Millennial Money
BIO
MOST SHARED
- The 'Real' Jobless Rate: 17.5% Of Workers Are Unemployed
- Why Amazon Rules Retail
- China Eastern to Complete Shanghai Air Buy by End '09
- Gold Will Collapse Like Oil Did in 2008: Charts
- Wave of Debt Payments Facing US Government
- Paul: Audit the Fed
- Weak Dollar Is Golden for Mining Companies
- Revised GDP Reading Puts Growth at 2.8%; Inflation Tame
- JAL Slides to Record Low on Bankruptcy Jitters
- Nielsen Ratings Coming to Video Games
- 8 Stocks That Could Gain With Rising GDP
- Remorseful Regulator Leads Reform Fight
- Lightning Round: AT&T, Verizon, Novartis and More
- Lightning Round OT: Alcoa, Weight Watchers and More
- Why Amazon Rules Retail
- Nordic American: Sinking Ship or Titan Tanker?
- Your First Move For Tuesday November 24th
- Cramer: What Monday’s Housing Number Really Means
- Pops & Drops: Cigna, Verizon...
- Giving Thanks: Energy
RSS FEED
Senior Writer, Mad Money
![]() |
Here's the latest from the front in Tuesday's Wall Street Journal, "employees in their 20s and 30s are finding themselves more at risk of a layoff, according to labor lawyers, as employers look to avoid age- discrimination lawsuits by adopting a "last one in, first one out" policy and turn to tenure as a means of conducting layoffs".
Okay, let me get this straight. Companies are firing younger workers because the legal system is stacked against us now? That's what this means, don't kid yourself about a level playing field.
If companies are more likely to be successfully sued by older workers when they enact "headcount reduction" plans, even though you can probably find someone younger to take the same job for less pay, something is very, very wrong.
This is so screwed up I'm having trouble getting my brain around it. Because older workers are paid more, then companies that want to save money but fear the wrath of the legal system, will have to lay off more total employees than they otherwise would.
Here's a thought for any corporation that's still in the business of capitalism: if you want to achieve cost savings by cutting back on your workforce, get rid of the people with "seniority." You won't have to fire as many because on average they have higher salaries than younger workers. And, let's be honest, if these are white collar jobs that involve computers, why the heck do you have anyone over 30 working for you in the first place? People who are still trying to figure out how to use the Xerox [XRX
Loading...
()
] machine do not belong in front of a keyboard, unless it's the keyboard of a typewriter.
Of course, old judges, along with juries made up of people who skew older, are more likely to side with their fellow-fogies (as are the people who probably design these, "fire the kids" policies), so maybe you'll lose lots of money in court and have reinstate some of the older workers you tried to fire.
Unbelievable. I am playing the age card. This is age discrimination. I don't even really care that it's not fair, what bothers me is that it's so stupid and craven.
Do you Agree/Disagree? Send your comments to
- Warren Buffett and Bill Gates discuss the economy and other subjects with CNBC's Becky Quick.
- Congressman Ron Paul explains to Squawk Box why he’s pushing legislation to audit the Federal Reserve.
- …you'll want to be prepared. Tips for getting the most out of the post-Thanksgiving shopping frenzy.
- A diet high in fat and sugar might actually be good for your portfolio.
- One shopper explains why he gets up at 3am on the day after Thanksgiving to go shopping every year.
- From the AIG&T to the Merrill Lychee, Jane Wells lists this year's holiday cocktails.












