Fired manager sues Twitter for age discrimination

[onehandle]

Source: San Francisco Chronicle

A former Twitter manager has filed a lawsuit alleging age discrimination, saying he was fired and replaced with people in their 20s and 30s.

Peter H. Taylor was in charge of managing the expansion and operation of Twitter's data centers. The lawsuit, filed last week in Superior Court in San Francisco, said Taylor lost his job when he was 57, after receiving additional stock for good performance and a "meets-expectation evaluation."

"He was terminated without warning, without notice, without explanation, and without an opportunity to discuss any concerns defendants might have," the lawsuit said.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/business/article/Fired-manager-sues-Twitter-for-age-discrimination-5624098.php

[rpannier]

1. good for him

there needs to be push back against this idiocy

[mackerel]

2. It's tough to prove but I'd bet anything it was because at his age his health benefits were

three times everyone elses. We had a woman in our office who just took early retirement and her insurance was at $987 a month.

[freebrew]

3. I wish him luck...

but the * administration took all of the meat out of the age discrimination law.
It is now OK to fire someone to save the company money. The law is still supposedly in effect for hiring, but impossible to prove.

Same happened to me. Fired at 57 because the 'new' company needed to cut costs.
Only those over 40 were cut(50 of us) citing that the newer workers had the same job skills.
It was called "work-force reduction" and the state went along with it.

[1StrongBlackMan]

5. Actually, it was the SCOTUS ...

during the * administration.

Same happened to me. Fired at 57 because the 'new' company needed to cut costs.
Only those over 40 were cut(50 of us) citing that the newer workers had the same job skills.
It was called "work-force reduction" and the state went along with it.

Wow ... the company argued the "newer" (less senior) workers has the "same" job skills? That pretty much establishes the prima facie case for age discrimination.

However, I suspect the company said, "the less senior workers had the same or better job skills" and showed that the newer employees were far cheaper, i.e., financial consideration. Court's tend to not "interfere with business decisions", where a "reasonable, on-discriminatory reason" can be invented, er, ... articulated. And, sadly, Courts tend to ignore "disparate impact" arguments.

[Blue Idaho]

4. Until we get rid of this toxic notion

That "corporations are people my friends." There is no chance that human rights (all of them) will ever take precedence over the rights of the capitalist machine.

[DAMANgoldberg]

6. This needs more coverage...

Too much of this is happening all across the workforce, and is especially prevalent here in "banktown".