Old Employee A Carry Out: Readers Comment
Last week I posted “67-Year Old Employee A ‘Carry Out’ – He Will Pass Away On The Job.” It was about a recent court decision in which a 67-year old employee claimed that:
“he was ‘frequently the brunt of embarrassing and hurtful age-related jokes.’ … (i) one of the jokes was ‘at age 67, [p]laintiff had four children who were barely teenagers’; (ii) ‘[p]laintiff’s superiors allowed him to be depicted as old and decrepit in unflattering cartoons’; and (iii) one of the jokes plaintiff’s superiors condoned was ‘referring to [plaintiff] as a ‘carry out’, i.e. someone who would pass away on the job.'”
“He’s a carry out!”
A lot of folks read this post – and a couple wrote comments which I want to share.
Wendy Goldman, a management consultant in West Hollywood, CA, wrote:
“This is a great reminder of inappropriate language in the workplace.
With regards to ‘at age 67, [p]laintiff had four children who were barely teenagers” (I am not sure what this is supposed to mean or imply).’
Perhaps it implies that this gentleman was a virile, healthy, loving family man, who started a family after traditional age? He may not have had the financial ability prior to mid-life, or found the right partner in life.
Nontraditional timelines are so common these days!”
“… and he is 67!”
Amy Ostrower, a production accountant in the LA area commented that:
“Maybe some folks in Congress should read this, as they try to increase the retirement age in this age discriminating world. What will people do when there are no jobs for older workers? Will we starve on the street?
Between the big corporations and the GOP controlled government, we are being squeezed out of the work force.”
The Takeaway, reprinted from my prior post was “ don’t make ageist comments, or jokes, or references, even if you think they are funny or harmless, or that you can escape the consequences – it’s not worth it.”