Is it ethical for IBM to lay people off before they can get lifetime medical?

Question

Through the years IBM tells employees part of their pay is the security, and people work for many decades for them. In recent years IBM decided the old retirement plan they committed to is too expensive and now targets older workers. Even if a worker is deemed the hardest worker in an area can be laid off a year or two before they can hit 30 years and get lifetime medical... if they get laid off at 28 years, as is the case the last years, they can have to pay something like an additional mortgage to get equivalent medical coverage. Is it legal or is it ethical of Sam Palmisano the CEO to allow age discrimination life this? Is it theft of benefits? or is it shrewd and astute business and the way life on the streets works?

Answer 1

Its not ethical for them to ask for lifetime anything. It was dumb for IBM (or any company) to agree to such a plan in the first place. In the long run, it can't be honored. Supporting people that no longer work for the company is an expense no company can afford.

Answer 2

No company Owes anybody a lifetime of expensive insurance protection.

Insurance is a "benefit", meaning it is a voluntary program employers use to try to attract excellent and educated employees.

"Lifetime" insurance plans were devised and meant for times when people worked at a company until they turned 65, retired, and died before they hit 67 years old.

Now people frequently live 25 years or more after their retirement age. These companies would be ruined paying for hip replacements and nursing homes for people who's lives have outlived their bodies.

It's not evil or greed. Its business. People need to remember that they are responsible for having their own savings and providing for their own healthcare.

Answer 3

How did you get IBM and ethical in the same sentence??? Wow.

Answer 4

It is not ethical, but that's business. More importantly, it's the basis for an age discrimination lawsuit, though.