The EEOC is currently investigating the complaints against IBM.
IBM was once known as the top technology company in the world. Over time, the tech landscape changed, and IBM found itself facing challenges in its workforce. In particular, IBM had older employees compared to its competitors. According to a recent report from ProPublica, its solution was to get rid of its aging employees in favor of younger, less experienced workers.
ProPublica uncovered a confidential planning document that discussed IBM’s strategy. The idea was to “correct the seniority mix” by cutting its overall workforce by as much as 75% from its peak, and replacing a good portion of its employees with lower paid, younger employees. It also planned to send many jobs overseas. According to the report, IBM has eliminated the jobs of more than 20,000 Americans aged 40 and older in the past 5 years. This represents approximately 60 percent of its total U.S. job cuts in this time period.
While the firings of older workers is bad enough, ProPublica uncovered other troubling information about IBM’s alleged practices. According to a skilled age discrimination attorney, some of these actions may have violated the law. This includes:
- Denying older workers required information about whether they have been the victim of age bias;
- Requiring older workers to sign away the right to sue;
- Targeting employees for termination with techniques that were designed to eliminate older workers;
- Changed job cuts into retirements;
- Encouraged employees who they planned to terminate to apply for other positions, while advising managers to not hire them; and
- Told some older employees that they were being terminated because their skills were out of date, but then re-hired them as contract workers, for lower pay and fewer benefits.
Under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), it is generally illegal for employers to treat older employees differently than younger employees (with the only exception being for jobs that require certain physical qualifications). Historically, courts have treated age discrimination similarly to discrimination on the basis of gender, race, or sexual orientation. However, in recent years, as employers have claimed that they need younger workers to compete on a global scale, protections for older workers have decreased.
While IBM’s round of layouts and its apparent targeted strategy may be unusual in that it seems to be a deliberate campaign to rid itself of an aging workforce in order to hire younger, cheaper employees, age discrimination is not uncommon across the United States. While the ADEA is in place to protect older workers from discrimination, many employers do not follow the law. That is why it is important to consult with an experienced age discrimination attorney if you believe that you have been treated unfairly due to your age.
At PLBH, we have more than 50 years of experience helping employees get justice. Contact us today at (800) 435-7542 or info@plblaw.com to schedule a consultation or to learn more about how we can help you.