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.
I think this topic is relevant for a lot of us and this article illustrates several points. As we know it's very difficult to prove but here is a time when it was proven.
Too Much Experience To Be Hired? Some Older Americans Face Age Bias
Blatant discrimination against older workers is illegal, but new research shows that it can be harder to get hired when you're older.
Most baby boomers say that they plan to keep working past conventional retirement age. But to do that, they have to get hired first. New research shows that can be harder when you're older.
The study was conducted by David Neumark, who is a professor of economics at the University of California, Irvine, and two other economists. They sent out 40,000 resumes for thousands of real jobs. The resumes for any given job were identical except for age.
"The call-back rate — the rate by which employers contact us and say we'd like to interview you — drops from young applicants to middle-aged applicants and drops further from middle-aged applicants to older applicants," Neumark says.
He also found the results were worse for older women than for older men. For women, he says, "the call-back rates dropped by around a quarter when you go from the young group to the middle-aged group. ... And they drop by another quarter when you go from the middle-age group to ... around age 65."
Blatant discrimination against older workers is illegal. For example, an employer couldn't advertise a job saying "people over 40 need not apply." A 50-year-old law called the Age Discrimination in Employment Act prevents that.
But there are other ways employers try to screen for age. For example, one company said that ideal candidates for regional sales jobs would be just two to three years out of college and that applicants with eight to 10 years of experience should be avoided. These were actual guidelines that tobacco company R.J. Reynolds gave to job recruiters. As a result, out of about 1,000 people hired for these positions, only 19 were over the age of 40.
This resulted in a lawsuit — made possible by a job recruiter who turned whistleblower and gave documents with the hiring guidelines to lawyers at the San Francisco firm Altshuler Berzon, which specializes in employment law.
The lawyers contacted the rejected job seekers, including a Georgia man named Billy Carter. He said he'd had no idea why he didn't get the R.J. Reynolds job until he got a letter from the lawyers.
"It made me mad," says Carter, especially when he realized that he wasn't the only one. "I know I could have been an asset to that company. It was very upsetting."
Below is an exhibit from an age discrimination complaint filed by Richard M. Villarreal against R.J. Reynolds. It shows resume review guidelines provided by R.J. Reynolds to Kelly Services to screen job applicants. It says Kelly should "stay away from" applicants who have been "in sales for 8-10 years."
Resume review guidelines provided by R.J. Reynolds to Kelly Services, which helped screen job applicants. Among the various aspects listed as undesirable is "in sales for 8-10 years."
Complaint for age discrimination filed by Richard Villarreal against R.J. Reynolds
Carter is not yet a plaintiff in the lawsuit. He is one of a dozen people Reynolds rejected who have petitioned the court to join the suit as additional plaintiffs. Currently, the only plaintiff is a man named Richard Villarreal. (Read his complaint.)
R.J. Reynolds and its attorney declined to comment because of the pending litigation. But in court documents, it doesn't deal with the discrimination charge. Its argument is that Villarreal doesn't even have a right to sue, that he waited too long to take action and that the age discrimination law protects people who have jobs — not people looking for jobs.
This is an exhibit in a complaint filed by Richard Villarreal against R.J. Reynolds for age discrimination. It shows that R.J. Reynolds considered the least desirable candidates for its territory manager positions to be those with the most experience. The company called ideal candidates for these jobs "Blue Chip TM."
Exhibit B of a complaint filed by Richard Villarreal against R.J. Reynolds for age discrimination. It shows a candidate profile preferred by R.J. Reynolds for its Territory Manager candidates. The ideal candidate for these jobs is called the "Blue Chip TM."
Complaint for age discrimination filed by Richard Villarreal against R.J. Reynolds
The courts have been torn on these issues. Reynolds won in federal district court, but Villarreal won on appeal. Reynolds then asked for the full appeals court of the 11th Circuit to hear the case and won that round. However, even the judges who sided with Reynolds did so for different reasons, authoring three separate opinions. Villarreal is now waiting to hear whether the Supreme Court will take his case.
The Villarreal lawsuit has attracted the attention of advocates for older adults. AARP has filed a friend of the court brief, as have some labor economists, including Neumark. Meanwhile, Congress could take action. A bipartisan group of senators has introduced a bill that would clarify the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.
Whatever happens in Congress or in the courts, discrimination against older workers is going to be a bigger issue if for no other reason than people are living longer lives and wanting — and needing — to work longer, too.
the 50 year old person only worked 10 years of their life?
I'm closing in on 50 (wow, did I just say that?) and I only list the last ten years or so on my resume. If they want to assume that must mean I'm 30, fine... get me in the interview and I can show them why I'm the one they should hire.
I am wondering, though, about the "identical resume except for age" bit... I'm assuming they probably put different college graduation dates. But that's assuming that everyone graduates at about the same date. Lots of people get degrees later in life. And there is no requirement to list dates! Just put the school and degree, especially if you're worried about being filtered out.
I forgot that people list primarily last 10 years, I haven't worked that long so it hasn't been a concern of mine. When I applied at the fed, they wanted 10 years, so I had to list the years as unemployed high school/college student
Happens all the time and really needs to be stopped. In other countries, or international job ads, they just list the age requirement right in the ad for all to see.
We need to pass a law where it is illegal to ask for dates for anything. You list degrees without dates and then list experience with number of years but no dates.
Then no age related information is allowed to be collected until after a job is offered and accepted.
So, is it *age* discrimination or *experience* discrimination that's the big deal, exactly? Like, say you have a college degree, but no work history... then go back and get a grad degree. When you graduate and seek work, you're in your mid-thirties - which lens are they going to view you with, more likely?
Happens all the time and really needs to be stopped. In other countries, or international job ads, they just list the age requirement right in the ad for all to see.
We need to pass a law where it is illegal to ask for dates for anything. You list degrees without dates and then list experience with number of years but no dates.
Then no age related information is allowed to be collected until after a job is offered and accepted.
The unfortunate reality is that they can make all the laws they want, but employers have multiple ways of weeding out us old farts from the job application process.
Anyways, if an older person makes it to the interview stage, you are still at the mercy of the people interviewing you. You walk in and they see grey hairs, wrinkles, and it's game over ("thank you for your applying, however, we have decided to move on..").
Many a people have experienced just that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by emeraldmist
So, is it *age* discrimination or *experience* discrimination that's the big deal, exactly? Like, say you have a college degree, but no work history... then go back and get a grad degree. When you graduate and seek work, you're in your mid-thirties - which lens are they going to view you with, more likely?
It is AGE, pure and simple.
Like it or not, employers just don't like older people because they equate age with negative character attributes like being sick, slow, bumbling, cranky, etc.
That's it, simply. Everything else they may state, such as being older means higher salary requirements, all of that is just sugar coating B.S. and the real reason is that they just don't like old people compared to younger and more 'vibrant' and attractive people.
Pass universal healthcare and discrimination tort reform and watch age discrimination diminish.
Most employers would have no problem hiring a qualified older person, but for two things - health insurance premiums skyrocket and cannot get rid of them if they are no good as they will sue for age discrimination.
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.
