Anonymous wrote:I think older workers need to consider moving to easier jobs and lower salaries. It’s not always a continuous upward path of improvement for a worker. Sometimes you’re not as good as you were twenty years ago.

Also your health costs rise sharply as you get older. A lot.

And sometimes you're not as amazing as you think you are at 28.

Anonymous wrote:Why are there these periodic random posts about ageism in this forum, that seem to be from the same person, with little detail about any actual case?

Right now, being an older worker is an advantage. It's young people who are having a hard time.

Clearly not the same person. This is a major issue in our workforce. This has never occurred to you? Medicare doesn’t kick in until 65 but corporate America doesn’t keep most workers around past mid 50s. And yes, there are exceptions but not that many. So there is a gap for the workforce. It’s a known issue.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are there these periodic random posts about ageism in this forum, that seem to be from the same person, with little detail about any actual case?

Right now, being an older worker is an advantage. It's young people who are having a hard time.

It’s hard to get your first job out of college, but after that it’s much easier in your 20s and 30s. 40s seems okay, but then 50+ is a bloodbath. I’m in my early thirties and regularly got interviews after I was laid off but I see former older colleagues 45+ really struggle on the job market. Six months emergency fund is not enough, I realized if you’re older, you need one year.

Exactly. 30s is the easiest time. 40s is tougher but still doable. 50s- very very hard and I have seen it over and over ‘she’s too experienced and won’t be happy in this role’.

Anonymous wrote:Every person over 50 who has been laid off or fired at my company (not is not lot number wise, but it has been EVERY person) tries to claim ageism. It's never been ageism. We have documented the reasons, and employ people well into their 70s in some cases.

We've also fired off plenty of young people. We follow the same procedure no matter the age, and comply with all laws.

Unless you literally work in HR, you are full of crap and just being nasty. As someone who actually knows what happens in RIF, I can say that layoffs of older workers are justified because they often garner higher salaries but if you think that is the end of it, you are ignorant. The unemployment stats cited above do not include the many older workers who were not able to find other jobs once laid off and so are ‘retired’ or remain underemployed. Educate yourself. And btw you will be there soon enough.

OP, it’s time to reskill and move if needed, just like the coal miners in WVA.

Anonymous wrote:I think older workers need to consider moving to easier jobs and lower salaries. It’s not always a continuous upward path of improvement for a worker. Sometimes you’re not as good as you were twenty years ago.

Also your health costs rise sharply as you get older. A lot.

+1000. Gotta make necessary adjustments to survive. Law of nature, survival. Not any different with careers imo.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are there these periodic random posts about ageism in this forum, that seem to be from the same person, with little detail about any actual case?

Right now, being an older worker is an advantage. It's young people who are having a hard time.

Why would you think that there's only one person experiencing this, when every day brings another set of statistics about the employment bloodbath older, more skilled workers are experiencing? Don't you read the papers? Sure, it's ok if you have a job... for now. But if you get laid off, as so many are, your chances of finding another one are abysmal.

I'm squirreling away every cent I can in anticipating of getting canned bc of AI, high salary, etc.

Employment bloodbath? The current UR for mid career workers is 3%.

Trying to deny reality?

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/after-the-fork-greater-washington-leads-the-nation-in-regional-job-loss/

https://does.dc.gov/release/washington-metro%E2%80%99s-unemployment-rate-52-percent

No. DC is one of 50 major job markets in the country. It was the worst performing job market in the country last year. We all know what happened. Move somewhere else; plenty of jobs available.

The younger workers calling for the olds to beat and step down it are making it easy to not want to back maternity/paternity leave, working from home, and other family friendly policies that primarily benefit younger workers with younger families. Suck it up losers, right?

Anonymous wrote:Why are there these periodic random posts about ageism in this forum, that seem to be from the same person, with little detail about any actual case?

Right now, being an older worker is an advantage. It's young people who are having a hard time.

It’s hard to get your first job out of college, but after that it’s much easier in your 20s and 30s. 40s seems okay, but then 50+ is a bloodbath. I’m in my early thirties and regularly got interviews after I was laid off but I see former older colleagues 45+ really struggle on the job market. Six months emergency fund is not enough, I realized if you’re older, you need one year.

Every person over 50 who has been laid off or fired at my company (not is not lot number wise, but it has been EVERY person) tries to claim ageism. It's never been ageism. We have documented the reasons, and employ people well into their 70s in some cases.

We've also fired off plenty of young people. We follow the same procedure no matter the age, and comply with all laws.

Anonymous wrote:I think older workers need to consider moving to easier jobs and lower salaries. It’s not always a continuous upward path of improvement for a worker. Sometimes you’re not as good as you were twenty years ago.

Also your health costs rise sharply as you get older. A lot.

So as your costs increase: health care usually with kids in college you want older workers to take a step back? Maybe younger workers should just bide their time and wait until its their turn.

Anonymous wrote:I think older workers need to consider moving to easier jobs and lower salaries. It’s not always a continuous upward path of improvement for a worker. Sometimes you’re not as good as you were twenty years ago.

Also your health costs rise sharply as you get older. A lot.

And sometimes companies just do not want to hire older workers because they don't want to pay for health care. The same companies will cut you loose at a certain age pp.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are there these periodic random posts about ageism in this forum, that seem to be from the same person, with little detail about any actual case?

Right now, being an older worker is an advantage. It's young people who are having a hard time.

Why would you think that there's only one person experiencing this, when every day brings another set of statistics about the employment bloodbath older, more skilled workers are experiencing? Don't you read the papers? Sure, it's ok if you have a job... for now. But if you get laid off, as so many are, your chances of finding another one are abysmal.

I'm squirreling away every cent I can in anticipating of getting canned bc of AI, high salary, etc.

Employment bloodbath? The current UR for mid career workers is 3%.

Trying to deny reality?

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/after-the-fork-greater-washington-leads-the-nation-in-regional-job-loss/

https://does.dc.gov/release/washington-metro%E2%80%99s-unemployment-rate-52-percent

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are there these periodic random posts about ageism in this forum, that seem to be from the same person, with little detail about any actual case?

Right now, being an older worker is an advantage. It's young people who are having a hard time.

Why would you think that there's only one person experiencing this, when every day brings another set of statistics about the employment bloodbath older, more skilled workers are experiencing? Don't you read the papers? Sure, it's ok if you have a job... for now. But if you get laid off, as so many are, your chances of finding another one are abysmal.

I'm squirreling away every cent I can in anticipating of getting canned bc of AI, high salary, etc.

Employment bloodbath? The current UR for mid career workers is 3%.

Anonymous wrote:I think older workers need to consider moving to easier jobs and lower salaries. It’s not always a continuous upward path of improvement for a worker. Sometimes you’re not as good as you were twenty years ago.

Also your health costs rise sharply as you get older. A lot.

How old are you?