Will former AT&T employees sue? https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ex-ibm-employees-allege-age-211847233.html
10 replies (most recent on top)
DIscrimination is against people who live in states that are not over population. Let people go cause where they live. Choose to keep people that under perform. Great job AT&T. Really hope you lose my state contract.
I was asked to resign because a young wippersnapper didn’t like me. All those years that I worked long hours, holidays and such went up in smoke because of one person. It had nothing to do with my job performance.
The official reason for most of the layoffs was work location. In several cases, employees from Michigan, Ohio, and Florida were laid off and were replaced by new hires in Atlanta or Dallas.
unfortunately in the United States we are ruled by corporations because they pile truckloads of money into washington dc. even the supreme court is getting full of judges that are pro business.
can you say fascism I knew you could. but it is all good corporations care about the citizenry.
At last I knew and was part of AT&T provides to all who are in surplus state, a complete listing of every person, age and if they are surplused or not. Back when it was paper it was like 20 pages on my packet. This action is against IBM.
The key words here are "accusing" and "alleging." There is no evidence at all in that article. In fact, it specifically points out the don't have any idea if there was age discrimination.
The Age Discrimination Employment Act (ADEA) was enacted to protect workers between the ages of 40-70 years old. But it is an extremely difficult case to prove and burden is all on the plaintiff. Even if the employer were to hire your replacement, under age 40, that’s only one foot in the door....the employer has all your past work evaluations, your former managers as witnesses, and much more.
Before you dig in on principle make sure you can afford to lose! But talking with an attorney can give you the financial bottom line.....and if they can’t give you a worst case dollar amount, that’s your signal to walk away.
As long as the corporation does not state or admit that they are targeting based on age, they will continue to target based on age.
How does one "prove" that age discrimination takes place in a round of layoffs? Even if an extremely higher portion of employees that get laid off are older ones, all a company has to say is that they targeted employees by salary. Naturally, older employees are going to have higher salaries than younger ones on average. Laying a person off with age as the reason is illegal, but laying someone off for how much they make isn't.
The only way justice can be served against the evil corporate state is for all employees (both u uon and non-union) to go on unpaid strike indefinitely
IF AT&T would provide information to make a determination ( one way or another ) that they are targeting ( Directly or indirectly ) their older employees, then I would fully expect to see a lawsuit come out of it.
I was under the impression they had to disclose this sort of information somewhere. Anyone know to which entity they have to report it to ?