Anonymous wrote:tell him to keep smiling and act like a team player. moments like these, you can do a lot of damage to yourself.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:"Longevity" sounds like age discrimination unless there's some other explanation. How old is he and how old is the person who got it?
But to answer your question, I'd try to ramp up the happiness factor and quality of life at home, to make him feel that work is only one part of his life and other parts of his life are pretty great. I wouldn't give him advice unless he asks for it, and then the advice would be aimed at helping him make it work and keeping his job. Could he find another job or is his industry hard to find something these days?
Not necessarily. There are many companies and institutions that reward seniority within the company. If you are choosing between two candidates and both are qualified for the position, you choose the one who has been with the company longer as a reward for providing good service over many years. Even if the second candidate has more experience or skills, if the person with more seniority is qualified for the position, you give that person the job. You may not like it, but is a common convention. While it is nice to be a pure meritocracy, it isn't always in the best interests of the company itself. Having a good person who can do what you need, is devoted to your company and will stay through thick and thin is worth a lot more than a shining start who takes a job (or two) and then bails with that wonderful experience and skill set to another company who offers him/her a new dangling carrot or bigger salary. The key is that both have to be qualified for the job, even if not necessarily the best qualified for the job.
I think OP needs to clarify this in terms of longevity. The way I read it, it sounded like company picked the younger candidate because s/he would have longevity in terms of years of employment left in career.
Ah, I see how you read this. To me, it echo'ed the oft-repeated complaint that young, smart up-and-coming people don't get the good opportunities because of older people (often implied that the older peers don't deserve the opportunities) in their way.
Yes, OP needs to clarify the term longevity.
But does someone older and with more seniority always "deserve" the opportunities, simple because they've been there longest, even if a hard-working, ambitious up-and-coming is more highly-qualified? Is it really that black and white?
Anonymous wrote:BJs help.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:"Longevity" sounds like age discrimination unless there's some other explanation. How old is he and how old is the person who got it?
But to answer your question, I'd try to ramp up the happiness factor and quality of life at home, to make him feel that work is only one part of his life and other parts of his life are pretty great. I wouldn't give him advice unless he asks for it, and then the advice would be aimed at helping him make it work and keeping his job. Could he find another job or is his industry hard to find something these days?
Not necessarily. There are many companies and institutions that reward seniority within the company. If you are choosing between two candidates and both are qualified for the position, you choose the one who has been with the company longer as a reward for providing good service over many years. Even if the second candidate has more experience or skills, if the person with more seniority is qualified for the position, you give that person the job. You may not like it, but is a common convention. While it is nice to be a pure meritocracy, it isn't always in the best interests of the company itself. Having a good person who can do what you need, is devoted to your company and will stay through thick and thin is worth a lot more than a shining start who takes a job (or two) and then bails with that wonderful experience and skill set to another company who offers him/her a new dangling carrot or bigger salary. The key is that both have to be qualified for the job, even if not necessarily the best qualified for the job.
I think OP needs to clarify this in terms of longevity. The way I read it, it sounded like company picked the younger candidate because s/he would have longevity in terms of years of employment left in career.
Ah, I see how you read this. To me, it echo'ed the oft-repeated complaint that young, smart up-and-coming people don't get the good opportunities because of older people (often implied that the older peers don't deserve the opportunities) in their way.
Yes, OP needs to clarify the term longevity.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:"Longevity" sounds like age discrimination unless there's some other explanation. How old is he and how old is the person who got it?
But to answer your question, I'd try to ramp up the happiness factor and quality of life at home, to make him feel that work is only one part of his life and other parts of his life are pretty great. I wouldn't give him advice unless he asks for it, and then the advice would be aimed at helping him make it work and keeping his job. Could he find another job or is his industry hard to find something these days?
Not necessarily. There are many companies and institutions that reward seniority within the company. If you are choosing between two candidates and both are qualified for the position, you choose the one who has been with the company longer as a reward for providing good service over many years. Even if the second candidate has more experience or skills, if the person with more seniority is qualified for the position, you give that person the job. You may not like it, but is a common convention. While it is nice to be a pure meritocracy, it isn't always in the best interests of the company itself. Having a good person who can do what you need, is devoted to your company and will stay through thick and thin is worth a lot more than a shining start who takes a job (or two) and then bails with that wonderful experience and skill set to another company who offers him/her a new dangling carrot or bigger salary. The key is that both have to be qualified for the job, even if not necessarily the best qualified for the job.
I think OP needs to clarify this in terms of longevity. The way I read it, it sounded like company picked the younger candidate because s/he would have longevity in terms of years of employment left in career.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:"Longevity" sounds like age discrimination unless there's some other explanation. How old is he and how old is the person who got it?
But to answer your question, I'd try to ramp up the happiness factor and quality of life at home, to make him feel that work is only one part of his life and other parts of his life are pretty great. I wouldn't give him advice unless he asks for it, and then the advice would be aimed at helping him make it work and keeping his job. Could he find another job or is his industry hard to find something these days?
Not necessarily. There are many companies and institutions that reward seniority within the company. If you are choosing between two candidates and both are qualified for the position, you choose the one who has been with the company longer as a reward for providing good service over many years. Even if the second candidate has more experience or skills, if the person with more seniority is qualified for the position, you give that person the job. You may not like it, but is a common convention. While it is nice to be a pure meritocracy, it isn't always in the best interests of the company itself. Having a good person who can do what you need, is devoted to your company and will stay through thick and thin is worth a lot more than a shining start who takes a job (or two) and then bails with that wonderful experience and skill set to another company who offers him/her a new dangling carrot or bigger salary. The key is that both have to be qualified for the job, even if not necessarily the best qualified for the job.
Anonymous wrote:"Longevity" sounds like age discrimination unless there's some other explanation. How old is he and how old is the person who got it?
But to answer your question, I'd try to ramp up the happiness factor and quality of life at home, to make him feel that work is only one part of his life and other parts of his life are pretty great. I wouldn't give him advice unless he asks for it, and then the advice would be aimed at helping him make it work and keeping his job. Could he find another job or is his industry hard to find something these days?