Was our Company’s layoff Discriminatory?
Was our Company's layoff Discriminatory?
Q: My company just had its first layoff. We were told it was strictly for financial reasons; no one did anything wrong—and people were chosen by job function. We were a 35-person company, with 13 women; however, four of the five people let go were women over 40 who had been with the company for several years. I’m having trouble believing they were chosen over younger, less experienced men in identical job titles “by chance.” Is this common or as shocking as it feels to me? I am a woman just under 40 and am now very worried about my future.
A: Clearly, your view into what happened would lead you to be afraid of what the organization is doing. And you’re right—the numbers don’t look good. 80% of those laid off were women, yet the entire company was only 37% women to start. The challenge is that you don’t know what else was going on in the situation. Of this group, was there a subgroup of specific positions which were eliminated? Because jobs are eliminated, roles are selected, but in “good” layoff, people are not targeted. So while you shouldn’t be worried about your future in the long term, be aware and examine the company that remains.
Layoffs are always difficult, especially if it’s the company’s first reduction and for financial reasons. Management communicating that the five employees did nothing wrong means the organization, if not under financial difficulties, would not have laid these people off. It’s important to realize that when organizations choose layoffs by job function, they are not only looking at the current role but the skill set needed for the job function in the future. Are there times when, as you suspect, less experienced and less costly employees are kept? Absolutely. But if they are truly identical titles, most organizations are considering those skill sets needed for the future. Do the “less experienced” people bring new and valuable skills to the table? Are they more tech savvy? Can they serve in multiple roles? Management may have realized that they could not continue doing things the way they were and had to reevaluate skill sets necessary to move the organization forward.
Most organizations are very careful about the position selected and the people impacted in a layoff and will document these reasons very carefully. Management and HR will look at the legal implications of a decision like this, focusing on adverse impact—that is, making sure they haven’t disproportionally impacted any specific group or protected class more than others. No organization wants to be considered suspect about their layoff decisions. That being said, consider the company make-up that remains. Are there women senior leaders within the organization? Of the people retained versus the people let go, are there any significant differences in skills or qualifications? If you still have concerns, consider speaking with HR or a woman senior leader. Do not be accusatory—ask for information to help you develop a better understanding of how a reduction happens.
This can also be a career wake up call for people who have been at an organization for a long time. Do you continue to be flexible at work or are you stuck in the ways things have always been done and can’t find new approaches? Do you continue to update your skills and stay current in the trends and technology appropriate for your role? Do you actively say, “What else can I do, what will my role look like in a year and am I prepared for that?” Remember, longevity on the job is no longer a promise of retirement.
If you believe this is a bigger issue within your company, this may not be a place where you want to stay. In the meantime, tread lightly and look for new opportunities. What you’re describing is not common, but unfortunately it’s not exactly shocking, either.
To comment, please create a screen name in your profile
To comment, please verify your email address
Conversation
This discussion has ended. Please join elsewhere on Boston.com