Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If being 60 years old is just so great in the world of work then why is it so hard for older workers to get a job? Because of bias based on employers bad experiences with older workers in the past.
Now I am sure some of the older posters are as sharp as a tact and they are still working at age 70. If so great, but you are an exception. Most workers start to slip and lose interest in the late 50s and slide to retirement. (I agree many younger workers are not too impressive either)
I'm not 60 yet, but I'm still sharp as a tack (tack is the word you were looking for)! And I'm not "slipping" or "sliding to retirement". I'm the most reliable person in my workplace. Age is not always a bad thing when it comes to employees.
If being 60 years old is just so great in the world of work then why is it so hard for older workers to get a job? Because of bias based on employers bad experiences with older workers in the past.
Now I am sure some of the older posters are as sharp as a tact and they are still working at age 70. If so great, but you are an exception. Most workers start to slip and lose interest in the late 50s and slide to retirement. (I agree many younger workers are not too impressive either)
I'm not 60 yet, but I can assure you I'm still sharp as a tack (that was the word you were looking for...). I am not "slipping" or "sliding to retirement" either. I am the most dependable person in my workplace and resent the sterotype. Discrimination of any kind is wrong.
I would...but seeing as how I'm being trained with older people...they do have one MAJOR flaw that works against them...
The willingness to be open...their experience basically works against them...I mean if I hear one more older person say "well I know this because I have experience in this and that" and then they STILL mess up or make excuses. Or better yet, when they fall behind on certain things and use the excuse "well this is all just so new" or this is just "too much"...like it isn't "new" for ALL of us or that we aren't dealing with an equally heavy workload. It almost implies that their age justifies them doing their work less efficiently than others. I just see some (not all) older people at first just being so rip-raring ready to go and talking about how fast they can adapt and their VAST experience but once they get to work and fall behind, all of that "I'm just as energetic and efficient as anyone" goes out of the window. They just need to understand that every new job they encounter which may be in a new field has different things to learn and it's going to take effort to learn...every job is not the same...
also they should be willing to embrace anything that comes with that job including learning new technology, keeping up to date with news pertaining to their field, and taking advice and direction from younger managers(and even more tenured co-workers who could help) as well instead of looking down upon them......they were chosen to be managers for a reason and not just there for their "supple" skin....
As an "old" worker", what do you think of the job perormance of Moses.....not bad for say, 800 years, eh?
That said, 'Old' is an old, outdated term today. Please review the RECENT accomplishments of 'old' people, ie. Clint Eastwood, Mick Jager, Buz Aldrin, etc,.
And don't forget Harlan Sanders (http://www.biography.com/articles/Harland-Sanders-9470977 - broken link) (1890-1980) of Kentucky Fried Chicken who started his franchise when he was 65 with just his first social security check in his pocket.
Quote:
After selling his restaurant, Sanders took to the road armed with his recipe but signed up only five restaurants in two years. By 1964, however, there were more than 600 franchises in the United States and Canada, and Sanders was making $300,000 a year. (He was 74 years old).
In the same year, Sanders signed most of his fast-food empire over to John Brown of Kentucky and Jack Massey of Tennessee, providing that he received $2,000,000, a lifetime salary of $40,000 a year, and a seat on the board of directors. In 1971 the company, which boasted 3,500 franchises and $700,000,000 a year in business, was acquired by Heublein Corporation. Sanders remained active as an official ambassador and appeared in advertisements and commercials for the company even as a nonagenarian.
"Stereotyping"......no, don't think that's what the person is doing. In all reality, myself (age 61 now) have seen too many people in my age bracket that do the "hunt and peck" type keyboarding that I, and my wife, don't do. We both use a computer/Internet quite often at home and have plenty of experience in using one in the workplace. Another thing, many people in that age bracket are also afraid of using the Internet for whatever reasons. Some of these folks are as slow in using a computer as they are in driving a car on a street or freeway! Wife and I "put the pedal to the metal" in driving (not real fast though) as well as letting our fingers "fly on the keyboard" of a computer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Opyelie
More stereotyping?
Exactly what do you mean when you type "computer savvy" anyway? Do you even know?
Company doesn't have to worry about my health insurance I'm covered under medicare.
My skills are sharp and most likely have more experience than anyone younger working for the company in an industry where experience is valued above all else.
House and everything is all paid for, I get social security which I can live on so if work slows up I'll just stay home until it heats up.
I would never ask for a raise because I don't need the money.
I am very stable, don't do drugs, drink or run around with women other than my wife.
Got a couple of questions for you - first of all, why would you use your Medicare instead of your employer's insurance? It is a heckuva lot easier to find doctors in your company medical plan than ones who will take Medicare patients. I won't stop using my employer's plan until I am no longer working. Secondly, why would you refrain from wanting to be as well-compensated as possible, regardless of the money you have? It would concern me that my company/boss would see my disinterest in advancing myself financially as not thinking I was worth anything more, that I undervalued my worth. And finally, I would want to hold off beginning to collect Social Security until I absolutely had to - why wouldn't you as well?
Age discrimination is against the law. The mere fact that you are questioning "if" you should hire someone who is older is just wrong. I'm not trying to be rude, I'm just saying that such thoughts are really a slap in the face to people who are older and it really is an overused stereotype. Personally, I do not like stereotypes. People are individuals and should be treated as such. The main question to be asked of a potential employee "Is this person qualified for this position?" You review the person's resume, set up an interview, ask the pertinent questions to get a feel of their background, check their references, and make a decision accordingly.
I suggest people spend time with older people. Volunteer in a senior citizen's center or some other type of activity. I did this 10 years ago and it changed my life forever. Beautiful stories. A twinkle in their eye. Words of wisdom abide.
"Grow old along with me!
The best is yet to be.
The last of life, for which the first was made. "
Robert Browning "'Rabbi Ben Ezra"
We are always the same age inside. ~Gertrude Stein
I personally have witnessed age discrimination in the workplace, committed against applicants for jobs in which I was privy to the hiring process. When I objected, I was thanked for my opinion, and ignored.
I personally have been the victim of similar discrimination. It was never admitted to, but it is very easy for an employer to justify their choices using vague, ambiguous terms.
I know a woman who holds a high position in the HR group for a major US/multi-national employer who confided in me that many of the staff reductions that took place in recent "down-turns" were older, more expensive to maintain employees.
Age is not the only discriminating factor. I've also known an Economic PhD that couldn't get work until she removed her higher education from her diploma. I've seen women denied access to positions, because "they wouldn't fit in with the existing (male) team.
As far as I can see, if you want a guaranteed, life-supporting occupation, you need to enter a profession that allows you to be self-employed, and can work at it through your lifetime. Forget jobs, be the employer.
Generally not! I find that many applicants are over the hill and not as sharp and aggressive at that age and also are less likely to get along with their coworkers who are mostly in their 20s and 30s. Another problem with older workers is they are set in their ways and are not computer savvy which is the key to corporate office jobs. Others are coasting to retirement and are just putting in their time until social security.
On the other hand, while I am only in my 30s I do strongly consider applicants in their 40s and 50s because they have less drama and more self confidence than younger employees.
If you're really looking for computer savvy, you almost have to go with an older person. If you need someone who understands machine language, assembly language, even DOS programming, you have to go with older.
Too often younger workers think they know computers because they grew up playing computer games but they don't have a clue how they work in business. Even if a younger person is a little computer savvy, it just means they're going to chat on the internet while being paid. And they cannot put down their cell phones for two minutes.
Depending on the type of job, education level, experience and job length history, would you interview or even hire someone who is 60 years old or older? Folks today say "age doesn't make a difference" when it comes to physical activities, but what about employment? With most, if not all, interviewers being 20 years or more younger than those applicants, what does the older generation do??
I'm really starting to think this about this age group: If a person in this age group isn't already retired from a company or City/State/Federal job OR fully employed, it is going to be mighty, mighty hard for that age group to get a job. True, it's continuing to be hard for many to find employment, but I'm not talking about "many", only those in this age bracket. Having no dates on a resume for certain things, such as military service or college, to me would be a "red flag" of questions, like: "why no dates?" or "is this person that old?"
Comments, please.
I would - but I'll admit how they appear might matter a lot. If they shuffle in and act worn out or set in their ways I wouldn't likely hire them, but if they are energetic and knowledgeable, then I would. Just like a younger applicant, they'll be judged on other factors. With younger applicants if they come dressed in low cut pants or look like emos and can't stop checking their cell phones, they can forget it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
