GM's moves to cut the old people who are expensive is transparent.
10 replies (most recent on top)
Austin is different from other locations. It's mostly NCHs and people with just a few years experience.
80% of non manager employees are in their 20s.
But the layoffs were about 50-50 younger and older.
Lots of younger empolyees were let go as well, though I'd wager that if there was a skew in the data it's more likely because they have more older employees. Of the group I used to work with 6 were close to retirement, 6 were middle aged, and 3 were younger than 30 (including me) and I was let go in the layoff.
We had 2 people take the buyout, a middle aged employee and one who retired. Not sure who else left from our plant though.
Age discrimination suits are often won in state courts, but rarely in Federal courts.
Saw a lot of older folks let go that got really high pay but did nothing but take smoke breaks and play solitaire. S---s but everyone saw the writing on the wall for them.
Younger hires come at the expense of quality.
If experience and quality came to a head where headcount reduction was required, what might a mass hiring of the unqualified produce? This is a new avenue taking by GM on a grand scale, as there have never been such an attempt in hiring the unqualified all at once.
A significant downturn in the market and economy comes next? Within 24 months, we should feel it.
Younger workers who got laid off were collateral damage. They were let go to cover older employees being let go. Someone should investigate how many younger employees are rehired. Some posts on this site from NCH told to reapply.
I saw a lot of youngins go...
Unlike race discrimination lawsuits, age discrimination lawsuits never win in court.
Society just seems less sympathetic to older people.
"It's not what you know, it's what you can prove in court"