Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New Evidence of Age Bias in Hiring, and a Push to Fight It

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 451 posts

Re: New Evidence of Age Bias in Hiring, and a Push to Fight It

#121

Post by 4ntonius8lock »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #113
4ntonius8lock wrote: post #108

Odd that in an article about age based discrimination, they don't mention that there is also age based discrimination against young people, for example, getting into C level positions in the non-tech world. When I used to be employed by other people, I specifically remember being told "we can't really promote you to director, you are too young". I wasn't inexperienced (I started working full time at 16). It wasn't th…

> I wasn't inexperienced (I started working full time at 16). It wasn't that I hadn't earned it. Above middle management, political calculus dominates meritocratic concerns (in the short term). This is true in any organisation because we’re primates. You won’t “earn” your way into senior management and you won’t help your case by informally complaining. If you want a promotion you need leverage. Relationships with (p…

I was specifically told by the CEO I would be considered for the position if not for my age. I earned my place by proving my value and reliability for years.

Explaining why we discriminate is not helping those who want to see this stopped.

It's like explaining why old people get discriminated upon. Yes, there is a logic to it. No, it is not acceptable. Yes, that is how it works now. No, that is not how it will always work, humans are constantly evolving. The way you talk sounds defeatist. It sounds a lot like the old 'thats just the way it is' when people talk about change.

BTW, I totally agree with you as to the fact that the logic you are talking about is correct in that is how things work NOW. Though we have been overcoming this. Or else there wouldn't be black or women in any boardroom. Change is happening. I don't believe those who say it will always be the same.

P.S. this happened to me more than 10 years ago. I ended up quitting and since spent the majority of my life working for myself.

Re: New Evidence of Age Bias in Hiring, and a Push to Fight It

#122

Post by EliRivers »

WalterBright wrote: post #41
jobigoud wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Older workers = more opinionated. Younger workers = more malleable. At least that's what management often think.

I was equally opinionated as a younger man, though I was wrong a lot more often :-)

Yes, well, you're Walter Bright, though.

The only name in this thread I recognise (although, to be fair, most people aren't using their real names), and as an aside, a name that a seventy-something year-old Vietnam veteran running an apartment full of automated test machines in Greater Tokyo was surprised I dropped when he told me that the Digital Mars compiler was testing well. That compiler was always well behaved. I wonder if his age would have been an impediment to finding work at in the US; in Tokyo he suffered only the problem of being a foreigner.

Re: New Evidence of Age Bias in Hiring, and a Push to Fight It

#123

Post by marcinzm »

4ntonius8lock wrote: post #108

Odd that in an article about age based discrimination, they don't mention that there is also age based discrimination against young people, for example, getting into C level positions in the non-tech world. When I used to be employed by other people, I specifically remember being told "we can't really promote you to director, you are too young". I wasn't inexperienced (I started working full time at 16). It wasn't th…

>It wasn't that I hadn't earned it. It was because the old farts on the board wouldn't take me seriously.

Except getting them to take you seriously is part of your job in upper management. Age matters but your view of them as old farts makes me suspect you did nothing to gain their favor in other ways. As someone else said, those ways have little to do with job based merit.

Re: New Evidence of Age Bias in Hiring, and a Push to Fight It

#124

Post by uoaei »

wellpast wrote: post #76
mykowebhn wrote: post #33

I'm 48, on the West Coast, and recently finished interviewing, receiving multiple offers. I did 250 Leetcode problems, practiced System Design, and Behavioral. In the end, I found doing 250 Leetcode was probably overkill, but it definitely helped. This will probably get me severely down-voted, and I do understand the antipathy toward having to Leetcode, but the way I see it is that I'm really lucky. I get to sit on m…

I love this. I think evaluating/interviewing is hard, should be much more about experience and past projects but so what if the industry has got it wrong, so what you have to study a little to get the job? The world is what it is. I think criticizing this from a ‘we could do better as an industry’ perspective is productive but from a personal perspective — today — what is going to get you hired is playing the game as…

"I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the software engineer's great stumbling block in his stride toward hiring fairness is not the Genius Asshole or the Bullshitter Who Can't Code, but the anonymous internet commenter, who is more devoted to 'pragmatism' than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of reform to a positive peace which is the presence of fairness..."

Re: New Evidence of Age Bias in Hiring, and a Push to Fight It

#125

Post by b212 »

adventured wrote: post #98
drchewbacca wrote: post #50

One thing I'm a bit confused about is why doesn't salary bidding fix this? For example if a 25 yr old coder is $X per year surely, even if you have terrible age discrimination, there must be some salary level, say $0.75*X where having the older worker is preferable? Is it that older workers are much more expensive and are bidding themselves out the market? Is it that people value youth so much they will pay a 3x mark…

> Is it that older workers are much more expensive and are bidding themselves out the market? On one cost issue. Let's say you're in a city other than SEA, LA, SF, NYC and Boston. A 55 year old on a good insurance plan will often cost you anywhere from $6,000 to $10,000 more per year in healthcare benefits versus a 20-25 year old. The cost of a 45 year old employee further increases with time due to that (over 10 yea…

> A 55 year old on a good insurance plan will often cost you anywhere from $6,000 to $10,000 more per year in healthcare benefits versus a 20-25 year old.

Jesus freaking christ I never realised that being European. This is a game changer for older folks, I guess I'm out of luck if I ever want to move to the US and I'm already over 30, ha :/

Re: New Evidence of Age Bias in Hiring, and a Push to Fight It

#126

Post by bonestamp2 »

mykowebhn wrote: post #33

I'm 48, on the West Coast, and recently finished interviewing, receiving multiple offers. I did 250 Leetcode problems, practiced System Design, and Behavioral. In the end, I found doing 250 Leetcode was probably overkill, but it definitely helped. This will probably get me severely down-voted, and I do understand the antipathy toward having to Leetcode, but the way I see it is that I'm really lucky. I get to sit on m…

Assuming your profile is anonymous, can you tell us what industry you're in and what your offers were paying? Just trying to get a comparison for what myself (and others) can expect.

Re: New Evidence of Age Bias in Hiring, and a Push to Fight It

#127

Post by JumpCrisscross »

4ntonius8lock wrote: post #121
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I wasn't inexperienced (I started working full time at 16). It wasn't that I hadn't earned it. Above middle management, political calculus dominates meritocratic concerns (in the short term). This is true in any organisation because we’re primates. You won’t “earn” your way into senior management and you won’t help your case by informally complaining. If you want a promotion you need leverage. Relationships with (p…

I was specifically told by the CEO I would be considered for the position if not for my age. I earned my place by proving my value and reliability for years. Explaining why we discriminate is not helping those who want to see this stopped. It's like explaining why old people get discriminated upon. Yes, there is a logic to it. No, it is not acceptable. Yes, that is how it works now. No, that is not how it will always…

> was specifically told by the CEO I would be considered for the position if not for my age

I’ve been told this and it sucks. I made the mistake of trying grovelling and complaining. Both failed for, with hindsight, fundamental reasons.

If you’re ambitious, you have to develop a political sense. Keeping stock of leverage relationships is key. If you lack leverage, you can’t make demands.

If you’d represented revenue and threatened to take it elsewhere, the CEO or Board may have overcome their biases. (If not, you’d get what you wanted by effecting the threat.)

Re: New Evidence of Age Bias in Hiring, and a Push to Fight It

#128

Post by bonestamp2 »

epc wrote: post #25

Am 52. Served as IBM’s “corporate webmaster” in the 1990s (sort of like being CTO but without the cool executive hat). Corporate Webmaster was responsible for all technical operations of IBM’s corporate sites (from systems administration to application development), as well as theoretically responsible for all IBM web sites. As well as serve as the single point of contact inside IBM for anything “internet”. Have been…

What area are you working in now?

Re: New Evidence of Age Bias in Hiring, and a Push to Fight It

#129

Post by HillaryBriss »

jobigoud wrote: post #20
drivingmenuts wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Older workers = more experience = higher pay. Younger workers = less experience = lower pay. Older workers also cost more in insurance premiums, have more "life events" that pull them away from work and are potentially harder to sell on corporate environment.

Older workers = more opinionated. Younger workers = more malleable. At least that's what management often think.

other HN threads have debated heavily about why the startup industry is centered in SV, given its ultra high cost of living and labor. and yet, despite everything, SV remains at the center.

and that's why i think your explanation is closer to the truth. higher salaries for older workers wouldn't matter. what does matter is that management thinks older workers will bring the wrong sauce to the product, exhibit reasonable skepticism of the (probably unsuccessful) product concept, generally fail to buy in to the vision and sass their 24 year old masters.

Re: New Evidence of Age Bias in Hiring, and a Push to Fight It

#130

Post by bongobongo »

andrewprock wrote: post #105
emit_time wrote: post #27

Anecdote: My dad (finance/accounting guy) lost his job in his 40's and was never able to find another one. Thankfully my mom makes enough for things to work out, and they own a piece of rental property, and my dad stashed away a lot of money for retirement while he worked (to the dismay of my mother). Additionally, the company I work at is half (or more) people hired straight out of college which kinda makes me feel…

Employment is not an efficient market. Transaction costs are very high, bidding is not public, and utility is a non-linear function of more than just compensation.

It’s not a market at all, because participation, realistically speaking, is involuntary for most sellers. It’s closer to a feudal contract than an actual market.
Post reply on HN