3 ms·

>I wouldn't try to be "current", I'd end up looking like an idiot. But I'd appear in a decent pair of pants and nice blue shirt and proper shoes. So you're say

>I wouldn't try to be "current", I'd end up looking like an idiot. But I'd appear in a decent pair of pants and nice blue shirt and proper shoes. So you're saying that you're over 50, so you can't look "current", and it's fine for companies to discriminate based on that? The advice in the article is literally "look current". The advice isn't "wear proper shoes", it's wear shoes that make you look younger.

chernevik 5y ago
Well, that's bad advice. Few things are more pathetic than a middle-aged man trying to look hip. But it is fair of you to notice that I don't agree with the article either. My point was, it is reasonable for an interviewer to notice my dress and what it says about me. Dress reasonably professionally and appropriately and it won't be a problem. For me to try to figure out today's sneakers would just be a disaster. I have good business casual shoes and they'll do fine.
- sarchertech 5y ago
  It might be reasonable for an interview to notice how you dress. It's certainly not reasonable for an interviewer to discriminate against you because you don't dress like a 25 y/o. The article is about age discrimination. Given that age discrimination is real, blind interviews could potentially help reduce the effects.
  - chernevik 5y ago
    They're AARP, noticing age discrimination is their mission. Myself, I don't see much of it out there. "Blind" interviews would be bad for everybody. Zoom is already bad enough. There is an enormous amount of information conveyed by facial expression. I can tell by the look on your face if you aren't following me, or if you are super in-tune with it and I get more complicated still. If we're going to generalize, I suspect that most older candidates would be better at reading and reacting to such nonverbal signals.

3 ms·

>I wouldn't try to be "current", I'd end up looking like an idiot. But I'd appear in a decent pair of pants and nice blue shirt and proper shoes. So you're say

by sarchertech 5y ago

chernevik 5y ago
Well, that's bad advice. Few things are more pathetic than a middle-aged man trying to look hip. But it is fair of you to notice that I don't agree with the article either. My point was, it is reasonable for an interviewer to notice my dress and what it says about me. Dress reasonably professionally and appropriately and it won't be a problem. For me to try to figure out today's sneakers would just be a disaster. I have good business casual shoes and they'll do fine.
- sarchertech 5y ago
  It might be reasonable for an interview to notice how you dress. It's certainly not reasonable for an interviewer to discriminate against you because you don't dress like a 25 y/o. The article is about age discrimination. Given that age discrimination is real, blind interviews could potentially help reduce the effects.
  - chernevik 5y ago
    They're AARP, noticing age discrimination is their mission. Myself, I don't see much of it out there. "Blind" interviews would be bad for everybody. Zoom is already bad enough. There is an enormous amount of information conveyed by facial expression. I can tell by the look on your face if you aren't following me, or if you are super in-tune with it and I get more complicated still. If we're going to generalize, I suspect that most older candidates would be better at reading and reacting to such nonverbal signals.