Age Discrimination at Work • Hacker News Board

Re: Age Discrimination at Work

#201

Post by wyclif » Mon, Sep 16, 2019, 2:20 AM UTC

vonmoltke wrote: post #149

bradleyjg wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's two different, but related, things going on: 1) Is regular, ordinary age discrimination. This is why tech companies won't hire people starting second careers into entry level programming roles. 2) The widespread notion that more than about 5 years programming experience is not valuable, maybe even counterproductive. (Firm specific knowledge is a different story, tech companies do value that.) Hence all the "s…

> The first one is illegal Partially illegal. I'm 39, and it is perfectly legal for companies to tell me they won't hire me because I'm too old. Next year it becomes illegal for them to do so.

When you say "Next year it becomes illegal for them to do so", what specifically are you referring to? I didn't catch the reference.

Re: Age Discrimination at Work

#202

Post by T-hawk » Mon, Sep 16, 2019, 4:15 AM UTC

sanderjd wrote: post #162

fiblye wrote: post #3

I was applying to a job with a large game studio. The interview was going pretty well, I'd thought. We talked a bit about how we'd implement certain gameplay elements, the content of the projects we've worked on, and overall it just seemed good and we all seemed to get along pretty well. Then they asked me how old I was. Their response to my age was, "Oh... maybe it's a little late then. You're not too old, but... ki…

Sounds like an easy lawsuit if they directly asked about your age and then implied it was relevant to their hiring decision.

Not in the US. The Age Discrimination In Employment Act specifically only prohibits age discrimination against workers who are 40 or older. Discriminating against someone not over 40 is perfectly legal.

More generally, discrimination in employment is legal by default. It becomes illegal only when a specific law gives protection for a specific characteristic. The laws are much narrower than many people think. For example, there are no laws disallowing discrimination for or against smokers, or Yankee fans, or D&D players.

Re: Age Discrimination at Work

#203

Post by eecc » Mon, Sep 16, 2019, 5:42 AM UTC

Tade0 wrote: post #20

noir_lord wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you're really just taking up space for someone who needs to feed their kids, has a potential to grow, and a better place to funnel the earned money than "expensive manicure" That's a ridiculous assertion, if someone is physically well and wants to work it's nobody's business how they spent then spend the money they earn. Choosing to have kids or not shouldn't give you any special status in the workforce at all (tho…

Choosing to have kids or not shouldn't give you any special status in the workforce at all (though in reality it often does). Unless economic growth depends on birthrate - which it does. No incentives to have children -> less children -> less future taxpayers

You forget inheritance tax.

Re: Age Discrimination at Work

#204

Post by gilbetron » Mon, Sep 16, 2019, 12:42 PM UTC

georgemcbay wrote: post #186

gilbetron wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Recently worked for a (bad) silicon valley YC company, and was shocked to learn that 6-8 years of experience is considered senior these days. Not enough experience at that point to really be senior, but I think there's such a desperate need for developers that they have to do that. To be clear, I've certainly met people in their 20s that have senior-level ability, but they are by far the exception.

I agree with you that the "senior" title is passed out too easily, but as someone who is 46 this has been the case throughout my entire career, I don't think it is a new problem. In fact, the 6-8 years of experience you quote is far higher than I would have guessed if you asked me when the average company (incorrectly) starts handing out "senior" titles.

I definitely agree - more precisely, I meant that "6-8 years" is the time by which nearly all people have attained "senior" designation, even if they aren't that good. However, it used to be (in the places I worked, at least) that a person wasn't senior until at least 10 years of experience.

Re: Age Discrimination at Work

#205

Post by mjm65 » Mon, Sep 16, 2019, 1:05 PM UTC

wyclif wrote: post #201

vonmoltke wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The first one is illegal Partially illegal. I'm 39, and it is perfectly legal for companies to tell me they won't hire me because I'm too old. Next year it becomes illegal for them to do so.

When you say "Next year it becomes illegal for them to do so", what specifically are you referring to? I didn't catch the reference.

US law (ADEA) that forbids discrimination for 40 and over.

Re: Age Discrimination at Work

#206

Post by twic » Mon, Sep 16, 2019, 5:46 PM UTC

phkahler wrote: post #103

tenaciousDaniel wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never worked with a significantly older person (in tech anyways), but I would happily lean on them for sniffing out fads. Even in my 30's, it's kinda hard to tell what's a fad and what's not. I really don't understand why there is a bias against age. Programming, for me, is a daily exercise in epistemic humility, and I can't fathom having the kind of arrogance to discount the experience and wisdom that comes wit…

On fads. In spite of the hype, I believe Rust is not a fad. It's going to be doing extremely well in 50 years. I cant condense the background that goes into that statement into a single comment. But a few other languages are valuable too and will be for a while.

I think the ideas that Rust is demonstrating are valuable, and will be around in 50 years. I'm not sure if Rust will be. I sort of hope it won't be, because that implies it'll be replaced by an even better realisation of the same ideas.