> Tech companies think they can get away with it because they do exactly what IBM did, fire all the old hats, then hire back the ones they really do need at cheaper, contractor rates.
If it was that simple, why don't they use that strategy with young workers as well? It would be even easier to make up justifications (e.g. lack of experience).
To me, it seems plausible that you would find a correlation between people laid off and their age, absent of systematic ageism. And if there really was systematic ageism, IBM is just shooting itself in the foot. It's possible but not a given.
> If it was that simple, why don't they use that strategy with young workers as well?
Two things.
First, there’s a lot more money to be saved cutting older employees (more senior positions, much higher pay, almost certainly grandfathered into either a pension [particularly in the case of IBM] or a higher 401k match, more vacation days).
Second, the industry has been trying its damndest to offshore as much as possible. This hits younger employees mostly in the form of “there just aren’t enough viable candidates in the US!” keeping wages down. It’s only through the grace of India being many many time zones away and persistently not-so-great code quality that younger employees aren’t as bad off as they could be.
> To me, it seems plausible that you would find a correlation between people laid off and their age, absent of systematic ageism.
Yes, it’s aaaallll just a coincidence until it happens to you and your friends. Patience, young one.
That was sort of my point. If the goal was to cut costs, it would make sense that the more costly employees, who are usually older, were let go first. To me that's not evidence of ageism even if it did impact older people more.
If it was that simple, why don't they use that strategy with young workers as well? It would be even easier to make up justifications (e.g. lack of experience).
To me, it seems plausible that you would find a correlation between people laid off and their age, absent of systematic ageism. And if there really was systematic ageism, IBM is just shooting itself in the foot. It's possible but not a given.