Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 50
Thanks Tree68Thanks

Thread: Inside IBMs purge of thousands of workers

  1. #11
    Veteran Member Dragonfly5's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2007
    Posts
    16,798
    Thanks
    13319

    From
    Houston, Texas
    Quote Originally Posted by fenrir View Post
    It's the same in my profession. The young ones are prettier and work for less. If I were to lose my job today I'd never get hired again because they'd have to pay me more.

    Of course I'm not as pretty as I once was either. Sigh.
    Judging by your Avatar, you don't look too bad. Kind of the outdoor type I would guess.

  2. #12
    Begin with a happy Ending Engine-Ear's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    14,954
    Thanks
    10984

    From
    The last place I lost my keys.
    Quote Originally Posted by fenrir View Post
    It's the same in my profession. The young ones are prettier and work for less. If I were to lose my job today I'd never get hired again because they'd have to pay me more.

    Of course I'm not as pretty as I once was either. Sigh.
    That's why I quit stripping.....

  3. #13
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    35,216
    Thanks
    27941

    From
    On a hill
    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    Right to Work has absolutely nothing to do with at-will employment. Learn what Right To Work means. It means union security clauses are illegal. Union security clauses are employers agreeing to fire people the union orders them to fire based on non-payment of dues. All Right To Work says is "union security clauses are illegal." Right To Work does not say "all employment is at-will." If some law or policy was passed declaring that, then that's a separate issue.



    Victim-minded entitlement to indefinite employment is an individual psychological problem, not a circumstance. I don't need to personally be laid off for incompetence or other reasons in order to observe the fact that employers aren't going to want to employ increasingly useless people forever and ever. If an employer offered a person an office job 23 years ago and over that period of time they never bothered to develop pertinent skills and figure out, for example, how to type with more than two fingers, send a text message, scan a document, rotate a PDF, format an excel spreadsheet, attach a file to an e-mail, or other painfully simple things to learn, the employer should not be forced to continue employing that increasingly useless person indefinitely, and it's not age discrimination to look to discontinue the employment relationship with people who can't maintain their usefulness.
    If we old folks are useless, then the retirement age should be lowered.

    Or maybe we should just quietly slip away and die.

    Oh wait, middle aged white men are

    We knew the proximate causes ó we know what they were dying from. We knew suicides were going up rapidly, and that overdoses mostly from prescription drugs were going up, and that alcoholic liver disease was going up. The deeper questions were why those were happening ó there's obviously some underlying malaise, reasons for which we [didn't] know.

    On what's driving these early deaths

    Anne Case: These deaths of despair have been accompanied by reduced labor force participation, reduced marriage rates, increases in reports of poor health and poor mental health. So we are beginning to thread a story in that it's possible that [the trend is] consistent with the labor market collapsing for people with less than a college degree. In turn, those people are being less able to form stable marriages, and in turn that has effects on the kind of economic and social supports that people need in order to thrive.

    https://www.npr.org/sections/health-...ths-of-despair
    Thanks from Madeline, Ian Jeffrey and Friday13

  4. #14
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    35,216
    Thanks
    27941

    From
    On a hill
    Quote Originally Posted by bajisima View Post
    While I agree we shouldnt have age discrimination, it does exist. There is nobody that will hire a 50 year old roofer for instance. Or a 55 year old logger. Its also hard to hire a 60 year old software engineer. While its wrong, there is some common sense there, which is why we have so many pockets of poverty out there. If we are supposed to work until we are 68 or 70 to collect Social Security and Medicare what should we do? If you are 60 and get laid off, you arent wanted in a great many professions. Its going to be a massive issue since quite a few people want the age to collect raised to 70.
    Yeah, that happened to a friend recently. Since she had scored a "consistently exceeds expectations" rating on her job reviews for a decade and a half; she figured it had to do with her age, and cost of her health insurance. (another reason for single payer health insurance)
    Thanks from Madeline, Ian Jeffrey and Friday13

  5. #15
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    35,216
    Thanks
    27941

    From
    On a hill
    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    1) I roll my eyes at accusations of age discrimination. Any policy that affects one age group of Americans badly while benefiting another age group of Americans can be said to be "age discrimination." Pensions are age discrimination. Social Security and Medicare are age discrimination. Obamacare is age discrimination. Senior tax exemptions are age discrimination. Many policies are created specifically to cater to the monetary interests of the senior and near-senior demographic, which necessarily means greater cost and burden on younger Americans.

    2) Mother Jones is an extremely biased source of information, almost without exception.

    3) Ultimately, employers should be able to hire who they want and lay off who they don't need. The government should not be analyzing and surmising as to the motives behind employment decisions.

    If I have an 80,000 salaried benefited job, and my employer discovers it can replace me with a 21-year old immigrant from Bangladesh and pay him $15 an hour, should my employer be able to do that, even if my performance has been good? Yes. If a 21-year old immigrant willing to work for $15 an hour can do my job just as adequately as I can at a price that is far below what I'd be willing to accept for it, and they can trust that other person to do the job as well, and they want to, then they should hire that person. The cost vs. benefit to my employer is off the charts in favor of letting me go and hiring that other person. And what if they are wrong, the kid can't do my job adequately, but they do this anyway? Oh well. That is their prerogative. Organizations should be able to make their own decisions, and if those decisions might be bad ones, well that's how life goes.

    Government shouldn't be protecting companies from their own decisions by micromanaging employment decisions. Employers should be able to hire those best-suited to complete the job to the highest standard and/or most competitive total cost. Employers should not be stuck with just-okay types of people they decided to hire 15 years ago or have to go through a ridiculous years-long progressive discipline process to be able to let people go. Employment is not a marriage and should not be treated like one.
    If I have an 80,000 salaried benefited job, and my employer discovers it can replace me with a 21-year old immigrant from Bangladesh and pay him $15 an hour, should my employer be able to do that, even if my performance has been good?
    So then you're in favor of expanding the visa program even when American workers are available?
    Thanks from Friday13

  6. #16
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    15,333
    Thanks
    4092

    From
    Boise, ID
    Quote Originally Posted by Madeline View Post
    Good grief! If age discrimination should be legal,
    Itís not age discrimination.

    Quote Originally Posted by labrea View Post
    If we old folks are useless, then the retirement age should be lowered.

    Or maybe we should just quietly slip away and die.
    Spare me.

    There is no coherent argument for why employers should be basically forced to keep people employed indefinitely, with continuous increases to pay, in return for becoming less skilled and useful over time. Theyíre going to do what it takes to not do that.

  7. #17
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    35,216
    Thanks
    27941

    From
    On a hill
    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    It’s not age discrimination.



    Spare me.

    There is no coherent argument for why employers should be basically forced to keep people employed indefinitely, with continuous increases to pay, in return for becoming less skilled and useful over time. They’re going to do what it takes to not do that.
    Why do you assume older workers are less skilled?
    Last edited by labrea; 3rd April 2018 at 07:06 PM.

  8. #18
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    15,333
    Thanks
    4092

    From
    Boise, ID
    Quote Originally Posted by labrea View Post
    Why do you assume older workers as less skilled?
    I don't need to assume. It's obvious. Old people are less likely to be adept and efficient with computer technology, but technology is how almost everything is done nowadays. That's not some random out-of-nowhere made-up comment. Look around.

    Technology skills threaten older worker's with long-term unemployment | Daily Mail Online
    http://www.nbcnews.com/id/33106445/n...y-job-seekers/
    The Impact of Technological Change on Older Workers: Evidence from Data on Computer Use

  9. #19
    Veteran Member EnigmaO01's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    18,230
    Thanks
    10114

    From
    Indiana
    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    Right to Work has absolutely nothing to do with at-will employment. Learn what Right To Work means. It means union security clauses are illegal. Union security clauses are employers agreeing to fire people the union orders them to fire based on non-payment of dues. All Right To Work says is "union security clauses are illegal." Right To Work does not say "all employment is at-will." If some law or policy was passed declaring that, then that's a separate issue.



    Victim-minded entitlement to indefinite employment is an individual psychological problem, not a circumstance. I don't need to personally be laid off for incompetence or other reasons in order to observe the fact that employers aren't going to want to employ increasingly useless people forever and ever. If an employer offered a person an office job 23 years ago and over that period of time they never bothered to develop pertinent skills and figure out, for example, how to type with more than two fingers, send a text message, scan a document, rotate a PDF, format an excel spreadsheet, attach a file to an e-mail, or other painfully simple things to learn, the employer should not be forced to continue employing that increasingly useless person indefinitely, and it's not age discrimination to look to discontinue the employment relationship with people who can't maintain their usefulness.
    Thank you for proofing my point. Just remember: karma can be a real bitch.
    Thanks from Ian Jeffrey and Friday13

  10. #20
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    15,333
    Thanks
    4092

    From
    Boise, ID

    Inside IBMs purge of thousands of workers

    Quote Originally Posted by EnigmaO01 View Post
    Thank you for proofing my point. Just remember: karma can be a real bitch.
    I wouldnít see it as karma, Iíd see it as validation of exactly what Iím saying. No one should feel entitled to a job for life. I certainly donít feel that way. If you want to be someone elseís employee, that person should actually want to continue buying your services, not be forced to or practically have to go through a protracted legal process to be able to discontinue the employment relationship.
    Last edited by Neomalthusian; 3rd April 2018 at 05:46 PM.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Purge My Ass!
    By vikingbeast in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11th January 2018, 06:42 AM
  2. Inside the Purge of Tens of Thousands of Ohio Voters
    By DemoWhip in forum Current Events
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 5th June 2016, 01:41 PM
  3. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 29th January 2016, 05:46 AM
  4. Replies: 16
    Last Post: 13th July 2009, 05:39 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed