This is weird considering that modern wisdom states that practical milestones tend to shift to later points in one's lifetime, not earlier - there are many reasons for this, like more people attending college, wages not keeping up with housing prices, etc., as well as the general perception that it's OK to have kids later in life.
Is 40 the New 60?
191–200 of 381 posts
Re: Is 40 the New 60?
#192Earlier quoted context omitted.
You post this all the time. You did 27 years at one single company, as you point out so proudly and often. After a stint like that, anyone would be unhireable. It isn't your age, as so many others on this chain have pointed out. You didn't build your CV to be attractive to new employers at all , and when eventually that became relevant again, you were out of luck. I read your posts whenever I see them, it's obvious y…
It really depends on what those experiences were at the same employer. I'm not the OP and not in the same boat. But I've been at the same employer for more than 30 years.
It should depend on that, and perhaps to some degree it does. But in even the best case scenario, where every few years was brand new knowledge, you've still put the obstacle in your path of convincing new hiring managers of that when their default assumption may be otherwise.
You've added a degree of difficulty (we could quibble about how much of one but whatever) to the process that didn't need to be there.
Re: Is 40 the New 60?
#193There are gobs of anecdotes from experienced tech workers about employers discriminating against older folks.
I Googled around looking for more rigorous data, and found that there seem to be a decent number of studies of various kinds that detect ageism in the tech job market. One report (https://www.visier.com/clarity/four-common-tech-ageism-myths...) says it debunks four myths about ageism in the tech job market, but even that one affirms that hiring practices in the tech sector discriminate unwisely against older workers.
So I guess we can tentatively conclude that, yeah, there's probably some ageism in the tech job market, and it will probably tend to affect most tech workers as they age.
My own experience tends to agree. I was in high demand through my thirties. That demand began to dry up in my forties. I'm 61 now.
I remain happliy employed as a consultant, but the people who employ me have shifted over time from mostly strangers to mostly people who already know me, or who know someone who has employed me before.
To put it another way, as I've aged, my employers are less and less likely to be strangers who hired me in a typical tech-industry hiring process, and more and more likely to be someone who has seen my work before, or who knows someone who has.
Maybe that suggests a workable strategy: take care to cultivate lasting constructive working relationships as you go. Look for people you work with well, and consciously choose to work with them, and to maintain friendly relations after each of you has moved on. Those relationships may become increasingly important to your work, especially if you begin to experience the ageism that many are reporting.
Re: Is 40 the New 60?
#194Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You did 27 years at one single company, as you point out so proudly and often. After a stint like that, anyone would be unhireable. Next time you hear someone complain about why programmers jump jobs ever 2 years, point them to this cynical and stereotyping comment. In my opinion this is no different from saying "What, you didn't graduate from college? Well, obviously you are unhireable", but I bet 'Icathian would…
I said nothing about what is fair, or what should be. I'm describing what is . Programmers jump jobs every 2-4 years (myself included) because it's the best way to reliably get good pay increases, and because staying more than 10 years at one company often makes it harder to get hired at the next place. You can blame me for recognizing that all you want, but it's a pretty well-known truth of our industry. I want it t…
> it's a pretty well-known truth of our industry
There are a lot of bad things about our industry, repeating the stereotypes that lead to them is still harmful. Which brings me to...
> I'm not sure what about that you object to so strongly.
Simple: If you were in a a position where you were screening resumes, I think you would rule out people with long tenures purely on the basis that the tenure was long.
I am saying that this amounts to age-based discrimination, and you should think about it rather than parroting the assertion "Obviously you're unhireable, you worked somewhere for 27 years". And even if you refuse to think about this, my hope is that other commenters will.
And maybe, just maybe next time they see a resume with 27 years of experience at one company, they will think "Wow, this person will bring an interesting point of view to the team – they have been through 5 times the tenure of an average VP and have seen the rise and fall of several projects. Let's hire them!"
Re: Is 40 the New 60?
#19540 is not the new 60. Not even close. At 40, I've done some of the best work I've ever done and my pay has been better than ever. I'm 52 now and the trend has only gotten better. Why? Its because at 40, I had a much deeper understanding of the tech, I understood of the whole business process and I had the maturity to deal with people in a productive way. You won't find all of those in a 25 year old developer. The onl…
>At 40, I've done some of the best work I've ever done [...] Its because at 40, I had a much deeper understanding of the tech, The blog post isn't about self-reported cognitive ability getting stronger (or not declining). It's about the job marketplace . Maybe it's instructive to compare/contrast different professional careers that depend on mental abilities and how age affects marketability: - computer programming :…
A lot of companies are run with the Taylorism hierarchy. The people at the bottom are making the widgets. The layer above them are the managers, who are good at managing workers. A layer above them are executives who are good at making strategic management decisions that the managers will implement.
That system worked well during WW2 and postwar America. Someone who was a manager at an airplane factory could move to another company and be a manager at a washing machine factory.
While it is true that some management and people skills can transfer between industries, the big problem with Taylorism in tech is that the skillset needed to make the right management decision is orthogonal to the skillset required to get into a traditional executive role. Andy Grove, from Intel, was very successful at adopting a new management framework for this scenario as described in his book "High Output Management"
Not everyone is as a good of a manager as Grove, so you still see a lot of managers following Taylorism hierarchy. And that requires that engineers assume the lowest level of the system and accept that their "managers" are qualified to make decisions. Young people without much exposure to the business side of things are much more likely to accept these positions. Managers are afraid of hiring someone 40+, who may know both the tech side and business side of things and be aware of management mistakes due to the manager's lack of technical expertise.
Re: Is 40 the New 60?
#196I've seen a few people fall off the career ladder to their doom in different fields. I once was a member of a local hackerspace and the place was like the Island of Misfit Toys. So many interesting and talented people biding there time there in between jobs and struggling to get back on the ladder. Lots of horror stories -- a homeless mechanical engineer, a couch surfing old programmer, etc. I think most of us are qu…
When I studied for the Chartered Financial Analyst exams I tried to find out who got a job after the 3-year, 750 hr minimum commitment (GCP professional architect looks like a joke in comparison). EVERYTHING I read was positive. Once I passed, I found a ton of people in the same boat as me - unable to find work in finance. No one wanted to admit it though.
It happens a lot. I've seen it first hand and I've also read plenty of horror stories on the internet. There's definitely a shocking disconnect between the education system and the job market. Many people are becoming qualified for jobs that simply aren't there. What a nightmare.
Re: Is 40 the New 60?
#197Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed, I keep being a jerk to junior developers that constantly comes to me with the same questions after I explained to them 10000 times and they say "Yeaah, I got it now". It is so hard to avoid being a jerk. What should I do?
Two options: * Ask why they keep coming? Maybe you aren't understanding their question, they want to build the relationship, or it's a really risky operation and they don't want to undertake it alone. This might be worth digging into. * Write the answer down to the questions (wiki, internal doc, whatever). When they ask, point them to what you've written down. Will still take some time and interrupt you, but hopefull…
Who reads though?
We had a build prerequisite check that output "error: package xxx is out of date, run sudo apt upgrade - see wiki.local/XXX for more details"
They still copied the error to me and asked what to do. I said follow the instructions in the message. They said cool thanks and did so.
Re: Is 40 the New 60?
#198Don't even get me started (just take a shufti through my posting history on this very site. You'll see this is a subject that has my attention) . > while the experience that comes with age is valued in fields like music, it counts against you in tech. Yup. The Jurassic-scale disasters that are becoming increasingly common, these days, are evidence of unsteady hands at the wheel. I'm not saying that older folks are be…
> In my case, I was finally laid off, after a 27-year run at one of the world's marquee imaging companies (which I think was overbalanced by experience). I started looking around for more work, as I wasn't really up for retirement (which I was quite capable of doing). Are you "out of practice" in the job search? This comment ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28758320 ) states: > Delete the first 10 years of your…
I understand that. I also have gotten advice to dye my hair.
I will do neither. That's dishonest.
If no one values me for the skills and experience I have, then I have no interest in working with them (not "for," "with." -A big problem, in today's working world, is the attitude that companies are doing people a favor by hiring them. If someone hires me, they don't get me as a servant. I've worked way too long and hard to be treated that way. Another problem, is that asking for simple, basic, human respect, is considered "arrogant").
I am very, very honest. This was actually a big plus, at my last company. It got me a seat at the "inner table" of a highly conservative Japanese corporation; something few Westerners ever experience.
I refuse to be dishonest. I won't hide my age, experience, or weaknesses. I also won't exaggerate. People often tell me that I'm exaggerating. Then, they take the time to look at my track record (which is very available -people like to lob insults before actually checking to see if they apply). Things get quiet, after that.
Re: Is 40 the New 60?
#199Earlier quoted context omitted.
You post this all the time. You did 27 years at one single company, as you point out so proudly and often. After a stint like that, anyone would be unhireable. It isn't your age, as so many others on this chain have pointed out. You didn't build your CV to be attractive to new employers at all , and when eventually that became relevant again, you were out of luck. I read your posts whenever I see them, it's obvious y…
> so proudly and often Not proudly, but often. Be nice. I thought we were supposed to be nicer to each other here, than in other Internet venues, but I'm often wrong. > You didn't build your CV to be attractive to new employers at all I see things differently. Don't forget that I was a hiring manager for most of that time. My CV reflects what I would have considered to be a "dream employee" for most of that time. It…
> Not proudly, but often. Be nice.
Apologies. I struggle when people I respect seem to miss things that are obvious to me, I should have kept my tone in check better.
Fair enough. If the winning move for you is not to play, that's hardly a bad choice. I don't think it would work for me.
Re: Is 40 the New 60?
#20040 is not the new 60. Not even close. At 40, I've done some of the best work I've ever done and my pay has been better than ever. I'm 52 now and the trend has only gotten better. Why? Its because at 40, I had a much deeper understanding of the tech, I understood of the whole business process and I had the maturity to deal with people in a productive way. You won't find all of those in a 25 year old developer. The onl…
>At 40, I've done some of the best work I've ever done [...] Its because at 40, I had a much deeper understanding of the tech, The blog post isn't about self-reported cognitive ability getting stronger (or not declining). It's about the job marketplace . Maybe it's instructive to compare/contrast different professional careers that depend on mental abilities and how age affects marketability: - computer programming :…
People don't look at a surgeon aged 55 asking themselves why that surgeon failed to move on to the next level. Unfortunately the same isn't true at all for programmers, for some reason it's assumed to be an entry position. If the path to surgery would be through nursing experience, aging nurses would have a much lower standing amongst all their future surgeon peers than they have now.
Seen from this angle, the ageism seems to be an unsurprising outcome of the relatively informal qualification structure in software tech: apparently opportunity for all cannot come without a bit of stigmatization for those who refuse to strive for it.