freeze or cap raises to like 1% along with capping their bonus to a low af number. Essentially forcing many to resign. Remotes are already not able to be promoted or move internally but some are OK with that. i9's and above are rarely promoted anyways so, who cares? But it's the lack of raises/bonus that will cause ppl to quit... IMPO