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

Feds: IBM did discriminate against older workers in making layoffs

wraltechwire.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 200 posts

Re: Feds: IBM did discriminate against older workers in making layoffs

#161

Post by olalonde »

xienze wrote: post #67
olalonde wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Tech companies think they can get away with it because they do exactly what IBM did, fire all the old hats, then hire back the ones they really do need at cheaper, contractor rates. If it was that simple, why don't they use that strategy with young workers as well? It would be even easier to make up justifications (e.g. lack of experience). To me, it seems plausible that you would find a correlation between people…

> If it was that simple, why don't they use that strategy with young workers as well? Two things. First, there’s a lot more money to be saved cutting older employees (more senior positions, much higher pay, almost certainly grandfathered into either a pension [particularly in the case of IBM] or a higher 401k match, more vacation days). Second, the industry has been trying its damndest to offshore as much as possible…

That was sort of my point. If the goal was to cut costs, it would make sense that the more costly employees, who are usually older, were let go first. To me that's not evidence of ageism even if it did impact older people more.

Re: Feds: IBM did discriminate against older workers in making layoffs

#162

Post by [deleted] »

Grimm1 wrote: post #157
reaperducer wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I'm 25, I've been programming for 15 years now" No one is going to look at your resume and be impressed by what you did when you were ten years old.

I agree which is why I didn't get my title by leveraging those things. Layering social graces on top of technical capability and delivering solidly on some larger scale projects both by planning, leading and executing them, however, will impress. I've been responsible for projects that have closed multi million dollar deals and lead full team rebuilding and system re-architectures.

[deleted]

Re: Feds: IBM did discriminate against older workers in making layoffs

#163

Post by triceratops »

liability wrote: post #2

Not surprising. Years ago one of my (gray haired) mentors opened my eyes to ageism in this industry by asking me to pay attention to how many programmers in the office have gray hair. Once you start looking for it, it becomes obvious that age discrimination is rampant. Some blame the young workforce on the industry being young, but the industry is decades old at this point so I don't think that excuse holds water.

I'm not denying that ageism exists, but this proves nothing. There are many reasons why young people outnumber over-40s in programming roles:

1. The size of the field has increased exponentially over time. Far fewer programmers started their careers in the 80s or 90s vs the past 10 years.

2. Many older programmers have transitioned into upper management or other roles - for example, product/project/people management, sales engineering, customer success, technical writing and so on.

3. People leave the industry due to family or health reasons, windfalls/inheritances leading to early retirement, burnout, or career changes. The longer someone has been working, the likelier it is that people from their cohort have left for one of these reasons.

Re: Feds: IBM did discriminate against older workers in making layoffs

#164

Post by treeman79 »

x87678r wrote: post #62
duxup wrote: post #20

A fellow older classmate of mine and I were looking for work after changing careers. We were talking about his recent interview when he got a call from the recruiter and put her on speakerphone. She told them they were going with someone else because they thought the other person "fit the culture" better. He asked if she could give some feedback on what that meant and she flat out said "Some people thought you were t…

> after changing careers. This is a big one. There are arguments for not hiring older experience programmers, then there is a different issue about hiring older people that want to be new programmers. I'd think the second group wont have much hope of getting hired.

Am over 40. I have no trouble getting hired.

Now every few years I make a massive time investment in an some new tech. I get hired for one thing. When chance comes up I take tech lead position on some something I’m not familiar with.

Keeps me up to date in a very practical manor.

Now I’ve seen lots of older people who learned something 20 years ago, and have barely changed since.

Re: Feds: IBM did discriminate against older workers in making layoffs

#165

Post by socrates1998 »

KKKKkkkk1 wrote: post #115
socrates1998 wrote: post #17

The big tech giants have used this marketing ploy that "older workers don't understand new tech" to undercut them at almost every opportunity. I honestly have no idea why they are allowed to get away with this in the media and public opinion. Maybe because older people don't know new tech, so they think older programmers don't know it either? It's insane to me that an older programmer with decades of experience and m…

> Another reason why I won't ever work for a large company again. Sounds like you're claiming there is less discrimination at startups?

No, I wouldn't know. I haven't worked for a company in a long time, big or small. I would imagine there are similar problems at start-ups, but the smaller scale would at least give you the chance at a fair shake.

For me, the bigger an organization is, the more these problems arise.

Re: Feds: IBM did discriminate against older workers in making layoffs

#166

Post by jkoudys »

Aperocky wrote: post #136
freetanga wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are spot on. I run a medium sized IT Team (400 employees plus 600 external contractors) and I like to go against the grain: In the past 12 months I have hired 15 people, and 13 are over 52 years old. Most have been laid off, got a juicy check that translates into a good nest egg, but not enough to make it their only source of income until retirement. A good job with a steady (but lower than before) income…

'Medium sized' lol, I think you're being very humble.

I thought my team became "medium" when I went from managing two people to four.

Re: Feds: IBM did discriminate against older workers in making layoffs

#168

Post by ThrowawayR2 »

mywittyname wrote: post #14
liability wrote: post #2

Not surprising. Years ago one of my (gray haired) mentors opened my eyes to ageism in this industry by asking me to pay attention to how many programmers in the office have gray hair. Once you start looking for it, it becomes obvious that age discrimination is rampant. Some blame the young workforce on the industry being young, but the industry is decades old at this point so I don't think that excuse holds water.

Some of the best people I've worked with are those who've been with the company for a long time. IME, the dead weight tends to be phased out over the years, so there's a bit of survivorship bias with the remaining ones. However, the road certainly isn't easy for them. Despite the utility of these people being totally obvious to anyone whose ever worked with them, with each change of leadership comes another fight to…

That's not ageism though. Getting pushed out because they lost the shelter of their patron(s) or because they were on the losing side of a political battle, which is a common cause of the departure of people like that, is a different thing entirely.

Re: Feds: IBM did discriminate against older workers in making layoffs

#169

Post by ThrowawayR2 »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #68
errantspark wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not exactly, but ageism is probably a welcome externality. The value of leetcode is mostly in helping hiring-people wash their hands of some responsibility.

Another externality - if not an intended effect - is that it selects for people who are willing to accept an abusive relationship with their employer. Why do I call it abusive? "Study this stuff, that isn't actually related to your job, on your own time, for free, for months, and we might give you a job." Even if you do get a job, they still abused you.

> "Study this stuff, that isn't actually related to your job..."

I am so glad to have spent my entire career in the parts of our industry where this is not true.

Re: Feds: IBM did discriminate against older workers in making layoffs

#170

Post by forgotmypw17 »

yardie wrote: post #44
Causality1 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every job I've ever gotten I had to provide ID.

Every job that you have gotten has needed ID for background checks. I've never been asked for ID, age, or gender during the interview process. Nor would I give that information freely. I recently filled an online application that asked for SSN and I dropped it right there. You only need my SSN for employer taxes, no way is that part of any job interview.

SSN also has an approximate timestamp encoded into it. The prefix can be linked to the time period it was given out, which is typically at or near birth registration.
Post reply on HN