Friends inside the firm that would be privy to this information are saying that as claims/pushback are starting to roll in from the layoffs, a pattern is emerging that older workers were disproportionately impacted and are beginning to air grievances about it. Particularly women who are over age 40 who are in the middle of raising their families. (Oh, how Schwab hates people that put healthy boundaries around having their work encroach on their personal life.)
Workers over the age of 40 have rights under the Older Workers Benefits Protection Act. Schwab is legally obligated per this Act to provide the ages and titles held of every employee considered for the layoff, both selected and not selected, to each impacted employee over age 40. This is done so that an impacted employee can consider all of the data as to whether there was discrimination of any type before they forever waive their right to sue in exchange for the severance package.
Fact: The information that Schwab is providing to impacted employees revealing the ages and positions of all employees considered for the layoff does not cut legal mustard. I have friends impacted that did not get this list even when more than two people in their department were affected. If you are in this situation, you should inquire about this as per law you must have 45 days to review this data before being asked to sign a waiver agreeing not to sue. I have other friends who got huge lists of their whole org, when it was clear that the decision making was done at a much smaller level. Lists should be provided based on the org of the actual decision maker, so if your list has hundreds of names, it likely doesn't cut it, especially if you know that the likely decision maker wouldn't even know you from Adam. Schwab does this to muddy the waters so that it's harder to detect wrongdoing, but they are standing on shaky legal ground with the way they have gone about providing this information. They went through this process so fast, they did not take the time to do it right, and are not in a strong position here.
And to all the naysayers out there who want to point out that older workers likely have higher salaries, this may or may not be true. BUT if there is a disproportionate amount of older workers that have been selected for layoffs by each "Decision Maker", which is the term that is used by the Older Workers Benefit Protection Act, then Schwab DOES have a problem, and they should be held accountable for this. There is no way to "prove" discrimination, so the courts look at the data. The data here is not favorable to Schwab.
Older workers over 40, look into this before you sign. Research Older Workers Benefit Protection Act and specifically the obligations of an employer during a mass layoff. Question Schwab on the shady stuff. They've made you sweat, now we can make them sweat.