@BlueFinch wrote:
Some feel that the culling of two of the older hosts, had nothing to do with age, as younger folks were fired, too. Well, I'm not convinced, because we've seen this in other work environments. Even at my former workplace.
I was privy, in my role, to some of the negative comments about our older staff. Yet, their work was top notch and they were always called on to train the new, young staff. Although they had earned their higher salaries, extra personal time off, etc., it became a burden for the bottom line.
With Q layoffs, the opportunity arose to lose two older hosts. It was likely financially beneficial for the Q. It's how things work these days. People no longer retire with accolades for a job well done and the gold watch. In fact, in some settings, some are escorted off with security, after their final bow.
The Q has had several new hires, in the last year, or two, but I haven't seen one YET that is a new hire, older senior, although they have an age range to 65. That's very telling.
And, all of this is why, I think Jane T works so hard to hold onto her spot, which she's often criticised for. You do what you have to do. If they want more animation and performance, it has to be given. It's a competitive role, which is why I hate to criticise any of hosts.
@BlueFinch I agree with everything you said, though it does not make me like Jane Treacy any better. It is a shame that this is the way it is these days. I think our parents' generation had it better in many respects. Pensions were much more prevalent. It seems they really benefited from the stock market (at least my parents and in-laws fared much better than we are). I have heard it from several sources that our generation (baby boomers) is not faring as well rinancially as our parents.
Always remember that you are absolutely unique. Just like everyone else. Margaret Mead