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

Silicon Valley's dirty secret - age bias

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 261 posts

Re: Silicon Valley's dirty secret - age bias

#81

Post by JVIDEL »

radicalbyte wrote: post #38

The thing is, Randy did get hired once he shaved his head and started dressing down. This isn't ageism, it's a filter against older people who are unable to adapt themselves to the changing environment. It's like classic cars: no-one is going to buy a neglected rust bucket that hasn't been serviced since the 1960s. Yet if the car is loved and cared for it can be worth millions ( http://www.topgear.com/uk/car-news/fer…

Bad example, that's a Ferrari GTO, it would sell for hundreds of thousands even if it was at the bottom of a lake.

And fashion means nothing, just that you read fashion blogs. The guys who invented the internet in the late 1960s wore 1950 dork clothes.

It doesn't matters.

Re: Silicon Valley's dirty secret - age bias

#82

Post by seiji »

cookiecaper wrote: post #74
seiji wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is America. Get litigious! Things are illegal for a reason. They can't ask about your age or family status. When your CEO gets up and says "We don't hire anybody over 28 years old," a dozen lawsuits should be filed within a week. It's amazing people let other people get away with ruling the world this way. *edit: I had over/under switched in the CEO quote. Fixed.

What's "family status"? AFAIK there is no protected "family status". The typical protected classes are race, sex, religion, age, and in some places, sexual orientation.

Usually "married with kids" or "are going through a divorce" or "has really sick parents/children they take care of."

Note: It's completely acceptable to discriminate against your boss though. If your boss is going through his fourth divorce and has 8 kids, maybe you don't want to work there.

Re: Silicon Valley's dirty secret - age bias

#83

Post by jiggy2011 »

It's interesting to compare with other professions.

I was out for drinks recently with some people who were programmers as well as others some of whom were doctors.

The mean age was probably about 27. A 27 year old developer is a grizzled vet whereas a 27 year old doctor is considered a noob at the start of their career.

Re: Silicon Valley's dirty secret - age bias

#84

Post by Domenic_S »

cookiecaper wrote: post #74
seiji wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is America. Get litigious! Things are illegal for a reason. They can't ask about your age or family status. When your CEO gets up and says "We don't hire anybody over 28 years old," a dozen lawsuits should be filed within a week. It's amazing people let other people get away with ruling the world this way. *edit: I had over/under switched in the CEO quote. Fixed.

What's "family status"? AFAIK there is no protected "family status". The typical protected classes are race, sex, religion, age, and in some places, sexual orientation.

You shouldn't ask because you can't discriminate "because of marriage to, or association with, an individual of a particular race, religion, national origin, or an individual with a disability" (Title VII).

You don't know if the interviewee is married to a Muslim, an invalid, etc -- if they are, you're open to a lawsuit claiming that was the basis of your discrimination. Just don't ask!

Re: Silicon Valley's dirty secret - age bias

#85

Post by jpdoctor »

finnw wrote: post #68
jpdoctor wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eventually, some enterprising law firm is going to make a bundle. The legal culture in SV (WSGR and their ilk) are not steeped in class-action suits, several folks are going to get their asses kicked from the legal defense, if nothing else.

You can get sued for firing someone, but I'm pretty sure you can't get sued for declining to invest in a company (that would be very scary indeed.)

> but I'm pretty sure you can't get sued for declining to invest in a company

Try this for example: "Our VC firm does not invest in companies with black founders. We looked at the data, and companies with black-founders have a measurably lower ROI."

Are you still pretty sure?

Re: Silicon Valley's dirty secret - age bias

#86

Post by Domenic_S »

chc wrote: post #57
aaronblohowiak wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most states' (and federal) law protects older, not younger, workers... in many jurisdictions that means being over 40.

Are the laws really that specific? I thought the way it generally worked was that discrimination based on age was illegal, but being young is viewed as a proxy for inexperience, so discriminating on that basis is OK. I didn't know there was generally a specific cutoff.

They are indeed.

> The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) only forbids age discrimination against people who are age 40 or older. It does not protect workers under the age of 40, although some states do have laws that protect younger workers from age discrimination.

http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/age.cfm

Re: Silicon Valley's dirty secret - age bias

#87

Post by raldi »

cookiecaper wrote: post #74
seiji wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is America. Get litigious! Things are illegal for a reason. They can't ask about your age or family status. When your CEO gets up and says "We don't hire anybody over 28 years old," a dozen lawsuits should be filed within a week. It's amazing people let other people get away with ruling the world this way. *edit: I had over/under switched in the CEO quote. Fixed.

What's "family status"? AFAIK there is no protected "family status". The typical protected classes are race, sex, religion, age, and in some places, sexual orientation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_class

Bullet point #7.

See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_discrimination_law_i...

Re: Silicon Valley's dirty secret - age bias

#88

Post by cookiecaper »

neya wrote: post #11

It's not just old guys, you know. 8 years ago, I was able to design the same quality of websites, yet no one gave a fuck because I was 'too young' according to them. Today, they are ready to pay me thousands of dollars because I have the age factor and a couple of white hairs. Many people are under the wrong notion that age = experience. While it may be partially true, it isn't all the time. When you're young, you ha…

The thing is, children say this all the time whilst getting scolded/warned/informed too. While I agree one shouldn't be written off immediately due to age, my experience is that in the case of younger people, they actually are inexperienced and naive and simply pitch a fit, blaming discrimination and everything/anything else, because they fail to recognize that about themselves.

Re: Silicon Valley's dirty secret - age bias

#89

Post by waterlesscloud »

embwbam wrote: post #79
samspot wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I'm hearing from many posters in these comments is my level of fashion-conciousness indicates how innovative I am. I think it's a big mistake to judge a candidate's aptitude for the work by how hip they look. This is the last industry I thought we'd have to face this kind of thing in.

Well, wait. I've always said this too: it shouldn't matter how I dress. But the truth is that dress is very frequently an indicator of how aware one is. It's a social consciousness that is sometimes reflected in other things (like being able to adapt to a new technology). Look at this comic: http://xkcd.com/1139/ - the playground jerks call the guy a loser because he isn't playing the social game. They are right that…

Are you seriously saying that keeping up with fashion is an indicator of being able to adapt to new tech?

Re: Silicon Valley's dirty secret - age bias

#90

Post by jsaxton86 »

krakensden wrote: post #40
codewright wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know the value of experience because I know what my code looked like 5 and 10 years ago. I also know how incredibly poor my judgment was back then compared to now. I can only imagine what 20 years will do for me. That's why I actively seek out more experience in candidates because I believe it'll make them more competent and sharp at what they do. Somebody with battle-scars is something a startup could really use.…

I've worked with developers in their fifties- they're scary good.

I've also worked with developers in their fifties who are awful.

Age bias is awful, and I have worked with a lot of older developers who know their stuff and are extremely competent, but the idea that 25 years of experience automatically makes you a better programmer is wrong. Good developers are able to learn and adapt quickly, and often older developers can't do that.

Post reply on HN