17 ms·

The discussion here is interesting, but I haven't seen any psychological and sociological aspects of hiring mentioned yet. Not all hiring decisions are rational

The discussion here is interesting, but I haven't seen any psychological and sociological aspects of hiring mentioned yet. Not all hiring decisions are rational. First, there's a culture thing - when a company is composed out of 20 year olds, it's natural for them to prefer working with other young people who they can relate to. That 40 year old job applicant, the one with the kids and the years of experience in companies that no longer exist doesn't look as relatable as someone your own age. Second, there's ego. In a company in which junior and even mid level managers are 25-35 years old, who wants to hire a 45 year old "veteran" that has 10 years more experience? Managing someone more knowledgeable than you is a challenge. It's much easier to get a fresh graduate and mold him into the employee you want him to be. Ego-wise, it's much nicer being the mentor than the mentee. There are many more aspects to this and I suspect that they play a more important role than at least some of the the purely rational reasons for ageism in our industry.

gaius 9y ago
mold him into the employee you want him to be Exploit him or her with false promises. FTFY.
- maltalex 9y ago
  > Exploit him or her with false promises. FTFY. Yeah, there's that too. But let's not even go there and assume that everything is strictly aboveboard. Otherwise we'll derail the discussion, and I think that the cultural aspect is one worth discussing. I really am talking about "molding him into the employee you want him to be" in terms of getting him to work the way you think is right. As opposed to hiring someone with different ideas than yours as to how to do the work he or she is supposed to to.
s3r3nity 9y ago
I worry that the "culture" argument has dangerous implications if true, as it can be used to discriminate on so many grounds outside of age: gender ("If I'm with a bunch of my bro's, why mess it up with a girl?"), race, language, disabilities, etc etc. I thought the "hacker culture" would be supportive of the idea that "if you can do the job well, let's work together on solving interesting problems," rather than the cliche "would I want to grab a beer with this person?"
- maltalex 9y ago
  > I worry that the "culture" argument has dangerous implications if true, as it can be used to discriminate on so many grounds outside of age: gender ("If I'm with a bunch of my bro's, why mess it up with a girl?"), race, language, disabilities, etc etc. Well, yeah. Only it's not "implications", it's the reality of tech hiring. The hiring practices of many tech companies have been called racist, sexist and age-discriminatory (although I haven't heard anything with regard to disabilities). One of the first counter arguments for the accused company is "culture fit". > I thought the "hacker culture" would be supportive of the idea that "if you can do the job well, let's work together on solving interesting problems," rather than the cliche "would I want to grab a beer with this person?" That's great in theory, but it doesn't hold water in practice. People are people. The "hacker culture" thing might work well if people work together via a mailing list, but if it's a bunch of people that spend many hours together in an office, then the social aspect play a bigger role I think.
  - soundwave106 9y ago
    In theory, if the tech hiring was purely about skillsets, one could adjust the interview process to focus only on that. I know some orchestras have shifted to "blind auditions" to eliminate bias, for instance, and it has helped out some groups previously left out of orchestras due to bias (female musicians notably). I think it would be possible to shift a technology-oriented hiring process towards those lines if one was most concerned about getting the best people for the job. In practice, to be honest, a lot of the stories I hear about age bias seem to come from the SV "startup culture" scene and a few of the other "new technology" type companies. In some ways, I almost think it's their loss. Passing over a fair bit of good talent just to get that, er, "culture fit" they want doesn't seem very optimal to me.
- teddyh 9y ago
  > I thought the "hacker culture" would be supportive of the idea (…) Oh, it is. But this isn’t the hacker culture. It’s startup culture. Take care not to confuse the two. To quote myself from three years ago (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9149922 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9149922): Saying “Hacker/Startup culture” is a little like saying “C/C++” – they are not the same and should not be conflated. Actually, it’s more like saying “Lisp/Java” – many people are enamored by the latter and thinks that the former is very similar, but it is in fact only similar in some superficial ways, and completely different in design, values, and style.
raducu 9y ago
It could be just my experience, but homogeneous teams have higher churn rates. What happens 6 months after 9 out of 10 juniors you hired want to become team leads? Or they dissagree on the technology stack? The advantages of younger people are numerous however: you can pay them less, make them work longer hours, make silly promises they will believe (think Elon Musk fooling his employees he's going to Mars).
mabbo 9y ago
Say it again, but replace the age ranges with races or genders. Your argument makes just as much sense, but it's more apparent why it's wrong. Company culture is not a valid reason for illegal discrimination.
1_2__4 9y ago
You could use arguments easily on the same moral parallels are those to exclude particular races, sexes, etc. I’m not calling you out - I think you’re correct actually, in the observation. But some biases are more politically and culturally palatable than others, even when there isn’t a whole lot of daylight between them.

gaius 9y ago

mold him into the employee you want him to be Exploit him or her with false promises. FTFY.

maltalex 9y ago
> Exploit him or her with false promises. FTFY. Yeah, there's that too. But let's not even go there and assume that everything is strictly aboveboard. Otherwise we'll derail the discussion, and I think that the cultural aspect is one worth discussing. I really am talking about "molding him into the employee you want him to be" in terms of getting him to work the way you think is right. As opposed to hiring someone with different ideas than yours as to how to do the work he or she is supposed to to.

s3r3nity 9y ago

I worry that the "culture" argument has dangerous implications if true, as it can be used to discriminate on so many grounds outside of age: gender ("If I'm with a bunch of my bro's, why mess it up with a girl?"), race, language, disabilities, etc etc. I thought the "hacker culture" would be supportive of the idea that "if you can do the job well, let's work together on solving interesting problems," rather than the cliche "would I want to grab a beer with this person?"

maltalex 9y ago
> I worry that the "culture" argument has dangerous implications if true, as it can be used to discriminate on so many grounds outside of age: gender ("If I'm with a bunch of my bro's, why mess it up with a girl?"), race, language, disabilities, etc etc. Well, yeah. Only it's not "implications", it's the reality of tech hiring. The hiring practices of many tech companies have been called racist, sexist and age-discriminatory (although I haven't heard anything with regard to disabilities). One of the first counter arguments for the accused company is "culture fit". > I thought the "hacker culture" would be supportive of the idea that "if you can do the job well, let's work together on solving interesting problems," rather than the cliche "would I want to grab a beer with this person?" That's great in theory, but it doesn't hold water in practice. People are people. The "hacker culture" thing might work well if people work together via a mailing list, but if it's a bunch of people that spend many hours together in an office, then the social aspect play a bigger role I think.
- soundwave106 9y ago
  In theory, if the tech hiring was purely about skillsets, one could adjust the interview process to focus only on that. I know some orchestras have shifted to "blind auditions" to eliminate bias, for instance, and it has helped out some groups previously left out of orchestras due to bias (female musicians notably). I think it would be possible to shift a technology-oriented hiring process towards those lines if one was most concerned about getting the best people for the job. In practice, to be honest, a lot of the stories I hear about age bias seem to come from the SV "startup culture" scene and a few of the other "new technology" type companies. In some ways, I almost think it's their loss. Passing over a fair bit of good talent just to get that, er, "culture fit" they want doesn't seem very optimal to me.
teddyh 9y ago
> I thought the "hacker culture" would be supportive of the idea (…) Oh, it is. But this isn’t the hacker culture. It’s startup culture. Take care not to confuse the two. To quote myself from three years ago (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9149922 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9149922): Saying “Hacker/Startup culture” is a little like saying “C/C++” – they are not the same and should not be conflated. Actually, it’s more like saying “Lisp/Java” – many people are enamored by the latter and thinks that the former is very similar, but it is in fact only similar in some superficial ways, and completely different in design, values, and style.

raducu 9y ago

It could be just my experience, but homogeneous teams have higher churn rates. What happens 6 months after 9 out of 10 juniors you hired want to become team leads? Or they dissagree on the technology stack? The advantages of younger people are numerous however: you can pay them less, make them work longer hours, make silly promises they will believe (think Elon Musk fooling his employees he's going to Mars).

mabbo 9y ago

Say it again, but replace the age ranges with races or genders. Your argument makes just as much sense, but it's more apparent why it's wrong. Company culture is not a valid reason for illegal discrimination.

1_2__4 9y ago

You could use arguments easily on the same moral parallels are those to exclude particular races, sexes, etc. I’m not calling you out - I think you’re correct actually, in the observation. But some biases are more politically and culturally palatable than others, even when there isn’t a whole lot of daylight between them.