Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
People who have direct reports are in management. At the very least you are a first line supervisor to this employee. Without any follow-ups you aren't doing your job. Besides taking orders, it is your job to ask questions, offer solutions and warn upper management when they might be doing something extremely stupid which is going to come back to bite them.
As a manager, this is what your expected dialogue replies should be:
Boss: I want you to fire her because she is getting long in the tooth. You: What exactly are you referring to? She is a fantastic worker and a great person. She's been with us for 35 years. What specific issues are there about her?
Boss: I want you to fire her because she is getting long in the tooth. You: I hope you realize that this would open us to an age discrimination, since there is nothing in her performance history that would support a termination.
Boss: I want you to fire her because she is getting long in the tooth. You: Are you eliminating her position? Does she not have a skill set you want? Can we train her? Are we downsizing?
That's how you handle it. If for whatever reason you didn't do that, you need to do that now. If you don't or come up with an excuse that you won't have a follow-up, that is why it is difficult for people here to take your situation seriously. If you can't ask those kinds of questions out of fear of losing your own job, then you don't deserve to be in that role and should look for another job immediately or ask to step down from your current position.
This.
I have never been in this exact situation, but in other situations that were clearly unethical, illegal or simply stupid or potentially damaging to the personal reputations and the business reputation in question, I always invoked the "Headline Test".
So, go back to your manager who I presume is the person who told you to fire this woman.
Say, "I've been thinking about your request that I terminate Sally; I know this woman and if I don't have some reason to tell her she is terminated that makes sense, she will file an age discrimination case. You do know its illegal to fire someone just because they are older than 40 right? Then if I am required to testify, which I and probably you as well would most surely be required to do, I will have nothing to testify to as the reason she was fired other than age. And in fact, you have now put me in the position of either committing perjury because you told me it is about her age, as well as yourself or testifying to the truth which makes me and you party to something illegal. Either way you and I, as well as the company are in legal jeopardy. And, if there is publicity around any lawsuit/claim she files what is that headline going to look like? Not good for us or the company."
Go from there. No guarantee it will work, but every time I have invoked the "Headline Test" it worked. And by the way, I didn't come up with it myself; it was taught to me by a brilliant executive with many years of experience.
IF you get involved in terminating her, and IF what you say about "long in the tooth" and "good evaluations over 35 years" is true, you best get prepared for the lawsuit from hell.
If a gun is being put to your head, start by documenting and dating everything. She will. Your only hope of surviving such a legal assault is to successfully argue that you were following orders, and your documentation proves it (and you knew all along it was wrong, but you feared for you own job if you didn't follow orders).
Well, OP, you are employed by a company that has no loyalty to a long-term, hard-working employee. Clearly, you have to do what your boss tells you to do or risk being fired yourself.
First of all, unless this person is being fired for some egregious acts detrimental to the company, she will have the right to Unemployment Benefits while she attempts to find other employment.
Secondly, make yourself comfortable that in 30 or so years, some young manager will be firing your long-term, hard-working azz.
I suggest you do your job and then start looking for another one.
Don't do it. Just tell them NO. And if they retaliate, you have dirt on them. The reason I say so is because you're also likely to suffer the same fate as your direct report. I would document everything with your bosses going forward.
Everyone who rides a tiger eventually gets to be devoured when they dismount. Don't ride the tiger.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lisa33441
Hello all.
So I have a long time report who I get along with very well. She is a fantastic worker, a great person, for reasons unbeknownst to me, I have been instructed to make separate her from employment with the company.
This came as a total shock to me, since she gets glowing reviews, she has been with the company over 35 years, and is one of the best people on my staff. When I probed my superiors for a little more information into their decision to terminate her employment, they told me it was because she was getting " long in the tooth. "
I know this is completely unethical, I am personally very hurt by this, because she does not deserve this, but I can not go against the current here and lose my job, I am a single working mother and need this job.
So Im torn, do I anonymously let the employee know, even though I have no proof, or do I just terminate her as told too and put this poor woman in financial harm?
Contact a labor and employment attorney for a free consultation. Maybe you can sue along with her and split a huge settlement. No, I am not kidding. Age discrimination is ugly and should not be tolerated by anyone. And those of you who don't care, or don't want to stir the pot, you are going to be considered "long in the tooth" soon enough and will get the same treatment if things don't change.
There's a lot of misinformation floating out there which the OP would be ill advised to even think of following. Even if the OP is a troll, this is still a topic worthy of discussion.
It's apparent quite a few people still believe that the worker is the one that holds the 'power' in all dealings with corporations. That former employers are not allowed to say anything besides dates of employment. That the threat or implication of a lawsuit is enough to send employers quivering with fear, ready to capitulate and beg for forgiveness on their knees. All fanciful thoughts not based on reality.
The fact of the matter is, age discrimination is actually hard to prove as I have pointed out many times before:
Quote:
Proving age discrimination has never been easy, but in 2009, a U.S. Supreme Court ruling made it even more difficult. In Gross v. FBL Financial Services, the court changed the rules. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in the majority decision that the employer doesn't have to show it would have taken action regardless of age, even when an employee has evidence that age was a motivating factor in that decision.
In fact, going forward, workers have to prove that age was the primary factor for discrimination rather than just one factor.
This standard for age discrimination is much harder to prove than the standards for race and gender discrimination, and many people think that it is unfair.
^^The OP stated there was nothing wrong with the employee's performance and that she was told the employee should be fired because she is "getting long in the tooth". Being fired for getting long in the tooth = age discrimination. Age discrimination = illegal as per the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act.
I believe you're putting the cart before the old horse. My paycheck is worth more to me than the feelings of a silver surfer who's probably starting to stink from overstating her welcome.
There's a lot of misinformation floating out there which the OP would be ill advised to even think of following. Even if the OP is a troll, this is still a topic worthy of discussion.
It's apparent quite a few people still believe that the worker is the one that holds the 'power' in all dealings with corporations. That former employers are not allowed to say anything besides dates of employment. That the threat or implication of a lawsuit is enough to send employers quivering with fear, ready to capitulate and beg for forgiveness on their knees. All fanciful thoughts not based on reality.
The fact of the matter is, age discrimination is actually hard to prove as I have pointed out many times before:
Companies don't want to get sued. Period. It doesn't matter if they win, they have to spend time and money to defend against the lawsuits, again even if they win. There is nothing in it for them to be engaged in a lawsuit which is why they do everything to prevent litigation. Litigation for a single case can drag on for years. They further insulate themselves with third-party companies for background checks, temporary workers, sub-contractors, etc. It is all to lessen their liabilities. The company doesn't sit there and think, "Sure, go ahead and sue us! You will loose, I will show you who is in power here!" followed by diabolical laughter like in a comic strip.
I know a fellow who was hurt at large department store chain because of their negligence. He sued them, it dragged on for 4 years and he lost, but it cost the company $700K defending themselves. It cost him nothing, because it was done on a contingency. Again, he didn't win, but the company is out $700K. You can be sure the company had a policy change to hopefully avoid further lawsuits.
^^The OP stated there was nothing wrong with the employee's performance and that she was told the employee should be fired because she is "getting long in the tooth". Being fired for getting long in the tooth = age discrimination. Age discrimination = illegal as per the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act.
You're forgetting the OP's response in post #4, where she states that "among other things..."
Which is a clear example of my post which you responded to.
Besides that, good luck to anyone that can find an attorney willing to take on such a he said/she said type of case with not a lot of weight to it. For all we know the OP may very well not be stating the whole truth of the matter, as it is human nature to make yourself less of the bad person especially if you have to do unpleasant things. After all the OP didn't mention the key point that I mentioned above until a subsequent post.
I'm not debating whether the statement that a person long in the tooth age is discriminatory or not. Of course I think age discrimination is bad. My point is that it's hard to prove age discrimination in general, and it's not as easy to fight it as some think. There have been cases where the evidence was much, much stronger than a casual statement as in the OP's situation, and the case dragged through the courts.
I get it that people want to live in a society that is safe and protective and takes care of people prone to discrimination. I really do.
But I'm also a realist, and understand that this world doesn't work like that. Corporation's will always have the upper hand.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
