9 ms·

So you're saying youre ok with employers discriminating based on your age because employers can do what they want?

vinceguidry 9y ago
As a professional, hopefully he's been planning for retirement for some number of years. And not all employers discriminate. So just find one who doesn't, finish off your retirement checklist, and leave the world of work to the kids. There are worse worlds to live in than one in which everyone can do what they want.
- Cthulhu_ 9y ago
  > So just find one who doesn't IBM didn't, until they did.
  - vinceguidry 9y ago
    I really don't understand the mentality here sometimes. HNers want ultimate choice for themselves, but the choices of the companies they work for are to be constrained such that the only choices they make are choices that benefit them. They want both ultimate security and benefit of market forces on their salaries. Libertarianism only when it suits them.
    - s73v3r_ 9y ago
      It's almost as if we care more about workers who are people, than big, faceless corporations.
- mental1896 9y ago
  Ah yes, the "let them eat cake" strategy.
  - vinceguidry 9y ago
    Oh these poor professional IBMers, making IBM salaries for all these years. These aren't the poor and downtrodden we're talking about here. Is it really too much to ask someone with a professional livelihood to build a professional safety net with it if they want safety? I rather like labor market liquidity, thank you very much. I wish there were more of it.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
- s73v3r_ 9y ago
  Oh? Just find a new employer? And if they get sick while unemployed, should they "just" cure cancer?
  - vinceguidry 9y ago
    > Just find a new employer? Umm, yeah? You do have a network of professional contacts whose bosses are constantly hitting up for personal references, don't you? There is still a shortage of qualified tech workers, isn't there? The world didn't just change overnight because IBM is laying some people off. Okay, you tell me. What social contract do you think should be on offer here? Because it sounds a lot to me like, "Give me everything and hold me accountable for nothing."
    - mixmastamyk 9y ago
      No, despite all the rhetoric about shortages, I'm seeing most companies sit on job reqs for a year waiting on a unicorn rather than taking a chance on a non-perfect fit. Largely due to the meme that started a decade+ ago that one bad hire can destroy a company, and everyone is secretly a non-learning moron. Heaven forbid they might have to allow you to train for two weeks for a two year job. Nope, must "hit the ground running."
      - vinceguidry 9y ago
        I wonder where it's going to go. Will the field fully stratify by tech stack? Kinda hard to imagine with how new stacks still pop up every 5 years or so. I'm already kinda leery of taking jobs outside of my specialty. I'm not at the point yet where I won't switch stacks, but I can see it getting there.
        mixmastamyk 9y ago
        Indeed, it might be even worse. You generally aren't allowed to take a job outside your specialty these days unless you've got a friend on the inside, or very early in your career. Or you can answer with 100% certainty a selection of twenty random questions on the new stack. Because there will always be one other candidate who dedicated their life to it. What you know right this second takes precedence over anything you might learn, even if you could look it up in thirty seconds. There is a book about "mindsets" I read recently. The growth mindset (teachable) and the fixed (born smart/dumb) mindset. Tech interviews are firmly in the later category, to our detriment.
Consultant32452 9y ago
Why would anyone be upset at a company shooting themselves in the foot? Discrimination is a luxury of the wealthy as it has a real market cost. If these older employees really are equal or more productive per dollar cost than their younger counterparts then surely someone will pick them up and get a market advantage.
- seanmcdirmid 9y ago
  There are a lot of biases that defy logic, age, gender, and ethnic biases being big ones. But let’s just take someone with a record, say a drug offense: even though it has little to do with coding, they are pretty much cut out of the high end labor market. Sure you might be able to get a job at a steel reduction in salary by someone who will exploit your situation, but that still sucks. Same with age: markets aren’t always as efficient as we think they should be.
  - Consultant32452 9y ago
    You're just expressing your own biases here. How would you prove that age based discrimination is economically irrational unless you let it happen? I tend to agree with you that IBM is hurting itself here. But I admit I could be wrong.
    - seanmcdirmid 9y ago
      My only point is that markets are not completely rational, and they are often irrational in many respects.
      - Consultant32452 9y ago
        Are you willing to even consider that what you're calling rational might not actually be rational? It's one thing to say you want to subsidize $group with some sort of legislation because it's moral or better for the broader economy, etc. It's another thing entirely to claim to be forcing any individual company to be acting in its own best interest.

As a professional, hopefully he's been planning for retirement for some number of years. And not all employers discriminate. So just find one who doesn't, finish off your retirement checklist, and leave the world of work to the kids. There are worse worlds to live in than one in which everyone can do what they want.

Cthulhu_ 9y ago
> So just find one who doesn't IBM didn't, until they did.
- vinceguidry 9y ago
  I really don't understand the mentality here sometimes. HNers want ultimate choice for themselves, but the choices of the companies they work for are to be constrained such that the only choices they make are choices that benefit them. They want both ultimate security and benefit of market forces on their salaries. Libertarianism only when it suits them.
  - s73v3r_ 9y ago
    It's almost as if we care more about workers who are people, than big, faceless corporations.
mental1896 9y ago
Ah yes, the "let them eat cake" strategy.
- vinceguidry 9y ago
  Oh these poor professional IBMers, making IBM salaries for all these years. These aren't the poor and downtrodden we're talking about here. Is it really too much to ask someone with a professional livelihood to build a professional safety net with it if they want safety? I rather like labor market liquidity, thank you very much. I wish there were more of it.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
s73v3r_ 9y ago
Oh? Just find a new employer? And if they get sick while unemployed, should they "just" cure cancer?
- vinceguidry 9y ago
  > Just find a new employer? Umm, yeah? You do have a network of professional contacts whose bosses are constantly hitting up for personal references, don't you? There is still a shortage of qualified tech workers, isn't there? The world didn't just change overnight because IBM is laying some people off. Okay, you tell me. What social contract do you think should be on offer here? Because it sounds a lot to me like, "Give me everything and hold me accountable for nothing."
  - mixmastamyk 9y ago
    No, despite all the rhetoric about shortages, I'm seeing most companies sit on job reqs for a year waiting on a unicorn rather than taking a chance on a non-perfect fit. Largely due to the meme that started a decade+ ago that one bad hire can destroy a company, and everyone is secretly a non-learning moron. Heaven forbid they might have to allow you to train for two weeks for a two year job. Nope, must "hit the ground running."
    - vinceguidry 9y ago
      I wonder where it's going to go. Will the field fully stratify by tech stack? Kinda hard to imagine with how new stacks still pop up every 5 years or so. I'm already kinda leery of taking jobs outside of my specialty. I'm not at the point yet where I won't switch stacks, but I can see it getting there.
      - mixmastamyk 9y ago
        Indeed, it might be even worse. You generally aren't allowed to take a job outside your specialty these days unless you've got a friend on the inside, or very early in your career. Or you can answer with 100% certainty a selection of twenty random questions on the new stack. Because there will always be one other candidate who dedicated their life to it. What you know right this second takes precedence over anything you might learn, even if you could look it up in thirty seconds. There is a book about "mindsets" I read recently. The growth mindset (teachable) and the fixed (born smart/dumb) mindset. Tech interviews are firmly in the later category, to our detriment.

Consultant32452 9y ago

Why would anyone be upset at a company shooting themselves in the foot? Discrimination is a luxury of the wealthy as it has a real market cost. If these older employees really are equal or more productive per dollar cost than their younger counterparts then surely someone will pick them up and get a market advantage.

seanmcdirmid 9y ago
There are a lot of biases that defy logic, age, gender, and ethnic biases being big ones. But let’s just take someone with a record, say a drug offense: even though it has little to do with coding, they are pretty much cut out of the high end labor market. Sure you might be able to get a job at a steel reduction in salary by someone who will exploit your situation, but that still sucks. Same with age: markets aren’t always as efficient as we think they should be.
- Consultant32452 9y ago
  You're just expressing your own biases here. How would you prove that age based discrimination is economically irrational unless you let it happen? I tend to agree with you that IBM is hurting itself here. But I admit I could be wrong.
  - seanmcdirmid 9y ago
    My only point is that markets are not completely rational, and they are often irrational in many respects.
    - Consultant32452 9y ago
      Are you willing to even consider that what you're calling rational might not actually be rational? It's one thing to say you want to subsidize $group with some sort of legislation because it's moral or better for the broader economy, etc. It's another thing entirely to claim to be forcing any individual company to be acting in its own best interest.