in this layoffs are they targeting 55 plus workers?
17 replies (most recent on top)
Yes. It’s standard practice in every round of redundancies.
@3awun Also since your precious anecdote was completely false, there's no info to be given anyway, but nice cover.
Don't feed the fake info trolls, fellas, you're just encouraging them to feed you more BS.
Absolutely not, @2kmu. How can you ask anyone on this site to provide their contact info? I’m obviously no longer with the company. I sued them and received a settlement and signed a non disclosure agreement. What I said is admissible because it doesn’t violate the agreement in providing details of the case or names anyone including the law firm. I suggest you do your own research, as I did. It’s not too difficult, just have sufficient evidence of your own work history and performance to backup the fact it’s not only because you’re over 55. You need to have a strong case to go to court and win. That’s how you get your ex-employer to settle large. Good luck, but plan well if you want to succeed.
I would like to get into contact with you regarding your experience. Could you provide a contact information? Thanks
@1dvx Who the F*** are you to tell someone when to quit working, regardless of their financial situation? 55+ with 30+ years experience, is someone who knows their shi, not someone who thinks they know their their shi.
There is a reason HR refused multiple meetings in s row to answer the question “how many applicants are in scope for R3”... only that there was 2700 positions. The way to legally target above 55 is to restrict the total jobs in R3, which are mostly older folks near their max pay grade.
Why are you crying? If you're 55+ with 30 years at the company you should have plenty of money to retire comfortably. If it's health insurance coverage I understand, that s—s. If you feel you have unique skills go find a job somewhere else?
Since they are paying more severance this time (which only benefits fools with less time), I think they are targeting anyone that’s willing to go! Not just the older crowd.
Yes, they're trying to reduce total payroll. People who are have been in the workforce longer are typically at higher PSGs. Also the more older people in the workforce, the higher the health care rates for the company.
@1xrk, you can dispense with the civic lesson and acknowledge that censorship of truth anywhere is universally understood as subversive and unAmerican.
I am 56 and I sued Chevron for age discrimination. They decided to settle out of court, paid 5 years of my salary plus my lawyer fees. I am now happily retired. Don't hesitate to sue them if you strongly feel that you have a case. I can provide you with my lawyer contact for sure. She does have extensive knowledge in dealing with CVX. Ask me how I know. Chevron does not like bad press, they will settle before going to court.
Civics lesson: The Constitution puts limits on what the federal government can do, not private entities including companies. Unless this site is run by a US Government entity it’s not censorship.
OP, they’ve been targeting age 55+ in every lay-off for the last 30 years. We know it’s called age discrimination, but when you sign the waiver papers to get your severance check, you yourself are saying you’re ok with it. I on the other hand was different than most everyone else. I had the luxury of not needing my severance pay right away, as I had more than enough savings and no mortgage payments to make. I sued Chevron through a law firm with a long history of winning cases against large corporations, including Chevron. It took me almost exactly 1 year of waiting, but after Chevron laid me off in 2016, I received a settlement of 4 times the severance they wanted to pay me and they also paid my lawyer fees and related expenses. My case wasn’t a difficult one to fight and win, probably very similar to that of anyone over 55 who gets laid off.
No they cannot do that however, by Giving EOI it will tend to get older employees who are close to retirement incentive to retire . That way they get around the law right?
Not sure about this age group being targeted in this specific event but they definitely were discriminated against the last several years. I know of many talented high performing post 50 year old employees that were treated poorly, disrespected or actually told they had no future. Chevron lost some real talent needed in the company as a result.
Why no. That would be ageism and surely in direct violation of the diversity policy.
No I believe they are targeting PSG, race and gender not age