Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:We just interviewed a 50ish woman for a position that currently is filled by people in their 20’s. She was stressing out big time about how to use the computer software, her current job isn’t teaching her etc. This is why we are reluctant to hire older employees. She could be good at her healthcare job but can’t handle the basic computer skills.
This is very true. I have a direct report in her 60s, and anytime an email is sent out about a new website or Teams group that our leadership wants us to join, my direct report expects me to setup time and walk her through it step by steps, even though detailed sign up instructions are included in the email, and she could easily read and follow them by herself. It is a big waste of my time.
She also calls me for anything even remotely different than her typical processes, and rants as if it’s the end of the world, when it’s no big deal. And she goes on in circles for 30 minutes. Experiences like this are what make hiring managers reluctant to hire older workers. We don’t have the time to babysit and hand hold people for routine mundane tasks.
Older workers definitely bring value, but if the costs of time and effort outweigh the value, then leaders look to younger talent that doesn’t require as much handholding. Older workers in the workforce are still competing against younger talent with fresher skillsets, so the onus is on them to stay on top of their game if they want to be seriously considered in hiring decisions.