Somebody told me that those who come under Rule 70 are most likely to be shown the door. Is this true? Isn't there a law that would prevent General Motors from doing something like this?
This doesn't just sound like age discrimination, this is age discrimination in a nutshell.
The Cornell link is off topic. Rule 70 has nothing to do with the execution of writs. It is a simple mathematical calculation. Years of service plus age equals points. One needs 85 points for full retirement. Rule 70 is a red line. Look at the do nothing EGMs with 40 plus years of service who are in their early 60s and still milking the system for all its worth. Company cars. Working at home several days a week. Big EVPs to go with their bigger than life salaries. If any of them survive this layoff I want a DNA sample. Even c---roaches can't survive ground zero.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_70
Easy peasy. Fire an older worker. Fire a younger worker. The government goes by the average age tally not the older people tally. Any large company can skirt the age discrimination issue that way in an en masse lay off. I hired a top notch labor lawyer in the metro Detroit area when I was fired by GM IT in April of 2017. My lawyer saw that I was rehired and voluntarily retired less than 72 hours later as my firing occurred "coincidentally" on a Friday afternoon. Federal and state labor laws were violated in my firing which was orchestrated and directed by Austin and Austin alone. My director in Austin sat silently with his arms crossed during the video conference staring me down like he had a ringside seat at a major sporting event. In short, I refused to falsify language in the boiler plate separation agreement I was presented with and stood my ground. The wording in question was ultimately struck from the final agreement. I took out two HR reps in Austin in the process and left a third one shaking in his boots in Phoenix. The two scheming HR reps in Austin were fired by GM Legal in Detroit for cause immediately afterwards. My younger supervisor in Phoenix mutually agreed to leave the company roughly one year later. Collateral damage can be a beautiful thing. GM Legal supported my stance on the issue from both a legal and ethical standpoint. FYI a good labor lawyer will cost you $325 an hour in the Detroit area. The average wrongful termination settlement is less than 40k nationally though. I did not pursue that route in the end. It can take over a year to get a labor case heard before the courts and there are no guarantees after the company drags you through the mud. I also chose not to personally sue my Director in Austin for damages for violating my rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act above and beyond the 250k liability amount GM provides for managers. I wanted him to have some skin in the game and exponentially increase his pucker factor. I was very tempted based solely on principal alone. Regrettably in the end he skated and got away. Rest assured that GM has lawyered up on this lay off and dotted every "i" and crossed every "t". GM IT in Austin went rogue in my firing after twenty years of dedicated and exemplary service. Good luck to all those affected. On a higher note I find life much more stress free since leaving GM.
What's rule 70?
Yes there is a law against it. It is a law that the government won’t enforce. The government is pro business and has been for decades. You could sue but you will only make your lawyer rich.