Whether or not this is true, lower-wage earners are more likely to be living “paycheck-to-paycheck” and have fewer resources to draw on than do higher paid employees. The average pay of just one middle management (male) employee can be equal to the costs of 4-10 lower wage workers.
I am not suggesting that higher paid workers be specifically targeted, only that the main consideration for letting someone go should be based on sound business decisions not on “political correctness” and unwritten industry employment practices. Your layoff goal should be to make decisions that will benefit your business.
As a business professional and CEO myself, I find the line of thinking that favors upper management in layoffs simply because they earn more money narrow-minded and offensive. And, it often does not even make the best business sense to retain higher-paid positions, or offer huge payouts when letting upper management go, and offering nothing to lower wage workers who are laid off.
Ask yourself if your goal is to cut overall employee costs or the overall number of employees. If your goal is to layoff as few employees as possible, while cutting the most expenses, the business fact is, retaining your lower-wage workers might make the most business sense.
One of the “perks” in company-wide layoffs is that you can use this as an opportunity to let go of upper management staff (or any other employees) that have not been performing. Because of the risk of lawsuits, many companies are hesitant to let certain employees go. In company-wide layoffs or job cuts, you can "clean house" and also let go other employees without having to fire them.
