5 ms·

Some of those points are actually age discriminatory. For example, why assume that an older person should earn more than a younger person? Instead, it's bette

Some of those points are actually age discriminatory. For example, why assume that an older person should earn more than a younger person? Instead, it's better to think about paying people in proportion to the value that they provide to the company. I understand that many startups simply do not have the cash required to pay a high base salary. But, that's what equity compensation is for.

allengeorge 9y ago
Perhaps I didn't make myself clear: I'm not asking companies to pay older employees more. I'm simply pointing out that job-hopping and personal commitments make it likely that older employees will demand a higher salary, which smaller companies may be loath to give.
- dogruck 9y ago
  I think we simultaneously agree and disagree. I agree that older candidates typically have expectations of higher total compensation. My point is that, either: 1. That expectation is unfounded -- they are looking to be paid out of proportion to the value they would provide back to the company, or 2. That expectation is justified, in which case the cash-poor company should find some way of striking a deal, so that they can bring on an employee of high value.
- walshemj 9y ago
  Tough just because your a small company doesn't excuse you from how the market works or laws on discrimination.
- jpindar 9y ago
  People used to say that having dark skin made it likely that someone was less skilled. Both statements are prejudiced - pre-judging someone based on factors they cannot control.
jakobegger 9y ago
The problem with that line of thinking is that it is extremely hard to measure the value that employees provide to the company. “Pay them what they are worth” sounds straightforward, but in reality you just can’t put a number on a candidate. The younger candidate might be inexperienced but a fast learner; the older candidate might have a lot of experience, but might be reluctant to adopt the companies coding practices... There’s no way to know which of them is going to provide more value in the long term; but you do know that one of them expects a significantly higher salary.
- dogruck 9y ago
  I agree that it is hard to measure an employee's value. Furthermore, predicting a candidate's value is even more difficult. Even then, I think the compensation can be structured to reflect that risk profile.
- wpietri 9y ago
  > “Pay them what they are worth” but in reality you just can’t put a number on a candidate. I'm having trouble making sense of this. Isn't that exactly what the hiring manager does? Then, if that number is too far off, it gets adjusted later, once more data as to value comes in.
  - dogruck 9y ago
    A cynical way of saying it is that since assessing employee value is so difficult, companies adopt a strategy of systematically discriminating against older candidates.
- jpindar 9y ago
  >you do know that one of them expects a significantly higher salary. How do you know that before you ask them?
zeroxfe 9y ago
> For example, why assume that an older person should earn more than a younger person? They shouldn't earn more, if they're providing the same value as someone paid less. But, they typically ask for more, because they have more experience (which is difficult to validate), and usually have more financial obligations. It is up to the employer to decide if they want to pay the price of seniority. > I understand that many startups simply do not have the cash required to pay a high base salary. But, that's what equity compensation is for. As one gets older, it's in their best interest to become more financially risk averse, and require more predictability and less uncertainty. Startup equity is very high-risk, and therefore not acceptable as a replacement to more salary.
- dogruck 9y ago
  I agree with you that increased age does not imply increased value/pay. I do not agree about risk aversion. I know several older software developers who have finally paid off their student debt and accumulated some savings, and are now ready to accept some higher risk compensation. In addition, I know younger workers who are in desperate need of cash.
davidcbc 9y ago
Nobody is assuming you should pay an older person more because they are older, but because they are more experienced. Paying someone with 30 years experience more than someone fresh out of school isn't age discrimination. Find me a fresh out of school 20 year old with 30 years experience and I'll pay them more too.
- dogruck 9y ago
  I can deliver a bunch of employees with 30 years of experience, who are overpaid. I can also deliver inexperienced employees who are underpaid.
  - Clubber 9y ago
    I would argue based on their contribution to the bottom line, all tech workers, regardless of age, are significantly underpaid.
    - dogruck 9y ago
      I would argue that cannot be true. If it were true, new companies would emerge that paid good employees more -- closer to their fair value. (Also, most companies pay employees more than fair value, to discourage them from shirking.)
      - RhodesianHunter 9y ago
        "new companies would emerge that paid good employees more" This has been happening for a decade or more... Every time I look at salaries they've gone up significantly more that other fields.
        dogruck 9y ago
        It's likely that pay has gone up because tech workers are providing more value. Consider an employee working at an investment bank 15 years ago versus today. 15 years ago, most value was generated by hoards of sales people and traders who cultured deep personal relationships with deep-pocketed customers. Today, tech people command a greater share of the wallet, and banks are making deep cuts to the ranks of sales people and traders.
bdcravens 9y ago
> why assume that an older person should earn more than a younger person I personally feel there's a point where it's a law of diminishing returns, somewhere around the 5-10 year of experience mark. > it's better to think about paying people in proportion to the value that they provide to the company. In general older developers are bringing experience from other projects, other industries, past crises, and soft skills that provide value (for instance, I think a 24 year old and a 40 year old have different approaches to telling someone they disagree with them)

allengeorge 9y ago

Perhaps I didn't make myself clear: I'm not asking companies to pay older employees more. I'm simply pointing out that job-hopping and personal commitments make it likely that older employees will demand a higher salary, which smaller companies may be loath to give.

dogruck 9y ago
I think we simultaneously agree and disagree. I agree that older candidates typically have expectations of higher total compensation. My point is that, either: 1. That expectation is unfounded -- they are looking to be paid out of proportion to the value they would provide back to the company, or 2. That expectation is justified, in which case the cash-poor company should find some way of striking a deal, so that they can bring on an employee of high value.
walshemj 9y ago
Tough just because your a small company doesn't excuse you from how the market works or laws on discrimination.
jpindar 9y ago
People used to say that having dark skin made it likely that someone was less skilled. Both statements are prejudiced - pre-judging someone based on factors they cannot control.

jakobegger 9y ago

The problem with that line of thinking is that it is extremely hard to measure the value that employees provide to the company. “Pay them what they are worth” sounds straightforward, but in reality you just can’t put a number on a candidate. The younger candidate might be inexperienced but a fast learner; the older candidate might have a lot of experience, but might be reluctant to adopt the companies coding practices... There’s no way to know which of them is going to provide more value in the long term; but you do know that one of them expects a significantly higher salary.

dogruck 9y ago
I agree that it is hard to measure an employee's value. Furthermore, predicting a candidate's value is even more difficult. Even then, I think the compensation can be structured to reflect that risk profile.
wpietri 9y ago
> “Pay them what they are worth” but in reality you just can’t put a number on a candidate. I'm having trouble making sense of this. Isn't that exactly what the hiring manager does? Then, if that number is too far off, it gets adjusted later, once more data as to value comes in.
- dogruck 9y ago
  A cynical way of saying it is that since assessing employee value is so difficult, companies adopt a strategy of systematically discriminating against older candidates.
jpindar 9y ago
>you do know that one of them expects a significantly higher salary. How do you know that before you ask them?

zeroxfe 9y ago

> For example, why assume that an older person should earn more than a younger person? They shouldn't earn more, if they're providing the same value as someone paid less. But, they typically ask for more, because they have more experience (which is difficult to validate), and usually have more financial obligations. It is up to the employer to decide if they want to pay the price of seniority. > I understand that many startups simply do not have the cash required to pay a high base salary. But, that's what equity compensation is for. As one gets older, it's in their best interest to become more financially risk averse, and require more predictability and less uncertainty. Startup equity is very high-risk, and therefore not acceptable as a replacement to more salary.

dogruck 9y ago
I agree with you that increased age does not imply increased value/pay. I do not agree about risk aversion. I know several older software developers who have finally paid off their student debt and accumulated some savings, and are now ready to accept some higher risk compensation. In addition, I know younger workers who are in desperate need of cash.

davidcbc 9y ago

Nobody is assuming you should pay an older person more because they are older, but because they are more experienced. Paying someone with 30 years experience more than someone fresh out of school isn't age discrimination. Find me a fresh out of school 20 year old with 30 years experience and I'll pay them more too.

dogruck 9y ago
I can deliver a bunch of employees with 30 years of experience, who are overpaid. I can also deliver inexperienced employees who are underpaid.
- Clubber 9y ago
  I would argue based on their contribution to the bottom line, all tech workers, regardless of age, are significantly underpaid.
  - dogruck 9y ago
    I would argue that cannot be true. If it were true, new companies would emerge that paid good employees more -- closer to their fair value. (Also, most companies pay employees more than fair value, to discourage them from shirking.)
    - RhodesianHunter 9y ago
      "new companies would emerge that paid good employees more" This has been happening for a decade or more... Every time I look at salaries they've gone up significantly more that other fields.
      - dogruck 9y ago
        It's likely that pay has gone up because tech workers are providing more value. Consider an employee working at an investment bank 15 years ago versus today. 15 years ago, most value was generated by hoards of sales people and traders who cultured deep personal relationships with deep-pocketed customers. Today, tech people command a greater share of the wallet, and banks are making deep cuts to the ranks of sales people and traders.

bdcravens 9y ago

> why assume that an older person should earn more than a younger person I personally feel there's a point where it's a law of diminishing returns, somewhere around the 5-10 year of experience mark. > it's better to think about paying people in proportion to the value that they provide to the company. In general older developers are bringing experience from other projects, other industries, past crises, and soft skills that provide value (for instance, I think a 24 year old and a 40 year old have different approaches to telling someone they disagree with them)