No. of Recommendations: 5
Should companies really focus exclusively on the bottom line and let the older, and usually more highly paid, workers go without a second thought? I have been struggling with this question. If companies are forced to consider seniority it will reduce their ability to compete in the world. OTOH, if they let these older employees go in the first layoff, can it be justified from a social perspective?

I've always thought for most people, cutting back slowly on work is useful so that retirement isn't such a shock [obviously not talking about most of the folks here <g>]. So that would be one way to go - offer 32 or 24 hour weeks to the "older" folks. Benefits could be cut in proportion, though something would have to be worked out for health benefits. DH did this, and I think it worked out fine. As he slowly cut back hours, he developed other interests, so he didn't mind cutting back more hours.

Just a thought.

arrete
Print the post  

Announcements

What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and Glassdoor #1 Company to Work For 2015! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.