I strongly disagree that age is NOT a factor. 72% of my VP's list was for people - OVER 40 - years of age. Let that sink in.
5 replies (most recent on top)
Oh gawd. You mean Hold My Balls won't be let go based on his age alone? We'll probably never see the last of him.
It's a slime by a disgruntled employee. As I stated in another thread, in my state you have to submit a breakdown of the age of those impacted by a RIF. Any abnormal weighting to older is closely examined for age discrimination, which Seagate had already been targeted for lawsuits in the past. I agree with the premise that it's likely the age is skewed by workforce distribution and/or complete elimination of departments with older workers. I know our local HR person has to make sure they have their paperwork in order to address age discrimination and there really isn't much room for blatant discrimination.
#AgeDiscrimination - anyone?
72% of my VP's list was for people - OVER 40 - years of age
I strongly disagree that age is NOT a factor. 72% of my VP's list was for people - OVER 40 - years of age.
Let that sink in.
I fully agree with waa. Nothing needs to 'sink in' the op needs to grow a brain stem and process the fact that the majority of the workforce is over 40. So layoffs in that age range are not only probable, they are expected.
Well, I'd venture a guess that around 72% of the workforce is over age 40, so not really surprising that the layoff represented the employee population.