The union at my former company, Ford Motor Company, is urging the older workers to retire to make room for the hiring of 300 new workers. Do you think this is fair, especially if the older worker is no where near the age to draw Social Security? Do older workers in other countries feel that kind of pressure from their younger populations? Are we really that disposable?
Anonymous
Favorite Answer
An interesting question that casts serious doubt on the expectations of a group of workers like ballerinas whose skills while necessary for that one job are not transferable. Skilled but how valuable are they, really, esp in view of the legions who are ready, willing and able to replace them at a much lower cost? Would new younger workers replace older auto workers easily w/o much training and/or expense? What's fair just doesn't enter into the thing esp at a time of economic stress. After all is said and done, no one least of all workers are in business for the good of our health and none of us is irreplacable - at least in the work context. We work to earn money. Period. Neither employer nor customer gives a crap whether we like our work nor should they. I can't help feeling, personally, that car workers have been wildly overpaid for their skill set, an observation that seems to me esp justified by their failure (a) to have seen the writing on the wall and (b) having seen it acted in a way to learn and develop new, more marketable skills. I'm hard-pressed to think of even one of these people who set aside some of that rather spectacularly high pay to further her own education maybe to take what s/he knew about the job to a higher level, even becoming an entrepreneur. Complacency and an overweight sense of entitlement is what happens when labor is overvalued. The smart thing for workers to do in the circs you describe is to see if they can come together and reduce their expectations in line with company profits and with the goal of employing the max no. of workers.
Bears Mom
In this day and age it appears all companies (not just Ford) consider their employees disposable...regardless of age. I do find offering long term employees an early retirement package seems to be the trend these days. I think it is unfair that simply because a person reaches a certain age or has been with a company a long time they are booted out to make room for new, younger employees. There just doesn't seem to be loyalty from employers anymore so is it any wonder employees no longer feel loyal to their employers as well? You can be doing a great job, have been with the company for years and walk in one day to find out you no longer have a job.
-
No they are only concerned with the money and not about loyalty or experience. It may very well be their loss in the end. If they feel so strongly that older workers should retire perhaps they should entice them with a large bonus for doing so, that may sweeten the offer and aid in starting a business for someone who is not ready for real retirement.
What they did at the job I retired from to get rid of older workers was to ignore the annual evaluations for job performance and give the new hires big raises and the older workers within a few years of retirement a small percentage of what the new hires received. It sure didn't create job loyalty because 99% of those who got the nice raises quit within a couple years. They are in constant spiral of hiring-training-employees quitting-mistakes being made by new employees-supervisors quitting and being frustrated. I think management thrives on creating chaos and being rewarded with fat bonuses.
Blank
Early retirement offers are a trend in this economy. It's an easy way for organizations to manage layoffs. If you retire early, it's "your" choice to leave the company.
I don't think fairness comes into play here despite the language used to describe early retirement. Do you owe younger workers "your" job? Do you owe the company or your union that kind of loyalty?
Unions have mostly outlived their usefulness anyway.
?
I guess neither the company nor the young population has figured out that if they "get rid" of older workers in that manner, they're going to have to support us in some other manner. And since we are the majority population now, the company is setting themselves up for age discrimination lawsuits. I know my firm has been slowly "laying off" staffers who are only 1 or 2 years from retirement but since they have laid off other workers as well, no one can claim it's based on age.