Thread regarding IBM layoffs

Listen to the Here and Now segment:
https://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2019/09/03/age-discrimination-ibm-lawsuit

Read about the shameless IBM scheme:
https://regmedia.co.uk/2019/07/31/ibm.pdf

I saw tons of older folks going out the door and it was such a sad thing to see. People who put 100% into the company only to be cut. Many are struggling.

I hope besides the the people that were discriminated against in their RA for age and years, that they talk to older workers still working who are being 'incented' to leave because of no more pay raises, promotions, or opportunity to change roles unless you leave the company. It, the discrimination, is rampant and it is encouraged by the older (even old with long years) sr management.

• 2qfx That is an excellent point. When I took computer courses in college we used key punches. Just think about all that change since then!

Like many companies that have laid off baby boomers as if they have the plague, what is not understood is that the baby boomers have done nothing but embrace change over and over in the last 30-35 years. Boomers have exhibited great capability of change, and due to depth and breadth of experience, can often have (and offer, if allowed) deeper perception of what the next levels of change present.
For example, I have seen more and more data being required to collect, yet little to no use of it - so if you ask me, stop with senseless "improved process" if all it adds is bits and bytes to a largely un-used database!
Newbies have few skills, and have never been challenged (yet) by the realities of working in tech: lots of flexibility and capability to change and then change again.
I think employers like that the younger generation may show no boundaries - they live in a non-stop 24-by-7 world, being connected and all the downfall that poses for a balanced, healthy life. That works for a company in the short-run (perhaps all they are interested in), but not the long-run.

I've noticed a few "older", former Sales IBM'ers, who worked elsewhere over the past 1-2 years, have been hired back in Sales capacities. I'm not saying they're not valuable because they are. What I'm wondering is IBM going to reference some of these "rehires" in a court case. Food for thought.

"IBM makes its employment decisions based on skills"... If it was a skills issue, why was I asked to train my India counterparts to do my job?

"In fact, since 2010 there is no difference in the age of our U.S. workforce". Isn't this about the same time when IBM stopped providing age references with their RA package? What is IBM hiding? :-)

I call BS..."IBM makes its employment decisions based on skills, not age. In fact, since 2010 there is no difference in the age of our U.S. workforce, but the skills profile has changed dramatically. That is why we have been and will continue investing heavily in employee skills and retraining — to make all of us successful in this new era of technology."

It is not a skills issue because IBM is hiring new employees right out of college and high school, then training them. Rather than training older employees with new skills, they are using the skills issue as a ploy to remove older higher salary employees.