After 50 Years Of Service, Man In His 70s Fired Without Severance Or Farewell: "Loyalty Means Nothing"

Years of dedication to a company do not always guarantee job security. Sometimes, a single corporate decision can abruptly end even the most enduring careers. A Reddit user recently recounted the story of his manager, a man in his early 70s who had spent more than half a century with the same organisation, only to be dismissed without a farewell ceremony or any severance pay. The incident has raised serious questions about how older employees are treated after decades of service, particularly when sudden termination leaves them financially vulnerable at a stage in life when stability is most critical.

According to the post, the manager had earned a strong reputation over his 50-plus years with the company for his fairness and integrity. For the Redditor, he was more than just a supervisor. He had personally hired him for a role that significantly improved his family's financial situation and had supported his professional development by arranging company-sponsored certifications that helped advance his career.

In early February, the veteran manager was placed on a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) following an acquisition by a multinational firm. The justification cited quality issues in the field -- areas that were largely outside his direct day-to-day responsibilities. Still, because the associated costs were formally attributed to his department, he became an easy target for accountability, the Redditor alleged. 

See the post here:

My boss was unjustly terminated and I WANT TO SCREAM
by u/VSauce3000 in antiwork

Soon after, the company terminated him, stating that he had failed to meet the PIP requirements. While he was not escorted out of the building, the dismissal was immediate. The Redditor acknowledged that leadership transitions are natural and that individuals in their 70s may eventually pass responsibilities to younger colleagues. However, many within the organization believed the PIP served primarily as documentation to justify termination without paying severance.

The user claimed the company had recently provided separation packages to employees with far shorter tenures during a previous round of layoffs, but not to this long-serving manager. He suggested the timing may have been calculated to reduce financial liability.

"Yes, he was older, and I do agree that people in their early 70s need to pass the torch to the younger generation. Part of our shit job market is because boomers refuse to leave their jobs, but there was a right way to do this termination. We all think they just wanted to save money by not giving him separation pay because of the 'paper trail PIP,' and I feel disgusted at my company. They gave people who worked here for 2 years a package in December but not him today. They knew they wanted him gone and could have done this during the layoff wave but wanted to save money by doing it later," the Reddit user said. 

The post gained traction online, sparking broader debate about corporate loyalty. Several users argued that companies operate on transactional terms and that long-term dedication is rarely reciprocated. Many advised the manager to seek an age discrimination attorney.

One user wrote, "I am so sorry to hear this. Hopefully, when Big Corpo starts asking "why isn't this getting done" or "how do we do XYZ," you and your co-workers can simply respond "I don't know. The guy you fired did all that. Ask him. Oh, that's right, you can't, he doesn't work here anymore."

Another commented, "Due to his age there is a good chance the corporation settles a lawsuit with him. Similar thing happened to my Step-Dad and it ended in a settlement. Your old boss needs a good employment attorney."

A third said, "In a capitalist society, every worker is a mercenary. This is a tough way to think about work, but it is the only way to think about work. Previous generations that ignored this get screwed over all the time, thinking their loyalty or work ethic matters. It doesn't. Stories like the OP are sad but common."