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.
so you would rather no one 20-30 are given the opportunity to learn it instead? Cerner in KC does the opposite, they hire college grads then mentors/grooms them into the roles the company needs, no bad skills to unlearn, does things how they want, etc. As they develop, get old, they become the next generation of mentors there as they move up. Pretty good way of running the company and everyone seems happy. They do work people hard but pay well in return.
Private enterprise is not workfare. Companies are in business to make money. The sun does not rise and set on our young. You have to be there, do the job and demonstrate your concern for the company values. The sheep skin guarantees nothing.
Look at who shows up when needed. Look at who shows up on time. Look at who gets the job done. Many of our young are trying to take off on Fridays. Many take time to get acclimated in the beginning of the week. Many put their social network first and work second - many companies keep a close eye on this. Many of our young think that a holiday is a holiday and their needs come before that of the company.
With that said; there are many young, dedicated individuals. They will fight their way up the ladder of success. They will also loose many of their friends on the way to the top.
Younger people can do the same job, if not more efficient and cost a fraction of the price. If you were a business what business decision would you go with? It's not necessarily age discrimination as it is pay discrimination. If I pay Bob 125k/yr and I can hire a Steven for 60k/yr that does the same job, well I could hire two Stevens for the price of Bob.
It's not necessarily true. I worked at Apple for 6 years and there are a lot of old guys there. Apple runs the company almost in the opposite way from other Silicon Valley companies, though. They have a zillion tiny teams and hire experts for each component. For example the iPhone keyboard. For the longest time, one guy "owned" that (I know the guy) and as long as the keyboard always worked, that guy could just do whatever he wanted. He could be young, old, take 3 weeks vacation in Japan, show up to work at 3am or 3pm, whatever. Nobody knows each other, or who is working on what. In this environment it really doesn't matter how old you are.
Most places are different, they all try to be like Google. Every engineer is sort of assumed to have the same general competency and they are all in one big talent pool. They have a big transparent rating system of everyone and each person is always getting evaluated. You have to be a superstar, working on really high profile and important stuff,or else you're on your way out. You can't be the anonymous gnome that takes care of the keyboard system your whole career. There was a high profile age discrimination case at Google. Google, like most companies that emulate it, don't apply their own system to their managers though, so there are a lot of unintended side effects.
In general in Silicon Valley, there's sort of an undercurrent in the culture that suggests if you're not a multi-millionaire or invented something important by the time you're 30 you are a loser.
Plus it's just very competitive, and almost every highly competitive arena favors the young. Experience counts for less than acuity and speed.
"How" do they force people out? The two main ways are: to assign a person to an impossible task and then when they fail, assign them a PIP with another impossible task. Inevitably the person fails at that, and they are gone. The other way is like in Japan, they just give you less work, stop inviting you to meetings, make you feel shunned and irrelevant until you get fed up and quit on your own accord.
I was talking to someone who works in San Jose CA and has worked for a number of tech companies. He says once you are 35 or so, employers in Silicon Valley will look for reasons to get rid of you. You are no longer a good fit and you are made to feel like an outcast. If you don't get the hint, your supervisors will set impossible standards for you, which of course you will fail at- because they are impossible.
This sounds so bizarre and 35 seems so young. It can't be true, can it?
At your employer, if you work in tech, does this happen and if so how do they get rid of people who are old? (35+)
I have no doubt it's true. I was at not so Big Blue and saw older workers targeted and laid off. It concerned me. I was probably about 40 at the time. We also knew there would be a lawsuit due to what appeared to be pretty rampant discrimination. The workers laid off eventually lost (no surprise there). I don't know what reasons management gave to the older laid-off workers. I quit around that time and moved out and elsewhere. This was in NYS and I know it continued.
Younger people can do the same job, if not more efficient and cost a fraction of the price. If you were a business what business decision would you go with? It's not necessarily age discrimination as it is pay discrimination. If I pay Bob 125k/yr and I can hire a Steven for 60k/yr that does the same job, well I could hire two Stevens for the price of Bob.
Yes, but when Bob doesn't even get past the job interview (IF he gets one) when the interviewees see how 'old' he looks, it IS age discrimination.
How do these interviewees know what Bob's minimum acceptable level of salary is, if they won't even give him that opportunity to get to the negotiating stage, because of grey hair and wrinkles? How do they know Bob won't be willing to work for 60k/year.
I'm sure many a desperate older worker would be more than happy to take 60K a year when their alternative is no job or working as a Wal-mart greeter?
Yes, but when Bob doesn't even get past the job interview (IF he gets one) when the interviewees see how 'old' he looks, it IS age discrimination.
How do these interviewees know what Bob's minimum acceptable level of salary is, if they won't even give him that opportunity to get to the negotiating stage, because of grey hair and wrinkles? How do they know Bob won't be willing to work for 60k/year.
I'm sure many a desperate older worker would be more than happy to take 60K a year when their alternative is no job or working as a Wal-mart greeter?
It would be interesting to see a personal injury lawyer come in and comment on their experience with age discrimination cases, but I have a feeling these lawyers pass on a lot of people that think they have been discriminated against.
It would be interesting to see a personal injury lawyer come in and comment on their experience with age discrimination cases, but I have a feeling these lawyers pass on a lot of people that think they have been discriminated against.
A personal injury attorney would be in order if the HR person lef a banana peel on the floor and the older person slipped. A labor and employment law attorney would likely be more useful in an age discrimination case.
Younger people can do the same job, if not more efficient and cost a fraction of the price. If you were a business what business decision would you go with? It's not necessarily age discrimination as it is pay discrimination. If I pay Bob 125k/yr and I can hire a Steven for 60k/yr that does the same job, well I could hire two Stevens for the price of Bob.
Younger people usually cannot do the same job as a technical expert with 10+, 15+ years of expertise. Even if the young person is brilliant and a hard worker, it usually takes time to hone those extremely complex technical skills and fully understand the big picture and how all the technologies interrelate. The newbies are often placed in more junior stepping stone jobs as they hone their expertise...gaining more expertise and knowledge year after year, and getting more responsibilities and more money as they grow.
This argument of hiring cheaper staff is what causes companies to offshore their work. They can go to other countries and get staff for $20/k year. And then hire 6 developers to replace Bob or 3 to replace Steven.
I think the offshore staff are more of a threat to the younger/less experienced US technical worker. Because offshore tends to have this (more junior) level of experience/skillset for much cheaper. But the highly experienced/expert level US worker is less threatened by offshore because offshore doesn't usually have someone with the expertise needed. Throwing 6 offshore devopers on a project often results in lower quality work versus what Bob produced in same amt of time for same amt of money. But lots of variables come into play.
Some companies assume throwing 6 developers onto a project will easily replace Bob, but then 3 years later they realize that Bob's expertise produced a better end product than 6 developers that appeared to have the same skill set on paper. And that's when projects come back to the US. But this takes time for companies to realize the true benefit of experts versus trying to replace them with cheaper staff. The issue issue is that some bean counters and decision makers don't fully comprehend what goes on in technology work so they don't realize the value in having quality workers/experts until years later when their products turned to garbage. Because it usually doesn't happen overnight. And it's rarely as simple as it seems.
Last edited by sware2cod; 03-01-2015 at 09:45 AM..
Younger people usually cannot do the same job as a technical expert with 10+, 15+ years of expertise. Even if the young person is brilliant and a hard worker, it usually takes time to hone those etremely complex technical skills and fully understand the big picture and how all the technologies interrelate. The newbies are often place at more junior stepping stone jobs as they hone their expertise...gaining more expertise and knowledge year after year, and getting more responsibilities and more money as they grow.
This argument of hiring cheaper staff is what causes companies to offshore their work. They can go to other countries and get staff for $20/k year. And then hire 6 developers to replace Bob or 3 to replace Steven.
I think the offshore staff are more of a threat to the younger/less experienced US technical worker. Because offshore tends to have this (more junior) level of experience/skillset for much cheaper. But the highly experienced/expert level US worker is less threatened by offshore because offshore doesn't usually have someone with the expertise needed. Throwing 6 offshore devopers on a project often results in lower quality work versus what Bob produced in same amt of time for same amt of money. But lots of variables come into play.
Some companies assume throwing 6 developer onto a project will easily replace Bob, but then 3 years later they realize that Bob's expertise producted a better end product than 6 developers that appeared to have the same skill set on paper. And that's when projects come back to the US. But this takes time for companies to realize the true benefit of experts versus trying to replace them with cheaper staff. The issue issue is that some bean counters and decision makers don't fully comprehend what goes on in technology work so they don't realize the value in having quality workers/experts until years later when their products turned to garbage. Because it usually doesn't happen overnight. And it's rarely as simple as it seems.
I agree with this, but what happens when a company no longer needs Bob to introduce new services? What if the company is already established? Then Bob's skills are no longer needed. A lot of experienced people will eventually fall into this category at one point or another in their career's. The Stevens can be taught what they need to do in order to keep the company and established service going, it's now up the sales team to bring in more business, not Bob's technical expertise. Bob is more in an R&D role now and a company that has a successful established business with competent employees like Steven that have learned their new roles no longer needs to be paying the price for a Bob. Thus Bob is let go and his expertise is going to some other company that needs help establishing their service and Bob would fit in there. What happens when those companies run out and don't have a need for establishing their service? Bob either goes on and starts his own company, or he collects unemployment.
I agree with this, but what happens when a company no longer needs Bob to introduce new services? What if the company is already established? Then Bob's skills are no longer needed.
Then Bob gets another job at another company or another project within the same company. Bob is kind of like a home builder/home architect and real estate developer all wrapped into one(comparing from software to real estate). When the housing development is completed and all homes are built, then Bob's job is done.
Gone are the days when one person stays at the same company for many years. We have turned into 'resources' and we're placed into projects with budgeted dollars and due dates next to our names. We must keep up our skill set at all times and be ready to go onto the next opportunity. And you want to be in a technology that always is growing, somewhere. And gain new emerging technologies along the way because they'll increase your demand in the future as those technologies expand and prior technologies diminish. It's a constant evolution and you must keep your eye on the future and try to have a crystal ball to determine what might be relevant skills/technologies that will keep you 'in demand' in the near future.
I am "Bob" in many ways. It's quite fun. I kind of like being a budgeted line item on a corporate spreadsheet.
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.
