What's all this ageism talk??
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Maybe this should be in the Over 50 section but I really don't want to believe that once you hit the 5-0 mark your job prospects dwindle  ....I see that comment more than I'd like to on this board so what gives, is it REALLY that bad for those of us job seeking jobs at this age??
|
Anonymous
|
The people I have an issue with over 50 at my work are the ones who have been at my workplace for 20-30+ years, refuse to change, are unhappy but won't look elsewhere. Still griping about how they were passed over for a promotion (even when they were less qualified) or about that time they had a better office or a secretary.
The 50 year olds we hire are great. They're forward thinking, and are mostly up to date on industry and software. |
Anonymous
|
forget about getting a job in tech on the west coast if you are over 35 and it isn't a promotion.
haha 50? no, 35 is the new cut off point. consulting, tech, finance - i notice that that is the age where people are able to get to the next level or they kind of drop off. |
Anonymous
| It's true, this isn't something specific to this board. |
Anonymous
|
Ageism in tech is real, but you don't see that as much in DC.
A lot of what gets called ageism here is really hesitance to hire people with insufficient experience given their age. Sorry, but if you're over 50 and haven't advanced past lower-mid level, people are going to look at you funny. It doesn't matter that the 29 year old has the same experience as you. You've had a lot more time to advance yet haven't, and that sets off alarms. |
Anonymous
I don't think you see ageism much in the federal government, but good luck getting a job in a major corporation after 45. I remember looking for a new job at age 37 and getting interviews for 4 out of every 5 applications - and found a job within three weeks. The next time I was looking, at age 46, I applied to about 100 jobs and received only three interviews over the course of 8 months. The worst is if you lose your job in your late 50s, often as part of a reorganization in which they get rid of the older, more expensive employees. Welcome to to early retirement. |
Anonymous
Agree that ageism in the private sector is a problem. In general, tech changes constantly and frankly, younger people in their 20's and 30's learn faster and learn what's new and in demand better. They've grown up with more of the technology that is important. However, if you work in certain public sectors, then being older can be an asset. I just passed my 25th anniversary at my federal agency and frankly there is enough that is unique about my agency and how things are done, that I and many of my peers are in high demand because we have institutional knowledge about how to get things done, quickly and still adhere to the myriad of agency and federal policies, practices and requirements. I was forced out of my last job due to some specific localized politics and had a job in about 2 weeks that included a raise and better working conditions, so I landed easily on my feet. I beat out several other candidates for this position, all of whom were younger than me because specifically I've been working in the IT security environment of the agency for several years, know what this group needs to do and could basically start with almost no ramp up time. My security credentials with the agency just had to be reapplied for under the new job and were approved in days when someone from outside the agency might have needed 2-3 weeks to get approvals. And I have connections throughout the agency to get work done quickly because I've been doing this for so long. The other system administrators and IT specialists from outside would not have been able to accomplish all that I accomplished in the first 4 weeks because of the ramp up time. Some other internal candidates might have also had a short ramp-up time, but the job said they liked all the institutional knowledge and experience that I brought. I had my last job for 4 years and was in my late 40s when I got that job. And again, I got the job because of my knowledge and experience and the fact that I didn't need to ramp up. In that job, I was also very productive my first several weeks, much more so that outsiders could have been in the same time frame. |
Anonymous
Ah yes silicon valley, if you aren't a millionaire by 40 obviously you are a loser. In any complicated enterprise, experienced level headed employees have value even if they aren't in upper management. It's not just knowing the syntax for the language du juor. Algorithms don't change that fast, and good design does often come from experience. |
Anonymous
|
Some long-heard concerns and biases with older hires:
- will be retiring sooner (i.e., if we hire someone who is, say, 57, they realistically may be planning to retire within 5 years. If we only get authority and budget to fill a slot intermittently, the HR office may rather hire the younger person. - getting along with peers; working well together on teams; dealing with a manager who may be 10 or more years younger. The average age of employees in an industry and even at certain companies is public info -- better odds at overcoming this bias in companies with an older workforce. - set in their ways. E.g., uncomfortable with tech changes; dislike using IT resources or new resources, even if it would increase efficiency. - not likely to be as hard-working. Is that 58 year old going to work until 2am or come in on the weekend to work on an urgent project with the team? (Of course, some will say the 58-year old is perhaps more willing to put in the extra hours than the millennial, and others will say the 58-year old has the benefit of experience and so can be more efficient.) Where I work in the legal field, there are plenty of older employees (attorneys) in their 50s and early 60s (some even older too). Though there are exceptions, by and large, they are the best, most respected employees -- they have far more experience and expertise than the younger set. |
Anonymous
| I'm in the nonprofit world, and in our particular niche, employees skew older. Our average age at my org is 57. What is becoming a problem is that, at a certain point, the 65 year old with 40 years of experience is not worth the premium we pay vs. a 50 year old with 25 years of experience. And that's the kind of tradeoff, because like I said, we skew older. |
Anonymous
This is definitely true. I work as a Gov't Contractor. I am in my mid 50's. It is not that we fire people that don't move up as much as we promote people who are able to grow into the positions. When we have down cycles -- no billable work -- there are layoffs. The layoffs typically focus on the people that can not help get in new work. People that have a track record, well they are promoted (not necessarily to a different role, but higher salary). |
Anonymous
|
Just look at all those millennial vs. boomer threads on DCUM to see the animosity toward anyone over 50. It is sad that this is a generational battle.
I'm on the cusp between boomer and Gen X and still have to work 12+ more years. I'm just hoping I can hang onto the job I'm in since I am worried about the job market for someone at my "advanced" age. |
Anonymous
+2 This happened to my mom - let go from an agency at 55 and now consulting/gigging/trying to find work. It's really screwed up. |
Anonymous
| It's true in the legal profession, especially if you are female. |
Anonymous
+ 3 a friend of mine was let go at age 57, in April 2016. She still hasn't found a job, and she's borrowing from her 401k to stay afloat. Bad situation. |