If you are over 40, gather all the appropriate documentation and file a complaint with your state and EEOC. They will research and follow up with IBM and you. If you can afford to not sign the severance agreement, do not do so. The agreement has a clause where you waive your right to a class action law suit and there are several in the works.
Posts mentioning hashtag #agediscrimination
Below are all the posts — topics as well as replies — that mention the hashtag #agediscrimination.
Mention #agediscrimination in your post to continue the discussion!
#AgeDiscrimination should be reported any time it's observed
Increase in write up and PIPs
After the news about downsizing broke last week, management was told to increase writing up their staff for minor infractions. 5 minutes late? Write up.. Take a little longer on lunch? Write up
The comment about straight white people days numbered. I think it's not so logical. US population is over 360 million, whites make up approximately 300 million. Lol it'll be a few hundred generations before anything changes. Reviewing national crime stats, blacks are 87% more likely to be murdured by a member of their own race. Dont get upset over a racist remark here, this is what happens when your great grandparents, grandparents, and parents teach you to be hateful to another race from a young age. Pathetic outcasts.
Also, about the #agediscrimination and lawsuits.....dont kid yourself. Most if not all associates at the snake will rat you out long before they offer you help. Reason snake farm is getting away with everything most associates are too coward to do the right thing and stand up for each other. Some are under the illusion by playing b--chboy to their managers, they can somehow get ahead. So either shut up and take it up the butt or be somebody and help bring an end to this behavior. PS. A recording device is your best friend at work. Please remove your head from your butt.
+1 Do Not Respond
Human resources associates and/or managers, public relations associates and/or managers, employee relations associates and/or managers, loss mitigation associates and/or managers, etc. This is another form of phishing. By us giving bad experiences these henchmen and henchwomen will do what means necessary to pinpoint the above question issues and associates. You want help with #AgeDiscrimination or does your gut not tell you that what you feel is right? Let's put it this way, a legal precedent is applicable for a plethora of state farm basic human rights violations let alone our basic civil rights. There is information out there that shows without a reasonable doubt state farm commits federal law violations ie civil rights act age, race, etc. Why do you think the operation hubs are housed in two party consent states? It's part of the plot to weaken your civil rights. Also firing more tenured associates and mixing it in with younger associates is very realistic. Its state farms modus operandi. For the folks who are 40 plus years old shame on you for being born 40 plus years ago I guess is state farms age discrimination logic. Much like your skin color and/or ethnicity can be issues for claims managers and section managers and hr managers.
Think back to the industrial revolution and the amount of employees like you or I that were exposed to many work place hazards that by today's standards seem quite unrealistic. Why not start the future for employee rights with more mental health protection and more accountability for companies like state farm.
Talking of a #metoo movement for abusive companies ie expose the harvey weinstein violators by name and illegal action or actions that were caused. If federal law and government agencies wont protect us why not expose these domestic terrorists for what they are? Today's workplace equivalent is the mental anguish and/or mental harm brought about by state farm managers and the above mentioned state farm employees ie, #metoo, #depression, #agediscrimination, #industrialblacklisting, etc
We need to find a way to get these ideas into the mainstream and expose the truth about state farms federal law violations. We must make the future work place a safer place for us all.
Here is one story with a proven IBM #AgeDiscrimination and a $1.5M award. It's from 2014 though:
Yet another article:
Millennials in, Boomers out? Lawsuit against IBM claims age discrimination in hiring.
BY RAY GRONBERG
ORDER REPRINT OF THIS STORY
June 04, 2018 12:52 PM
Updated 8 hours 6 minutes ago
The long-time rumblings about age discrimination at IBM have finally produced a lawsuit. A 60-year-old Texas man alleges in a suit filed May 25 that he was improperly laid off amid the company's push to hire millennials.
Jonathan Langley, a former salesman in IBM's Hybrid Cloud unit, alleges the company sent him packing after a 24-year career that consistently "met or exceeded" the company's performance expectations. He also claims the company lied to investigators from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission about the reasons for his dismissal.
The reality is if he had "been younger, and especially if he had been a Millennial, IBM would not have fired him," the federal lawsuit says.
Langley's Austin-based legal team filed the case just before the Memorial Day holiday, and in it highlighted a recent ProPublica/Mother Jones report that alleges the company is systematically pushing out its older workers, tilting its in-house evaluation and layoff process even against high performers. According to the report, IBM had “ousted an estimated 20,000 U.S. employees ages 40 and over since 2014, about 60 percent of its American job cuts during those years."
Be the first to know when big news breaks
Enter Email Address
Steve Groetzinger, a Triangle resident and former salesman for the company's Security Division, says he was one of those targeted. Groetzinger, now 66, was working on a sales proposal to North Carolina's state government when he was laid off in 2016.
"When I looked around at all the people who've been laid off recently, there was a pattern," Groetzinger said. "Everybody was over 50."
Groetzinger isn't inclined to join the litigation — "I'm over it, I'm retired and I'm doing fine," he said — but he points out that other layoff victims aren't as lucky.
Some are "people a little younger than me who still had houses to pay off or kids in college," he said. "To them, this is really bad."
IBM, which employs thousands at its corporate campus in Research Triangle Park, has gone through multiple rounds of layoffs in recent years, including one just before the Memorial Day holiday that targeted workers in its Watson Health project.
Company Chief Financial Officer Jim Kavanaugh earlier this spring told investment analysts the company had taken "about a $610 million [job] action" in the first quarter of 2018, and ducked questions about whether that was the end of "workforce rebalancing" for the year.
After layoffs, social-media postings in forums such as Facebook's "Watching IBM" group regularly feature complaints that the targets were in their 60s, 50s and even late 40s.
IBM says it has done nothing wrong. "IBM complies with all applicable laws, and we will defend this case vigorously," company spokesman Doug Shelton said, referring to Langley's lawsuit.
The situation has led to complaints to the EEOC, which appears to be taking an interest the matter. Pro Publica reported recently that the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has launched a nationwide probe of age bias at IBM. It cited as its sources ex-employees who had spoken with investigators and people familiar with the agency’s actions, including a former general counsel for the EEOC. The EEOC does not comment on on-going investigations.
Litigation is the next frontier, but lawsuits are complicated by severance agreements that call for the use of arbitration to resolve age-discrimination claims.
Langley is suing IBM on his own, but the issue is serious enough that it could "potentially" spawn a class-action lawsuit against the company, said David Lopez, a former EEOC general counsel who's now with a San Francisco law firm, Outten & Golden, that specializes in employment law.
RELATED STORIES FROM RALEIGH NEWS & OBSERVER
IBM says it's reaching for the 'moon' with Watson Health. That hasn't stopped layoffs.
IBM says it's reaching for the 'moon' with Watson Health. That hasn't stopped layoffs.
Nor is IBM the only tech-industry player that's under fire. Lopez and his firm are involved in a lawsuit that accuses a number of companies, Amazon among them, of using age-restricted employment ads on Facebook to exclude older workers.
"When you start peeling the onion, you start to see that age discrimination in the hiring process is pervasive," Lopez said.
Lopez is also representing a former IBM program manager from Georgia, Coretta Roddey, who suspects her "over 40" age has something to do with her inability to return to the company after stints elsewhere in the private sector.
Roddey said she left IBM on good terms and was deemed re-hireable. But subsequent interviews or recruiting contacts, including one with an IBM human-resources manager based in the Research Triangle Park, never turned into an offer. She's filed an EEOC complaint.
Intel Faces Age-Discrimination Claims
Federal watchdog investigates allegations by former Intel employees that they were let go because of their age
Intel said factors such as age weren’t part of the decision-making process for the layoffs.
Intel said factors such as age weren’t part of the decision-making process for the layoffs. PHOTO:
By Georgia Wells
May 25, 2018 12:05 p.m. ET
The federal watchdog for equal employment is investigating claims that Intel Corp. INTC 1.26% targeted workers for layoffs based on their age.
Nearly three years after the chip maker launched a series of layoffs that cut more than 10,000 employees globally, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s Seattle office is working to determine whether the job cuts were discriminatory, according to a document from the agency reviewed by The Wall Street Journal.
The issue of potential age discrimination is recurrent in the tech industry, where the workforces at many firms skew younger and the pace of change is often rapid.
Following the Intel layoffs, dozens of former employees sought legal advice on whether they could sue, according to lawyers who received calls from the employees. Some of those former employees filed complaints with the EEOC, according to people familiar with the matter.
In one set of layoffs in May 2016, the median age of the 2,300 employees let go was 49 years old, seven years older than the median age of their peer employees who remained, according to Intel documents viewed by the Journal. Many of the layoffs in the U.S. occurred in Oregon, where Intel is one of the largest employers.
The company, which is based in Santa Clara, Calif., said its layoffs were intended to “fuel Intel’s evolution” from a supplier to the PC industry to one whose processors power the cloud and connected devices.
“Factors such as age, race, national origin, gender, immigration status, or other personal demographics were not part of the process when we made those decisions,” a spokesman for Intel said in a statement.
A spokeswoman for the EEOC said the agency isn’t permitted to confirm or deny the existence of investigations.
Layoffs of older workers, who tend to be better paid, happen in any variety of industries. But in recent years several tech firms have been sued for alleged age discrimination, and Pro Publica reported earlier this year that the EEOC is also looking into age-discrimination complaints at International Business Machines Corp. An IBM spokesman declined to comment.
Under federal employment law, people alleging age discrimination by their employers must first file complaints with the EEOC. The agency then investigates these complaints, and determines whether there is sufficient evidence to settle the matter privately, or help take the cases to court, sometimes as class-action suits.
“If someone files an individual charge, and it looks like it implicates broader, systemic issues, then the EEOC can expand the investigation to include the broader issue,” said David Lopez, a former general counsel for the EEOC who now is a partner at law firm Outten & Golden.
The document viewed by the Journal indicates the agency hasn’t yet determined whether to file a class-action suit against Intel.
If the EEOC doesn’t find sufficient evidence to file its own case, the agency issues a letter to those who filed charges that allows them to file civil cases.
—Ted Greenwald contributed to this article.
If you are into this kind of stuff, check out #AgeDiscrimination hash...
What's the average age of those laid off?
Are we looking at another cleansing of those in their late forties and early fifties (with a few younger employees thrown in to avert suspicion, of course) or is there an actual chance that for once layoffs are actually going to get rid of employees who really are dead weight?
Check this out:
You are not alone.
Many folks over 50 struggle, not only in tech.
Yes, this is about age
Come on folks! Age has nothing to do with it. If you’re particularly good at your job (and performing reach arounds), then your chances of being retained are exponentially greater.
That is so untrue I am not sure where to start. No matter how good you are, there is zero guarantee you will remain at your job. Those making the decisions have no idea about who you are and what you do. they deal with numbers. And if numbers say you earn twice, three times, or four times as much as somebody new would make in a similar position, you are gone. unfortunately, we live in a time where honestly earned pay through years with the company is a liability to keeping your job.
Trying to bury #AgeDiscrimination news, huh???
Now, let that sink in... #AgeDiscrimination
Yes, it's not ageism, it's #AgeDiscrimination
this will be unpopular opinion, i know that, but i think older employees who have been with the company for more than twenty years should not be protected when it comes to layoffs.
majority of them has been here for so long that they have lost all of their drive but are still paid much more than the rest of us.
this is not personal, i'm not advocating to lay them off, just saying if they are it's not ageism. there are actual reasons behind it.
I spent 25 years there until the kicked me out for being old and making too much money -
The new generation of management is clueless. It used to be about the client, you know they people that bay the bills.
Now it's about the process even if it screws the client, as long as the process is followed. If you dare to bypass procedure even if it helps keep a client happy you will be in deep trouble and likely soon to be looking for a job.
Oh, good old #AgeDiscrimination
Got hit. Mostly people above 40 with lots 50 year olds and one 29 yr old to keep cisco legal.
This board is littered with stories about #AgeDiscrimination - see that hashtag and you will see that this spans industries, regions, etc...
Really, this is how the economy operates, out with the old, in with the young - repeat, recycle...
How hard is it truly to find a job in your fifties?
I was just wondering, how hard is it truly to find a job in your fifties? I'm not sure if my dad will be a part of the layoff, but if he is, I'm scared that finding a new job might be an issue for him.
He's been with the same company for decades, and he is not really the moving with the times, adjusting well to change kind of guy.
How bad will it get for him if he gets shown the door?
SAP layoffs are all true, so - no rumors here - just facts.
The aftermath, in NA 40% of service sales...
Seems high earners who are older were targeted - #agediscrimination ???
Was told that the criteria for the layoffs would not be discussed...
Younger academy grads not effected and were protected - no surprises here.
Management thinks a 20 something has the gravitas to discuss digital transformation with a C level executive... Good luck with that. It never works.
Laying off people close to retirement
My dad just got laid off after decades with PepsiCo. He is only a few years away from retirement, so this hit him really hard, I could hear it in his voice. Broke my heart. How heartless do you have to be to do something like this? I truly hope this comes back to bite them in the a-- really soon.
I do not work for Humana but my company has a thriving board here - you may want to learn more about how rampant Age Discrimination is in corporate America. I am not saying it's happening at your company as I have no insight into the internal dynamics of the enterprise, however feel free to check out this hashtag ( #AgeDiscrimination ) and see how many companies have an issue with this...
Isn't this #AgeDiscrimination - huh?
The 70 Rule
We continue to cut here -10% by November. I hear each department is being asked to cut 10% of expenses. I'm also hearing the 70 rule. Add your age to your years of service. The closer it gets to 70 the more likely it is you will get caught up in the layoff.
#AgeDiscrimination is like a plague nowadays, it's rampant in corporate America...
Those in late 40s and 50s are in most danger
From what I have gathered from previous layoff rounds, everybody who is over 50 and those close to it are in biggest danger of being shown the door.
It is sad but it is true. If you have earned a decent salary through hard work and long tenure, chances are you are considered a burden by the company.
Anybody in this age bracket (me included) should update their resumes and begin looking for something new without delay.
Good old #AgeDiscrimination
True - a lot of companies discriminate on age, I haven't noticed it at my store though...
I’m sure Walmart has their attorneys review their layoffs. But it still feels like older people are being disproportionately shoved out of the work place and out of the good paying jobs.
I am just tagging this #AgeDiscrimination
Any interest in class action for targeting of over 50 aged workers terminated, or forced to retire or quit?
older folks always get screwed, always #agediscrimination
True 100%, expensive and locked:
beware of cobra
True 100%, #AgeDiscrimination is rampant
if you are over 50, consider a career change
Just tagging it for #AgeDiscrimination (in a case someone searches for the topic):
Age of those laid off?
We've lost three people in our department today, all of them are over 50. Considering that all of them were exemplary employees, I can't help but wonder if their age had something to do with this.
Anybody else noticed that the age of those laid off skewers towards older rather than younger?
If your over 45, your protected from age discrimination. California supreme court already ruled that firing due to salary is equivalent to age discrimination. So if your more qualified than other people kept, and over 45, start the lawsuits. Massachusetts courts always follow California -- #AgeDiscrimination #StaplesLayoffs
This is so true, agree 1000%
Some managers I won't use the word leader because very few exist try and manage out tenured employees because they are not the future.
We do discriminate, and it's just a matter of time when someone actually proves this, trust me on this one, all it takes is a good attorney and a determined and pissed off worker.
Intel Corp. is currently under investigation for the 2015/2016 layoffs as a result of age discrimination complaints that have been filed against them by individuals that have been affected.
For some reason the EEOC is not in a hurry to bring the case to court; however, the data that was provided by the company is now expected t undergo statistical analysis to verify the claims and produce a finding of rule violations.
Government agencies are not known for their speed of execution; however, the fact that the charges are still being investigated indicates that the EEOC has enough prima facie evidence to pursue the case to the end.
Speaking of the tag for #AGEdiscrimination as one of the responders posted here, this below deserves that same tag as well.
For Any Large Employer, “Blacklisting” Those Laid Off is a Form of Age Discrimination; Math Geek Demonstrates it Here!
This is not directed towards any specific employer, it is generic… Please forward if appropriate… Well OK, it DOES seem to apply to HPE!
The short version is this: As a brand-new college grad (or other youngster new to the work force), you haven’t yet had the chance to get laid-off and blacklisted forever. Every year that you work (the older you get), the greater your chances of having been blacklisted forever. It’s that simple!
Caveats and Details.
This kind of logic (here and below) would not find traction in court for a smaller employer. So you have 15 employees, and you forever blacklist those who you lay off? Big deal. Not that much impact.
You have thousands of employees, and sometimes hundreds of thousands in a given metro area? Your workers are a HUGE fraction of the local community, especially in certain specialized job areas? Your laid-off older folks will have to move long distances to find new work? NOW we’re talking!
But the biggest caveat here is we’re talking “probabilities”. The offending companies (when accused) will doubtlessly try to pull the following garbage: “Oh, no, there’s nothing that’s “probabalistic” or random about our performance reviews and resulting selections for layoffs; They are all 100 percent totally factual and rational and objective. No subjectivity involved! None at all!” . Unless your workers are driving “X” measurable lug nuts per day… Those kinds of jobs being long-gone in the USA today… Then this is just flat-out not true! Let’s say, for example, that you are trying to persuade a jury of this… (Make sure your selected jurors have worked for a boss at some time in their lives). Any rational common-sense juror will KNOW that there’s subjectivity in performance reviews! So dealing with “the probability of your getting laid off” (alluding to some randomness) is NOT an unrealistic assumption (or approximation), and most jurors will KNOW this!
Before doing the math, for you TOTAL geeks, we are dealing with “prior” probabilities here… The perspective of a brand-new hire, who does NOT know when the axe will eventually fall. Yearly “posterior” probabilities are not of much interest… Say the axe-chopping-rate is 1percent per year. After each year passes, it is still 1% for the next year, assuming you’ve not gotten chopped yet… Otherwise you’ve already been chopped, and your probability is 100% ! That’s not of much interest…
Assume 1% then… 99% chance you still have your job one year from now. 5 years from now, it becomes 100% minus (0.99 times 0.99 times 0.99 times 0.99 times 0.99) or 100% minus (0.99 to the fifth power), or 95%.
If you run the numbers, it looks about like this:
Rate 1 yr 5 yrs 10 yr 15 yr 20 yr 30 years (Prob. Of Still Have Job)
99% 99% 95% 90% 86% 82% 75%
98% 98% 90% 82% 75% 67% 55%
97% 97% 86% 75% 64% 54% 40%
96% 96% 82% 66% 54% 44% 29%
95% 95% 77% 60% 46% 36% 21%
(That last 21% means you’d have a 79 chance of being laid off by then).
Does anyone know the current rough numbers of employees v/s how many are laid off every year, for a sample company? That would give us a rough “probability” of being laid off…
Tagging it: #AGEdiscrimination
I'm a younger employee in my early 30s. I hear a lot of folks talking about age discrimination and I see it often. Management has told me that "you're the future of the company so youre safe from WFR." I am so torn right now because I see the advantages to staying with a smaller HPE bring more profitable, more concentrated, and without a lot of the dead weight that I see taking up dollars and time daily. However, the ever-possible WFR concerns me greatly. What would you do if you were me? Jump ship or ride it out?
#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.
Source below. Here is the update on the class action for HPE #AGEdiscrimination:
Updated 9/22/17 at 6:20 am with comment from plaintiffs counsel.
A federal judge has granted Hewlett-Packard's request to arbitrate an age-bias suit filed over the company's massive layoffs, allegedly targeting older workers.
The proposed class action claims that the tens of thousands of job cuts HP has made since 2012 as part of its workforce reduction plan were designed to get rid of older workers, and that the company has since blatantly favored younger people in filling out its ranks.
The suit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against Hewlett Packard Enterprise Co. and HP Inc., which were formed after Hewlett-Packard split in two in 2015.
On Sept. 20, U.S. District Judge Edward J. Davila granted HP's request to compel arbitration on the basis of a release agreement signed by the plaintiffs.
According to Davila's opinion, the release states that an arbitrator must determine whether the arbitration clause is enforceable.
"The court agrees with defendants that, under the terms of the RA, 'an arbitrator must first decide whether the release provision contained in the agreement is enforceable,'" Davila wrote. "Then, if the arbitrator determines that the release provision is enforceable, plaintiffs' claims will be barred and the collective action issue will be moot. Otherwise, the court will then determine whether plaintiffs' claims may proceed on a class or collective basis."
Benjamin Emmert of Littler Mendelson represents HP and did not respond to a request for comment.
Jennie Lee Anderson of Ardus Anderson, who represents the plaintiffs, said in an email that the firm will seek reconsideration of the order.
"The majority of named and opt-in plaintiffs did not sign any arbitration clause," she said. "Thus, their claims should not be delayed by arbitration proceedings that do not and should not affect them."
HP slashed roughly 30,000 jobs in 2012 under CEO Meg Whitman, and has conducted smaller cuts since then. According to the complaint, workers over 40 were "significantly more likely" to have their jobs eliminated under the company's reduction plan.
The company has denied the bias claims, and last year, a representative for Hewlett Packard Enterprise said that age was not a consideration in the company's layoffs. "The decision to implement a workforce reduction is always difficult," the representative said in an emailed statement, "but we are confident that our decisions were based on legitimate factors unrelated to age."
According to the complaint, Whitman made no secret of her desire to overhaul the workforce with younger people, saying in a televised interview in 2015 that the company wanted "to make sure that we've got a labor pyramid with lots of young people coming in right out of college and graduate school and early in their careers."
In addition to the layoffs, the complaint says HP implemented early phased retirement programs in 2014 and 2015 for employees over 55 to incentivize them to voluntarily quit. It also reversed its policy of encouraging employees to work from home, putting a burden on workers with families who were located farther away from HP's offices, it alleges.
The two HP spinoffs also face an age and race discrimination lawsuit filed in July which claims the layoffs disproportionately affected older, black workers.
When VSP is offered to older employees to save on insurance money and higher salaries, that is
#agediscrimination. This company has dishonored people including a family member of mine. Shame on them.