I don't see this as a Federal issue as much as I see it as a State issue. Chances are you are going to be unemployed for a long stretch, especially if you are 4

I don't see this as a Federal issue as much as I see it as a State issue. Chances are you are going to be unemployed for a long stretch, especially if you are 40+. If you take the severance, and refuse to support them, they could technically take you to court and attempt to claw back the severance. In California, the courts would quash this, but in Georgia, the courts would likely favour the employer. Obviously, if you become employed in short order, then the needs of your employer are going to override the support requirement. I think that the bank has made a bet here that the people who were let go may not ever be employed again. Additionally, if the person is re-employed elsewhere, it's much more costly to fight a well-financed employer, vs. a poorly financed employee. This all stems from the fact the employer-employee relationship is not balanced with respect to labour laws grossly favouring the employer over the employees. The US is a third world country when it comes to labour law. Most of the governments in developed world would not tolerate this.