“Sorry, you’re not quite what we’re looking for. I’m sure that there are plenty of companies looking for your particular background that could benefit from your knowledge of IT.”
Every day across America, older workers swallow lines like this from potential employers. And such words are usually delivered by a smiling, perky human resources person 25 years their junior. You walk away annihilated and crushed, and you wonder why this young thing had the chutzpah to smile while she was delivering a nasty verbal jab to your self-esteem.
What employers actually mean--but can’t say because of fears of a possible age-bias lawsuit--is: “Your qualifications are great on paper, but you’re over the hill. We’d prefer someone in their early to mid-20s--even mid-30s. In short, you’re really not good enough for our fast-track firm.”
Sound familiar? Whether they admit it or not, techies at all points on the skill ladder--from support technician and programmer to IT project manager and CTO--believe that they have seen their best days by their mid-40s.
There is nothing new about age bias in the workplace, especially in many technology companies. What is new is that “old” is now defined as over 40. A decade ago, it was 55 and 60. The great irony is that because of an aging work
I see where one young boy has just passed 500 hours sitting in a treetop. There is a good deal of discussion as to what to do with a civilization that produces prodigies like that. Wouldn't it be a good idea to take his ladder away from him and leave him up there?