I heard a manager talking to someone saying that one of the criteria for layoffs would be the number of years in the company and the age of the employee - 20+ years in the company and age 55+.
17 replies (most recent on top)
Is Apply still buying chips from Q or are they buying from a competitor?
This is true. Age plus years of service. It’s pretty sad that Q has decided to get rid of those who started near the beginning and have truly made it the company it is today.
Not fake news at all.
If there is criteria, CEO would have gone by now.
The guidelines sound appropriate for someone who is volunteering for early retirement, not a layoff. A lot of people volunteered to take packages. This round of layoffs may not be as bad as people think.
And now due to that lawsuit they have put some incompetent chinese women in positions of power. Now it is like if you are a white man you are in danger of extinction!
That sounds like early retirement criteria.
What a surprise - Qualcomm and a discrimination suit? See lawsuit from ~5 years ago by women workers at QCOM who were given settlement because it was proven that QCOM systematically under paid, under titled women.
Q was roasted in an age discrimination lawsuit years ago, 25 at least. What's different now is most employees defaulted into opt-out arbitration maybe 5 years ago, so no wave of lawsuits.
This sounds like criterion for volunteering only for principal and above that already happened
age 55+...
Did this "manager" also told you how many billions Q is putting a side for litigation reserve???
It’s been more than 6 months, when is ot going to happen?
There is no criteria. Executives want to save their as*. They want to do it at any how. It does not matter to them.
Fake News. No manager is going to say that. It opens the company up to discrimination lawsuits.
Yea performances should be used but it’s never simple or fair
what has age got to do with it...... it should always be performance.... it is qualcomm problem that it doesnt monitor people well enough and allows them to slack.......
It would be utterly stupid if they use this as the basic criteria. Poor performance should be the primary criteria. They should also be looking at some of the newbies who are utterly terrible and completely unmotivated. Having graduated in the best job market in living memory, a lot of them are complacent and take things for granted.
managers have no clue when it comes to layoff decisions. At this point senior directors/vps and above who would know who and when