@4wex, with respect, I need to have you re-focus on what I said and the timeline period of when. “When I was 35” (I was already an eight yr vet with T) and “I’m now 63” and 28 years ago, or 1991, was a hugely different time and “age discrimination” wasn’t even an actionable verb back then.
Lay-offs, in the 90s, were commonplace and when they came to get us it wasn’t the 30-40 something (like me) that got tagged....it was the 55-65. They made more money than I did, medical was more costly because chances were higher that they were married with kids, have a spouse or child with a medical condition, and of course, they needed to fund their pensions.....back then, many of us were unmarried and no kids, we mostly drew a pass. But they came at the older T’s long and hard.
The “Age Discrimination In Employment Act” is a wonderful thing to read, but ask the ex Call Center employées how that worked out for them when their voices were replaced by new voices from India and the Philippines at one third the cost, no pension and cheaper medical, if that!
Companies are savvy in how to side step, what they know to be a discriminatory maneuver, and not get caught.....T is no different. “Statistics” And “Math” you might have a point, except they were used by AT&T back then, as today, to return money to their pockets and shorten our careers!