#agediscrimination

DID YOU KNOW ...

• Adope has an unwritten objective to always rotate out anyone over the age of 45 on a regular rotation.

DID YOU KNOW

• Adobe deliberately does not have a published "process" for managing employees performance. Thus, a manager can simply declare 'sorry. You have not performed and your last day is xx"" with no warning or no opportunity to improve. In fact, it's intentional so managers can manage out anyone, on a whim at any time and claim "performance" with zero documentation or process.

DID YOU KNOW?
Adobe had a mass layoff, that is well documented in the press, on Dec 6th. They claim over 100 people in the sales group we part of a "reduction in force" or a RIF. HOWEVER, there were dozens of additional people impacted. Yet they were of an advanced age. So Adobe didnt want them reported within the official layoff filing as it would become EVIDENT that they targeted people 50+. So instead of including these individuals, they suddebly "claimed" it was due to "performance issues".
YES! ✅ ! That is precisely why they don't have a formal performance improvement process or a POLICY that managers must follow. They actually claim "We give managers the freedom to manage their employees without any policy".

And there you have it. Where is @TheJusticeDept with such EXTREME Age 🎯, by proxy of Adobe Policy to NOT have a policy?

This company cannot go 'uncategorized' on this site without it appropriately being identified... Just saying.

The company is using tactics of age discrimination.

Older workers could soon find it easier to prove age discrimination. The House Education and Labor Committee voted on Tuesday to approve the Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act (POWADA).

#agediscrimination

The bill, which moves next to the full House and then the Senate, would reverse a 2009 Supreme Court decision, Gross v. FBL Financial Services, which required workers to prove that their age was the main factor in an employer’s decision to discipline, fire or not hire them.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/11/older-workers-could-soon-find-it-easier-to-prove-age-discrimination.html

NYTimes: New Evidence of Age Bias in Hiring, and a Push to Fight It

https://nyti.ms/31eZlQa

By Patricia Cohen

June 7, 2019

MADISON, Ala. — Across the United States, mammoth corporations and family businesses share a complaint: a shortage of workers.

As the unemployment rate has tunneled its way to a half-century low, employers insist they must scramble to lure applicants.

#agediscrimination

Anonymous | Post ID: @ZsY8FhL | |

Why is majority of those laid off in their late forties or early fifties? It looks like #agediscrimination is out of control here and nobody is really either talking about it or trying to do anything about it.

I guess nobody but those directly affected cares about this issue...

Yet another article:

Millennials in, Boomers out? Lawsuit against IBM claims age discrimination in hiring.

BY RAY GRONBERG

rgronberg@heraldsun.com

LINKEDIN

GOOGLE+

PINTEREST

REDDIT

PRINT

ORDER REPRINT OF THIS STORY

June 04, 2018 12:52 PM

Updated 8 hours 6 minutes ago

DURHAM

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."

Breaking News

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.

#AgeDiscrimination

https://www.wsj.com/articles/intel-faces-age-discrimination-claims-1527264300

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.

Now, let that sink in... #AgeDiscrimination

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.

#AgeDiscrimination

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.