The ER was a LAYOFF
Chuck and Fran labeled it voluntary so to try and sell employees their "people deal "kool-aid
Chuck and Fran have lost their credibility and everyone rolls their with their weak attempts at brainwashing employees
16 replies (most recent on top)
Age Discrimination in Disguise - True
I have the spreadsheet from HR. It is the LR not ER and over 80% are over 50.
That’s why they had an ER, to scoop up the older ones in a way that dodges law suits. The extra 3 months salary for their package is peanuts compared to a few months of legal fees.
Yes and no. Yes, in more recent LRs it felt (and looked) like age discrimination, but this LR followed an ER which predominantly targeted 50+. This LR seemed more focused on performance and budget related issues (in my team) and I'd say most of those impacted were under 50, even still in their 30s.
February 2020 was all 40+ and 50+ from my division with a few interns tossed in (under the bus?) for balance
Yes, the Cisco lawyers include some under 50 year olds to try and avoid lawsuits, which if you google age discrimination you will read that the courts will side with the employees in many cases
Look at how much $$$$ IBM has also paid to settle claims
I disagree. I am in my early 20's & I have been at Cisco for 3 years. Earlier, I was told by my manager that my job has been impacted. Also, I know 3 other early in career employees in 2 different orgs who have also been told the same today so no, the LR's are not just targeting older people.
Fact-LR/ER is definitely age discrimination
All you need to do is read the employee ages listed on the packages....Includes those employees being LR’d AND those employees not being LR’d
"2458" That's pretty old.
Cisco doesn't hire recent university graduates to replace experienced hires. The university hires are intended to boost domestic hiring metrics. Young hires leave after a year or two due to poor compensation.
That was supposed to be 24*, not sure how other numbers snuck in.
ER...maybe.
Myself and three colleagues are leaving. I'm 38, one colleague is 28, the other is 2458. It's not all older employees.
VMWare, Palo Alto, Microsoft, Nividia, Google, Arista, etc are all thriving because they continue to hire all the 50+ ex-Cisco rock stars that Cisco thought recent college grads could replace them at 1/3 compensation with no experience
Look at above companies growth and stock prices and explain why the board has not removed Chuck and his exec team
Shameful!!
I disagree concerning the ER.....
Cisco recognized a person in my situation, 62 and ready to retire the end of 2021, and provided a generous financial bridge to be able to retire now.
I wasn’t an old guy just sitting around doing nothing.
My leaving is causing some angst in my old group. Recognizing that, I worked my butt off to make sure I left all my projects in good shape and provided all the details needed to follow up to completion. I worked up to the end of the day on 10/2.
Why? Because I believe people remember how left a job more than how you actually did the job prior to deciding to leave
Cisco has been good to me - I was glad I was finally able to accept this ER (the third one offered).
Regarding the LR - yes I believe there is a deep bias against older employees in planning for the list of names to layoff. It is one reason I was hoping for fair and generous offer to retire so I could choose to leave on my own terms.
I will never forget a CNBC interview where John Chambers clearly stated that 50% of the planned 1100 layoff was to get rid of older workers who supposedly did not have the skills Cisco needed (and was unwilling to invest in current employees to help them develop the skills needed). The LR was termed a ‘reskilling’ need and new college hires would replace the older workers. While not stated, it was also clear part of the plan was to hire 1000 new hires, possible due to Cisco saving on salaries and low balling new hire salaries in the US.
Holding companies accountable for age discrimination is long overdue.
A California judge on Tuesday rejected an attempt by Cisco Systems Inc. to route an age discrimination suit brought by a veteran product manager at the company into arbitration. Ann Bark, 63, has worked at Cisco since 1998. She sued the company in August alleging that she had been denied career opportunities and bonuses as a result of her age. Represented by the Louderback Law Group, Bark alleges that she has lost over $100,000 in compensation as a result of age discrimination, and that she has experienced "extreme stress and reputational damage." Cisco's attorneys at Littler Mendelson moved to compel arbitration in December. But on Tuesday, San Francisco Superior Court Judge Harold Kahn ruled that the arbitration clause was unenforceable because it had been buried in a contract that largely focused on intellectual property issues, and because it contained other "unconscionable" provisions...Cisco intends to appeal the ruling.