Ageism and salary

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[list]u

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are people over 40 being discriminated due to age or because of the perception that they are expensive to hire and retain.

For both reasons. Many incorrectly assume an older worker will not work as hard as a new graduate.

A new graduate can work 14 hour work days.
Older workers cannot compete with that. If they have kids, there is 0 chance they can compete with that.
So let's not put ourselves into the "work hard" route.

Ha ha you think 23 years olds work 14 hour days.

Ha ha you can’t hire top talent.

Top talent also knows which hedge funds put their workers in a basement without windows and lunch breaks and which ones pay the same $350k starting salary for a balanced workload. So you also can’t hire the very top if you need them to work 14 hours a day.

The true number of "top talent" grads is very, very rare. We're talking about mathematical prodigies, computer scientists, etc... Not quite Good Will Hunting, but up there. They get paid whatever they want and work whenever they want because they're just that rare. Top graduates from top universities are the next tier and are hired to do the work the true geniuses aren't doing. Their academic resumes and top universities look good to clients and potential clients (i.e. selling prestige or "nobody gets fired for hiring IBM" philosophy from 30-40 years ago). After that, compensation drops off significantly for new hires (if they can even get in the door).

When it comes to ageism and salary, it all comes down to what you can offer. If you have a unique skill set that a new grad can't replicate easily (genius), you can still command a high salary no matter how old you are. Typically this is accompanied by numerous career accomplishments and a top reputation (which a company is also buying). Likewise, if you have unique experience that is critical to the company's business plan (e.g., expertise in certain emerging markets that the company is targeting), your age won't matter to your compensation.

If you're not getting paid what you're worth (regardless of your age), you need to find a company where your intelligence, skill set, and experience will be valued more.

Agree, if you are not valued and you stick around, you are missing out on opportunities to build confidence and new skills, and it shows in the next interview.

Again, just being competent and doing your job well is not enough, you have to keep moving like a shark from job to job or battle your way up the ladder or else retire by 55

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[list]u

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are people over 40 being discriminated due to age or because of the perception that they are expensive to hire and retain.

For both reasons. Many incorrectly assume an older worker will not work as hard as a new graduate.

A new graduate can work 14 hour work days.
Older workers cannot compete with that. If they have kids, there is 0 chance they can compete with that.
So let's not put ourselves into the "work hard" route.

Ha ha you think 23 years olds work 14 hour days.

Ha ha you can’t hire top talent.

Top talent also knows which hedge funds put their workers in a basement without windows and lunch breaks and which ones pay the same $350k starting salary for a balanced workload. So you also can’t hire the very top if you need them to work 14 hours a day.

The true number of "top talent" grads is very, very rare. We're talking about mathematical prodigies, computer scientists, etc... Not quite Good Will Hunting, but up there. They get paid whatever they want and work whenever they want because they're just that rare. Top graduates from top universities are the next tier and are hired to do the work the true geniuses aren't doing. Their academic resumes and top universities look good to clients and potential clients (i.e. selling prestige or "nobody gets fired for hiring IBM" philosophy from 30-40 years ago). After that, compensation drops off significantly for new hires (if they can even get in the door).

When it comes to ageism and salary, it all comes down to what you can offer. If you have a unique skill set that a new grad can't replicate easily (genius), you can still command a high salary no matter how old you are. Typically this is accompanied by numerous career accomplishments and a top reputation (which a company is also buying). Likewise, if you have unique experience that is critical to the company's business plan (e.g., expertise in certain emerging markets that the company is targeting), your age won't matter to your compensation.

If you're not getting paid what you're worth (regardless of your age), you need to find a company where your intelligence, skill set, and experience will be valued more.

Agree, if you are not valued and you stick around, you are missing out on opportunities to build confidence and new skills, and it shows in the next interview.

Again, just being competent and doing your job well is not enough, you have to keep moving like a shark from job to job or battle your way up the ladder or else retire by 55

Not necessarily. You simply move to a government or other job where it's difficult to lay you off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[list]u

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are people over 40 being discriminated due to age or because of the perception that they are expensive to hire and retain.

For both reasons. Many incorrectly assume an older worker will not work as hard as a new graduate.

A new graduate can work 14 hour work days.
Older workers cannot compete with that. If they have kids, there is 0 chance they can compete with that.
So let's not put ourselves into the "work hard" route.

Ha ha you think 23 years olds work 14 hour days.

Ha ha you can’t hire top talent.

Top talent also knows which hedge funds put their workers in a basement without windows and lunch breaks and which ones pay the same $350k starting salary for a balanced workload. So you also can’t hire the very top if you need them to work 14 hours a day.

The true number of "top talent" grads is very, very rare. We're talking about mathematical prodigies, computer scientists, etc... Not quite Good Will Hunting, but up there. They get paid whatever they want and work whenever they want because they're just that rare. Top graduates from top universities are the next tier and are hired to do the work the true geniuses aren't doing. Their academic resumes and top universities look good to clients and potential clients (i.e. selling prestige or "nobody gets fired for hiring IBM" philosophy from 30-40 years ago). After that, compensation drops off significantly for new hires (if they can even get in the door).

When it comes to ageism and salary, it all comes down to what you can offer. If you have a unique skill set that a new grad can't replicate easily (genius), you can still command a high salary no matter how old you are. Typically this is accompanied by numerous career accomplishments and a top reputation (which a company is also buying). Likewise, if you have unique experience that is critical to the company's business plan (e.g., expertise in certain emerging markets that the company is targeting), your age won't matter to your compensation.

If you're not getting paid what you're worth (regardless of your age), you need to find a company where your intelligence, skill set, and experience will be valued more.[/quote]


Well, aren't you just the Oracle of Delphi, genius. Wonder where that might be for most of us?

[Anonymous]

Ageism, in the proper sense of the term to actively discriminate against older people, is very rare. More often than not, older people have obsolete skills, don’t adjust to the newer marketable skills, and cost more because they might demand a seniority pay

[Anonymous]

So we keep hearing most people will have to work until their 60s, and at the same time we have people who say you will be lucky to still be employed by 60

Thats a problem...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So we keep hearing most people will have to work until their 60s, and at the same time we have people who say you will be lucky to still be employed by 60

Thats a problem...

I think it's that we'll have to work until our 70s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[list]u

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are people over 40 being discriminated due to age or because of the perception that they are expensive to hire and retain.

For both reasons. Many incorrectly assume an older worker will not work as hard as a new graduate.

A new graduate can work 14 hour work days.
Older workers cannot compete with that. If they have kids, there is 0 chance they can compete with that.
So let's not put ourselves into the "work hard" route.

Ha ha you think 23 years olds work 14 hour days.

Ha ha you can’t hire top talent.

Top talent also knows which hedge funds put their workers in a basement without windows and lunch breaks and which ones pay the same $350k starting salary for a balanced workload. So you also can’t hire the very top if you need them to work 14 hours a day.

The true number of "top talent" grads is very, very rare. We're talking about mathematical prodigies, computer scientists, etc... Not quite Good Will Hunting, but up there. They get paid whatever they want and work whenever they want because they're just that rare. Top graduates from top universities are the next tier and are hired to do the work the true geniuses aren't doing. Their academic resumes and top universities look good to clients and potential clients (i.e. selling prestige or "nobody gets fired for hiring IBM" philosophy from 30-40 years ago). After that, compensation drops off significantly for new hires (if they can even get in the door).

When it comes to ageism and salary, it all comes down to what you can offer. If you have a unique skill set that a new grad can't replicate easily (genius), you can still command a high salary no matter how old you are. Typically this is accompanied by numerous career accomplishments and a top reputation (which a company is also buying). Likewise, if you have unique experience that is critical to the company's business plan (e.g., expertise in certain emerging markets that the company is targeting), your age won't matter to your compensation.

If you're not getting paid what you're worth (regardless of your age), you need to find a company where your intelligence, skill set, and experience will be valued more.

Agree, if you are not valued and you stick around, you are missing out on opportunities to build confidence and new skills, and it shows in the next interview.

Again, just being competent and doing your job well is not enough, you have to keep moving like a shark from job to job or battle your way up the ladder or else retire by 55

Not necessarily. You simply move to a government or other job where it's difficult to lay you off.

What jobs are difficult to be laid off? Everyone over 55 can't get the same job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So we keep hearing most people will have to work until their 60s, and at the same time we have people who say you will be lucky to still be employed by 60

Thats a problem...

You missed a post I guess, its not that you cant be employed, you just won't be employed as a professional. Lots of 50 and 60 years working as gig workers, home health care workers, hotel maids, walmart greeters, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So we keep hearing most people will have to work until their 60s, and at the same time we have people who say you will be lucky to still be employed by 60

Thats a problem...

You missed a post I guess, its not that you cant be employed, you just won't be employed as a professional. Lots of 50 and 60 years working as gig workers, home health care workers, hotel maids, walmart greeters, etc.

That's terrible. Is that the future path of the American worker? Professional before 50 and hig worker post 50...I really hope that isn't our future

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So we keep hearing most people will have to work until their 60s, and at the same time we have people who say you will be lucky to still be employed by 60

Thats a problem...

You missed a post I guess, its not that you cant be employed, you just won't be employed as a professional. Lots of 50 and 60 years working as gig workers, home health care workers, hotel maids, walmart greeters, etc.

That's terrible. Is that the future path of the American worker? Professional before 50 and hig worker post 50...I really hope that isn't our future

That seems to be the consensus on many threads. You need to save and invest aggressively, to plan to be laid off around 55 and not find professional work again. Alternatively, you need to advance to leadership and be an executive where age is less of a liability. Of course its a pyramid of musical chairs, there are not enough leadership positions for everyone to move up, so most workers need to make other plans -- not to mention majority of workers dont have the opportunity for a variety of reasons (including prejudice and favoritism, not just skills and aptitude)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So we keep hearing most people will have to work until their 60s, and at the same time we have people who say you will be lucky to still be employed by 60

Thats a problem...

You missed a post I guess, its not that you cant be employed, you just won't be employed as a professional. Lots of 50 and 60 years working as gig workers, home health care workers, hotel maids, walmart greeters, etc.

That's terrible. Is that the future path of the American worker? Professional before 50 and hig worker post 50...I really hope that isn't our future

It depends on the profession. As a CPA and tax consultant, I'm sure I can keep working for as many years as my health would allow me to. My relative worked as an auditor in a country where ageism is much worse than here. Even in her country, when she was 80 and retired, her ex-clients still called her and asked to assist on various special projects.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So we keep hearing most people will have to work until their 60s, and at the same time we have people who say you will be lucky to still be employed by 60

Thats a problem...

You missed a post I guess, its not that you cant be employed, you just won't be employed as a professional. Lots of 50 and 60 years working as gig workers, home health care workers, hotel maids, walmart greeters, etc.

I am cool with that. Expect healthy 80 year old me to greet you at Costco in 40 years!

[Anonymous]

I'm glad I never found this thread before I got my data analyst job at 55 after being off the job market for 5 years else I would have been discouraged to say the least

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm glad I never found this thread before I got my data analyst job at 55 after being off the job market for 5 years else I would have been discouraged to say the least

You got laid off at 50 and finally landed a job at 55? What kind of company?