Hopefully, the first of many more to come.
https://medium.com/austin-bureau/ibm-faces-lawsuit-for-age-discrimination-at-austin-offices-8d1db262e52e
(Link to full case filing here --
https://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/desktop/document/Langley_v_International_Business_Machines_Corporation_Docket_No_1?1527798903)
IBM needs to be forced to share the ages of all people it laid off in the last 10 years. If the judge in this case orders IBM to do that, it will easily show IBM laid off mostly older employees.
IBM will defend against it by saying that all it did was let go of low-skilled/expensive employees and hire high-skilled/cheaper employees. It will claim that the fact that the new employees were young in age was just a coincidence.
Of course, that defense will be laughable. It is easily contradicted by all the internal communications included in the filing. These show that the IBM had a systematic strategy to attract and develop a workforce consisting MAINLY of "millennials" - a category that is first and foremost defined by age. And, IBM did this to change its "image". Now, something like that is OK if you are in the movie or modeling or similar business where your employee's image is what you are selling and the age is a factor you are legally allowed to take into consideration. But here it is age discrimination.
Points 52, 56 and 57 of the filing are key.