Thread regarding AT&T Inc. layoffs

54 with 13 years of service, laid off in 2016 and numerous attempts to get rehired. Receive emails saying "sorry not a good match this time" go figure.

57 but Rule of 75 would not have applied to me.

50 with 22 years service. Midwest.

So glad I no longer work at that sh-- hole of a company!! So much stress!! Was biggest weight lifted walking out those big double glass doors!! AT&T s---s!! Now lemme cash out my pension arseholes!! Only positive was all the woman you can hook up with. Omg never been so easy. Lol.

I was within 5 years of the rule 75 and was chosen for surplus. Lucky for me I am a veteran and can take care of my medical through the VA.

@ fktvt .... i think there have been many like you the past several years, you are not alone.

I have 17.5 years with the company and am 54. I would have met the criteria for early retirement in January of 2019. I have 3 other friends who are all over 40 who were cut as well. (this is at least 4 of the 13 cuts in our division that are over 40)

61 with 39,25 yrs Very thankful that i am away from T. Poorly managed corporation. Now working for a fiber company that treats their employees as family. Should have left years ago

Funny that this is being asked. There is a director with over 40 years in the company that got surplussed and then the decision was reversed to keep her here even longer.

IMO, if you are in the company for more than 30 years you are what I cal a 'lifer'.

When will AT&T learn to cut the REAL FAT? Get rid of Management that gets paid too much for doing nothing. I have a manager in my area that is the spawn of Geryon, not even liked by his own peers, much less anyone else. He has gotten rid of or drove off some great workers, while he has been able to keep his job even when he breaks more rules than anyone he has ever fired! The surpluses are bad enough, he makes sure you are in fear of losing your job everyday! Even when he got caught having s-x with a married female manager ON THE CLOCK , they did nothing, just once again covered it up. No not all are bad, but if AT&T really wants to make a difference, quit the surpluses of your workers, and surplus some managers!

Should’ve stayed Union!

Yes, age has a lot to do with it. They can do it by location and happen to have a lot of older people in the layoff group since they are probably more settled down and were not hand picked to move to the big CZ's and get the promotions, like a younger person would be jumping to do. There are a few younger people getting surplussed also, but some of those might be spared getting another position within the company. Most people in the surplus do not even get an interview.

The Horowitz case vs AT&T seems to sum up a lot of the BS going on here. There is a special place in Hell for the upper management that is letting all this happen.

https://www.almcms.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/292/2017/07/att-age-discrimination.pdf

Surplused in 2016 Within 21 months of full retirement

age 63 + 18 years service

6 months severance

six months unemployment comp

6 months co-paid COBRA

12 months reg COBRA

2 months ACA

Medicare

SS

They're doing it by location now - no consideration for rating, ranking, length of service, or impact to the business. I finally was in one of those states. 50 years old w 27+ years of service.

It's true. From last 3 surplus older on age and with the company were the first to go. 🤔😔

52 with 18 years of service

I'm 55 with 35 years service & almost entire office has 30+ years service-southeast

55 years old, over 30 years of service. Level 2 manager. By law we were given a breakdown of our org. Listed everyone by age and who was surplused. Large number of those over 50 and a few much younger. I figure they were to offset the average age of those surpluses.

Why doesn't the rule of 75 apply if you're 60 with 15 years

Sneaky Ways Companies Get Rid of Older Workers:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/deborahljacobs/2013/11/03/11-sneaky-ways-companies-get-rid-of-older-workers/#57623c86206a

It is well known that a trick management uses to make it look like they are not discriminating against older people is to lay off a couple of young people.

I am 65 With 5 Years on the Job. Should I be worried?

62 with almost 9 years this go round. Had 26.5 with AT&T/Lucent.

over 50 and over 30 years of service let go last week

52 ....20 years in engineering....white male.

I do fit in the last spring group 64 with 13 plus years of service.

It could be that, four out of the twelve worker bees, were cut, which should equate to 30% reduction. the other way around would be a 70% reduction, unlikely.... but possible if the 4 people left happen to be managers, ....quite possible at ATT

Are you saying 12 people in your group were surplussed with 4 fitting the rule of 75 profile? Or are you saying 4 people in a group of 12 were surplussed with all 4 fitting the profile?

4 out 12, the oldest in our group were 50 or above, with more than 20 years service, after their departure, quietly,our Area Manager replaced them with newbies/no experience, what do you think about that???

53 and 33 years

Heard that when they laid off last spring. The folks I know that were laid off, all fit that group. :(

45 with 20 years of service

I am 53 with 20 years of service, SouthEast

The whole young/old thing makes sense. I bet that 75 calculation is how they are deciding on the old end of the spectrum.

54 w/32 yrs svc...very obvious!!!

I'm 56 with 17 years of service and they got me. Do the math

I don't believe that's all of it. I know way too many people who have 5 years or less who have been let go. I think they're trying to dump everyone too young and too old and are managing towards the middle. It's stupid, but I've seen it before, too.