S/O Ageism-proof professions/industries?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The least ageist occupations are in industrys with a low rate of change and where experience increases an employee's value, particularly those which require a high degree of craftsmanship.

Examples would include the following: tailor/dressmaker, watch maker/repairman, cabinet maker/carpenter, typesetter/printer, artist, interpreter/translator.

Government (and, to some extent, education) could be included, too, but that is more because of the difficulty of firing anyone.

Another possibility would be in professions where few or no young people have the necessary skills to maintain critical systems. For example, COBOL programmers.

Watchmaker? Typesetter? COBOL? Those are only protected from ageism because those are dying jobs and all the people who ever did it have retired and no one is interested in that work.

Amused at translator — AI will eliminate that in a generation.

Artist? Okay? That’s a hobby not a career for 99% of people.

[Anonymous]

Why do you find the need to be contemptuous of real jobs that employ real people?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole ageism stuff is really depressing folks. Not everyone has had the luck despite hard work of a very high paying job by 50. Now if these people are likely going to be laid off and never be able to find another professional job again after 60 then this country is in serious trouble.

It is! And I'm wondering why all the attention now??!!!

Because BOOMERS never experienced Ageism? They were worshiped for their wisdom and knowledge and dug in and stayed in their senior roles as long as they wanted - 60s, 70s.

Because GEN X is now the ones aging and we always get the shaft? What else is new.

Because millennials (the younger ones anyways; the older ones are in the same boat as genx) are now hiring managers and they are ageist?

I hate generational generalizations, but this one is truly generational and I'd like to understand.

GenX rarely gets to advance to leadership because of toadstool Boomers. So hitting 50s and 60s — C-YA!

What is a toadstool boomer?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole ageism stuff is really depressing folks. Not everyone has had the luck despite hard work of a very high paying job by 50. Now if these people are likely going to be laid off and never be able to find another professional job again after 60 then this country is in serious trouble.

It is! And I'm wondering why all the attention now??!!!

Because BOOMERS never experienced Ageism? They were worshiped for their wisdom and knowledge and dug in and stayed in their senior roles as long as they wanted - 60s, 70s.

Because GEN X is now the ones aging and we always get the shaft? What else is new.

Because millennials (the younger ones anyways; the older ones are in the same boat as genx) are now hiring managers and they are ageist?

I hate generational generalizations, but this one is truly generational and I'd like to understand.

GenX rarely gets to advance to leadership because of toadstool Boomers. So hitting 50s and 60s — C-YA!

What is a toadstool boomer?

Sit and grow in place like fungus

[Anonymous]

Trade associations. In general most active members are business.owmers or very senior, at their company thus often no younger than 45,/50 so being that age and older, you fit in well with them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Trade associations. In general most active members are business.owmers or very senior, at their company thus often no younger than 45,/50 so being that age and older, you fit in well with them.

So become executive level, then join the club job. I mean we already knew executives were safe, so a job recruiting from them is hardly a reach.

Can a line employee get into trade association?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What an onslaught of threads regarding aging in the workplace! That said, what are some industries - and professions within these industries - that are relatively non-ageist? Which are the worst?

Worst
Fashion/art/design/music/acting
Big/commercial tech
Consulting
Any physical labor - obviously. The body can only withstand so much abuse for so long.

Best
Government - as has been said on this site ad nauseum
Healthcare, including providers (although it can be physically/emotionally demanding)
Law
Education, including higher education

These are just my thoughts/impressions not based on any data. Interested to hear what others think.

There is tons of ageism in law, at least corporate law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trade associations. In general most active members are business.owmers or very senior, at their company thus often no younger than 45,/50 so being that age and older, you fit in well with them.

So become executive level, then join the club job. I mean we already knew executives were safe, so a job recruiting from them is hardly a reach.

Can a line employee get into trade association?

They have roles for many fits: advocacy, IT, finance, accounting, event planning, policy.,legal. To be honest, many often skew on the older side because of their experience and ability to work with their older peers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This whole ageism stuff is really depressing folks. Not everyone has had the luck despite hard work of a very high paying job by 50. Now if these people are likely going to be laid off and never be able to find another professional job again after 60 then this country is in serious trouble.

Yep. We are supposed to work to 65 but experience ageism starting at 40 or 50.

My advice to my kids will be to save as much as possible tomorrow for the ageism.

And it’s really crazy because the ageist people will one day be old!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole ageism stuff is really depressing folks. Not everyone has had the luck despite hard work of a very high paying job by 50. Now if these people are likely going to be laid off and never be able to find another professional job again after 60 then this country is in serious trouble.

Yep. We are supposed to work to 65 but experience ageism starting at 40 or 50.

My advice to my kids will be to save as much as possible tomorrow for the ageism.

And it’s really crazy because the ageist people will one day be old!

The ageist ones tend to be paid well so assume they will retire by 50, especially since they showed leadership in downsizing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm in healthcare. We hired a 70 something in April at top pay and she just left because she was poached for even higher pay by another hospital.

Nurse?

No, I'm in laboratory science/blood bank. As long as you can keep up with the ever-changing software and your eyes are good enough to look through a microscope we don't care how old you are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:GenX is about to become Madame President.

GenXer woman here. Sometimes we really need to stop whining.

It's an up or out system. We need to move on. Keep moving and progressing. Let the young ones take our jobs

I wanted to start my own business in my 30s. Here's my chance.

I just can't deal with corporate BS anymore.

I don’t know if she is gen x? Is she? I though that kind of started in 1968or so

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm in healthcare. We hired a 70 something in April at top pay and she just left because she was poached for even higher pay by another hospital.

Nurse?

NP but this is a no-go in government healthcare and or health admin - increasingly a younger person’s field due to technology and even physical requirements. (Former CPR instructor and too many can’t get on the ground to perform chest compressions due to obesity/joint pain/surgeries/health conditions)

I'm an MD and a federal employee, and I'd disagree completely. We are hiring good candidates, and you are suggesting that we not do so because of disability? Multiple problems with that.

1. First, it's illegal. The federal government toes that line very tightly.
2. How much of our time do you think is spent doing chest compressions? Anyone who is trained can compress (nurses, CNAs, med techs, whomever), or you can use a compression device -- I dislike them, but always an option. But you need a provider to run the code, and they are not supposed to be doing the direct work -- they are supposed to be looking at big picture and directing the work.
3. Most of the work that providers do is cerebral. That's making clinical decisions and, if needed, running codes. The money we make for the institution and the critical services we provide are not dependent on being able to get on and off the floor quickly. That would be so little of our job, and it can be done by others.
4. Lastly, we are still hiring people in their 60s and 70s, actively. We have people -- very good docs -- who were are hoping don't reture soon, even though they are past the age they could.

+1

I know lots of nurses who really don’t do the physical labor of the job anymore. Some work in schools, one works from home interpreting medical tests (I’m not a nurse so this is what I think she does).

I also feel like hospitals are always desperate for per diem workers so some I know work when they want. But can always find work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm in healthcare. We hired a 70 something in April at top pay and she just left because she was poached for even higher pay by another hospital.

Nurse?

NP but this is a no-go in government healthcare and or health admin - increasingly a younger person’s field due to technology and even physical requirements. (Former CPR instructor and too many can’t get on the ground to perform chest compressions due to obesity/joint pain/surgeries/health conditions)

I'm an MD and a federal employee, and I'd disagree completely. We are hiring good candidates, and you are suggesting that we not do so because of disability? Multiple problems with that.

1. First, it's illegal. The federal government toes that line very tightly.
2. How much of our time do you think is spent doing chest compressions? Anyone who is trained can compress (nurses, CNAs, med techs, whomever), or you can use a compression device -- I dislike them, but always an option. But you need a provider to run the code, and they are not supposed to be doing the direct work -- they are supposed to be looking at big picture and directing the work.
3. Most of the work that providers do is cerebral. That's making clinical decisions and, if needed, running codes. The money we make for the institution and the critical services we provide are not dependent on being able to get on and off the floor quickly. That would be so little of our job, and it can be done by others.
4. Lastly, we are still hiring people in their 60s and 70s, actively. We have people -- very good docs -- who were are hoping don't reture soon, even though they are past the age they could.

+1

I know lots of nurses who really don’t do the physical labor of the job anymore. Some work in schools, one works from home interpreting medical tests (I’m not a nurse so this is what I think she does).

I also feel like hospitals are always desperate for per diem workers so some I know work when they want. But can always find work.

Nurses will always, always have a job. I work in healthcare admin and we throw so much money at sign on bonuses (although we don’t do retention bonuses…which I personally think is not great but I understand the rationale). In any case, we are desperate for nursing staff.

That said, nurses and nursing can be pretty rough. The saying is that “nurses eat their young.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe surprising but I believe law is very ageist

My former biglaw firm doesn’t seem to enforce the mandatory retirement age. Those geezers stay forever.