Tech giants IBM and its spin-off Kyndryl are once again in the legal spotlight, facing allegations of age discrimination in a lawsuit file...
Tech giants IBM and its spin-off Kyndryl are once again in the legal spotlight, facing allegations of age discrimination in a lawsuit filed by five veteran executives and employees with over 150 years of combined service.
The Register reports that in a continuing saga of age discrimination accusations, IBM and its former Global Technology Services Group, now known as Kyndryl, find themselves at the center of a new lawsuit. Filed on Tuesday in New York City, the complaint alleges that the companies systematically targeted older workers for job cuts while simultaneously creating similar positions for younger employees.
The lawsuit, brought forth by five former high-ranking executives and employees, paints a damning picture of a corporate culture allegedly bent on “de-aging” its workforce. The plaintiffs, who collectively served the two corporations for more than 150 years, include former directors and vice presidents from various departments within IBM and Kyndryl.
This latest legal action comes despite IBM’s previous denials of systemic age discrimination. In 2022, IBM’s chief global HR officer, Nickel LaMoreaux, rejected what she termed “false claims of systemic age discrimination.” However, the lawsuit argues that discriminatory practices have persisted and even intensified.
The complaint cites several pieces of evidence to support its claims. One such piece is a 2021 case, Townsley v. Int’l Bus. Machines Corp, where an IBM executive allegedly admitted that ageist planning documents from five to six years prior were still being used for hiring decisions. Additionally, the lawsuit references a recently leaked video of IBM CEO Arvind Krishna, which purportedly shows him tying manager bonuses to diversity targets in a context where such targets are alleged to be discriminatory.
The plaintiffs’ attorneys argue that IBM and Kyndryl employed a range of tactics to conceal their alleged discriminatory practices. These include using coded language in corporate planning documents, such as “Early Professional Hire,” “skills remix,” and “revitalization hiring,” to obscure discussions of potentially illegal activities. The lawsuit also describes how company-wide layoffs, referred to as “Resource Actions,” were allegedly formulated to disproportionately target older workers.
No comments