6 ms·

At 60 you just got a few more years to work until you have to retire. It takes 2-3 years to really get comfortable with some bigger code base... So if you are l

At 60 you just got a few more years to work until you have to retire. It takes 2-3 years to really get comfortable with some bigger code base... So if you are looking for some longterm employee (if such a thing even exists), it's not worth it.

throwawaymath 8y ago
I disagree, unless you and I have radically different definitions of what "comfortable" means. If I'm hiring an engineer with the seniority I'd expect them to have at 20, 30 or 40 years in industry then I want them to ramp up inside of a year. I'm not going to expect them to be completely self-sufficient within a month. But they should be capable of implementing performant solutions to nontrivial problems with autonomy and collaboratively reviewing code with their peers. Stated another way - what are they doing for 2 - 3 years before they're comfortable that isn't worth it to hire them?
- Double_a_92 8y ago
  I meant comfortable as in knowing exactly how to solve something, instead of first having to read and debug through (legacy) code for 1-2 days everytime you touch some new area of the application. For me personally the worst unsecurity is not knowing where to put new code, without messing up some architectural separation that I'm not aware of.
  - b_t_s 8y ago
    I think that level of security is only even possible at companies with small codebases or a high degree of siloing. I totally fit this description as a junior with 2 or 3 years experience at my first job where I wrote half the product. At my current job where I've been for 7 or 8 years I can't imagine anyone on any team ever achieving that. Maybe for a little while when you're working in some corner of the codebase that you happen to know really well, but not long term. There's just too many devs making too many changes and nobody "owns" any area. I bet a third to a half of the code I wrote 3 years ago is gone or heavily modified already.
  - JustSomeNobody 8y ago
    I once worked on a very large project in the healthcare industry. During code reviews you had to provide evidence you did a full impact analysis because the system was so large that not a single person could keep it all in their head. We're talking millions of lines of code. Being senior doesn't make you a superhuman.
sillyquiet 8y ago
Since they're over 40, it may not be worth it but it's also almost certainly illegal. Assuming the employer is in the U.S. and has over 20 employees. https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/age.cfm https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/age.cfm
- anticensor 8y ago
  Does US anti-discrimination law really operate like "you have to serve the protected class whatever the consequences for unprotected ones?" European ones typically require both weak and strong classes be served equally, not in results, but in the manner and the matter.
  - sillyquiet 8y ago
    Not sure what you mean by 'consequences' for the unprotected classes in this context, but the age discrimination case would only be valid if both the Over-40 candidate and Under-40 candidate were equally qualified, and the Over-40 candidate was rejected solely because they are too close to retirement age. Note that due to the letter of the EEO law, there is NOT actionable age discrimination if all candidates were over 40, and for example, the 60 year old was rejected in favor of a 41 year old for the same reason as above. edit: I should also mention IANAL
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
  - astura 8y ago
    I think you're confusing "weak and strong classes" with "protected and unprotected classes" For example, national origin is a protected class and there was a case a few years ago where the EEOC got involved. It was a company owned by Indian-Americans(?) (might have been another nationality) who routinely turned down non-Indian-American job seekers (mostly whites) solely because they where non-Indian-American and they pretty much only hired other Indian-Americans and Indians. This was official policy. So everyone's national origin is protected, no matter what it is. Everyone is in a protected class. But say, people who have finger or face tattoos could be turned down for a job solely for having finger and face tattoos because people who have finger and face tattoos aren't a protected class.
astura 8y ago
That sort of reason for not hiring a 60 year old is illegal in the US.
- anticensor 8y ago
  Unless the job listing is specifically intended for interns.
  - astura 8y ago
    You're conflating different things. If you were hiring an intern and you got two resumes in order to comply with the law you'd have to consider a 60 year old intern still in college the same way you'd consider a 19 year old intern still in college.
- crispyambulance 8y ago
  Yet it happens, ALL THE TIME, even for candidates that are 40-ish and higher. It is always trivial to find another reason to not hire an older worker.

throwawaymath 8y ago

I disagree, unless you and I have radically different definitions of what "comfortable" means. If I'm hiring an engineer with the seniority I'd expect them to have at 20, 30 or 40 years in industry then I want them to ramp up inside of a year. I'm not going to expect them to be completely self-sufficient within a month. But they should be capable of implementing performant solutions to nontrivial problems with autonomy and collaboratively reviewing code with their peers. Stated another way - what are they doing for 2 - 3 years before they're comfortable that isn't worth it to hire them?

Double_a_92 8y ago
I meant comfortable as in knowing exactly how to solve something, instead of first having to read and debug through (legacy) code for 1-2 days everytime you touch some new area of the application. For me personally the worst unsecurity is not knowing where to put new code, without messing up some architectural separation that I'm not aware of.
- b_t_s 8y ago
  I think that level of security is only even possible at companies with small codebases or a high degree of siloing. I totally fit this description as a junior with 2 or 3 years experience at my first job where I wrote half the product. At my current job where I've been for 7 or 8 years I can't imagine anyone on any team ever achieving that. Maybe for a little while when you're working in some corner of the codebase that you happen to know really well, but not long term. There's just too many devs making too many changes and nobody "owns" any area. I bet a third to a half of the code I wrote 3 years ago is gone or heavily modified already.
- JustSomeNobody 8y ago
  I once worked on a very large project in the healthcare industry. During code reviews you had to provide evidence you did a full impact analysis because the system was so large that not a single person could keep it all in their head. We're talking millions of lines of code. Being senior doesn't make you a superhuman.

sillyquiet 8y ago

Since they're over 40, it may not be worth it but it's also almost certainly illegal. Assuming the employer is in the U.S. and has over 20 employees. https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/age.cfm https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/age.cfm

anticensor 8y ago
Does US anti-discrimination law really operate like "you have to serve the protected class whatever the consequences for unprotected ones?" European ones typically require both weak and strong classes be served equally, not in results, but in the manner and the matter.
- sillyquiet 8y ago
  Not sure what you mean by 'consequences' for the unprotected classes in this context, but the age discrimination case would only be valid if both the Over-40 candidate and Under-40 candidate were equally qualified, and the Over-40 candidate was rejected solely because they are too close to retirement age. Note that due to the letter of the EEO law, there is NOT actionable age discrimination if all candidates were over 40, and for example, the 60 year old was rejected in favor of a 41 year old for the same reason as above. edit: I should also mention IANAL
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- astura 8y ago
  I think you're confusing "weak and strong classes" with "protected and unprotected classes" For example, national origin is a protected class and there was a case a few years ago where the EEOC got involved. It was a company owned by Indian-Americans(?) (might have been another nationality) who routinely turned down non-Indian-American job seekers (mostly whites) solely because they where non-Indian-American and they pretty much only hired other Indian-Americans and Indians. This was official policy. So everyone's national origin is protected, no matter what it is. Everyone is in a protected class. But say, people who have finger or face tattoos could be turned down for a job solely for having finger and face tattoos because people who have finger and face tattoos aren't a protected class.

astura 8y ago

That sort of reason for not hiring a 60 year old is illegal in the US.

anticensor 8y ago
Unless the job listing is specifically intended for interns.
- astura 8y ago
  You're conflating different things. If you were hiring an intern and you got two resumes in order to comply with the law you'd have to consider a 60 year old intern still in college the same way you'd consider a 19 year old intern still in college.
crispyambulance 8y ago
Yet it happens, ALL THE TIME, even for candidates that are 40-ish and higher. It is always trivial to find another reason to not hire an older worker.