Re: confidential terms
This situation isn’t a simple question of age discrimination as the article suggests - therefore cannot be seen as some sort of vicarious revenge attack on Baby Boomers. The fact is, IBM U.K. put itself in serious breach of good faith by disguising a separation as a change to the pension scheme. The company handled the whole thing astonishingly badly and was clearly making it up as it went along. It was found guilty in a huge and complex court judgement. It appealed but not against the judgement - only against the punishment - leaving the way for these settlements. Of course that route was only available to those who left the company. Those of us still stuck on the headcount were hardly likely to sue. If they’d wanted to get rid of the “wrinklies” they could have funded a generous separation package. Or they could have offered early retirement. They’d been doing both for most of the 80s, 90s and 00s. Instead they came up with A Cunning Plan which cost them a fortune and alienated the generation that built Big Blue.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
