5 ms·

Perhaps age is just an oddball compared to the other protected classes, because there are legitimate reasons not to employ someone young (e.g., if the position

Perhaps age is just an oddball compared to the other protected classes, because there are legitimate reasons not to employ someone young (e.g., if the position requires x years of professional experience but the candidate has only been of working age for <x years) while there aren't many legitimate reasons not to employ someone old. Gender, race, etc. don't have this natural asymmetry.

thethimble 4y ago
Another interesting angle is that everyone eventually will become old and therefore in this protected class. It's not like race, gender, etc. in that way.
- codefreeordie 4y ago
  Everyone old was once young, but not everyone young will live to be old.
8note 4y ago
There's similarly good reasons to not hire somebody old though - theyve already been trained in some other work method, have/spend time with their families, have retirement sooner, etc
- falcolas 4y ago
  > have retirement sooner By that logic, you shouldnt hire women, since they may get pregnant and take extensive leave on your company’s dime. Or men, whose partner could get pregnant (or adopt). > have/spend time with their families Applies to anyone over the age of 18. Probably under 18 too. > theyve already been trained in some other work method Which is why once you learn one programming language, you are immediately banned for working with any other language.
  - mise_en_place 4y ago
    I just want to comment that your comment reminded me of min wage requirements. I'd love to hire a really Jr DevOps engineer but because of min wage and benefits that makes it impossible. If there was no min wage requirements I could hire a high school student with interest and not get destroyed financially by regulations
    - soco 4y ago
      Which is exactly why there are regulations in the first place, to protect also that high school student with interest from being kicked out next year when a new round of high schoolers with interest comes around.
    - moron4hire 4y ago
      Maybe you can't hire anyone because your business model just sucks.
      - mise_en_place 4y ago
        No, the req just becomes a senior role because comp has to be adjusted accordingly. Do you think min wage creates jobs?
  - native_samples 4y ago
    > By that logic, you shouldnt hire women, since they may get pregnant and take extensive leave on your company’s dime Although you're presenting this as obviously absurd, taking that risk into account was long practice wasn't it? Forcing companies to pretend women are as likely to suddenly disappear for long periods as men is ultimately an economic choice and debatable as such in economic terms. It's essentially a kind of welfare that companies are made to pay, except instead of being an insurance scheme with actuarial rigor and smooth risk sharing over the entire population, it's a form of regressive taxation that disproportionately impacts smaller firms. It can therefore be argued that it'd be better for society to take a different approach here, maybe more similar to (non-US) healthcare, e.g. mandatory maternity leave insurance, and then allow companies to simply price in the higher risk of extended absences. If they're no longer on the hook for paying wages this difference would be basically disruption risk and shouldn't be a particularly large difference for any but the tiniest firms, especially as motherhood comes with a much longer notice period than the typical resignation.
- hunter2_ 4y ago
  Feel free to not hire someone because they say that they're going to use obsolete methods, or because they say they're going to take leave in excess of what's offered, or because they say they're going to resign in short order. Just don't use old age -- instead of statements like these -- to make assumptions! When someone is too young, however, there can be some guaranteed deficiencies that don't require any assumptions in order to know the requirements can't be met; for example, if you are looking to hire someone to create and execute a 10-year plan with prior experience doing so, it's impossible for a very young person to be qualified.
  - native_samples 4y ago
    A young person could simply argue that requiring prior experience is a form of age discrimination no different to saying "We are looking to hire someone to run a project, no usage of obsolete methods allowed" and then not defining what that means. After all, "years of experience" is a rather arbitrary measure, it's easy for people to rack up years on projects and learn nothing, and it's common for young people to have insights their elders lack despite the YoE difference. See: Larry Page, Sergey Brin, Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, the young Steve Jobs etc. Lots of young world-changing founders out there who easily beat people with far more experience.
- yjftsjthsd-h 4y ago
  > theyve already been trained in some other work method, We hired them for prior experience on purpose, yes. > have/spend time with their families, If that stands out, your company has a serious culture problem. > have retirement sooner, Isn't the average time at a job like 3 years in tech? Who cares if they leave for another company or retire at the end? Outside of tech I'm still skeptical that the odds of jumping for another job vs retiring is that different, actually.

thethimble 4y ago

Another interesting angle is that everyone eventually will become old and therefore in this protected class. It's not like race, gender, etc. in that way.

codefreeordie 4y ago
Everyone old was once young, but not everyone young will live to be old.

8note 4y ago

There's similarly good reasons to not hire somebody old though - theyve already been trained in some other work method, have/spend time with their families, have retirement sooner, etc

falcolas 4y ago
> have retirement sooner By that logic, you shouldnt hire women, since they may get pregnant and take extensive leave on your company’s dime. Or men, whose partner could get pregnant (or adopt). > have/spend time with their families Applies to anyone over the age of 18. Probably under 18 too. > theyve already been trained in some other work method Which is why once you learn one programming language, you are immediately banned for working with any other language.
- mise_en_place 4y ago
  I just want to comment that your comment reminded me of min wage requirements. I'd love to hire a really Jr DevOps engineer but because of min wage and benefits that makes it impossible. If there was no min wage requirements I could hire a high school student with interest and not get destroyed financially by regulations
  - soco 4y ago
    Which is exactly why there are regulations in the first place, to protect also that high school student with interest from being kicked out next year when a new round of high schoolers with interest comes around.
  - moron4hire 4y ago
    Maybe you can't hire anyone because your business model just sucks.
    - mise_en_place 4y ago
      No, the req just becomes a senior role because comp has to be adjusted accordingly. Do you think min wage creates jobs?
- native_samples 4y ago
  > By that logic, you shouldnt hire women, since they may get pregnant and take extensive leave on your company’s dime Although you're presenting this as obviously absurd, taking that risk into account was long practice wasn't it? Forcing companies to pretend women are as likely to suddenly disappear for long periods as men is ultimately an economic choice and debatable as such in economic terms. It's essentially a kind of welfare that companies are made to pay, except instead of being an insurance scheme with actuarial rigor and smooth risk sharing over the entire population, it's a form of regressive taxation that disproportionately impacts smaller firms. It can therefore be argued that it'd be better for society to take a different approach here, maybe more similar to (non-US) healthcare, e.g. mandatory maternity leave insurance, and then allow companies to simply price in the higher risk of extended absences. If they're no longer on the hook for paying wages this difference would be basically disruption risk and shouldn't be a particularly large difference for any but the tiniest firms, especially as motherhood comes with a much longer notice period than the typical resignation.
hunter2_ 4y ago
Feel free to not hire someone because they say that they're going to use obsolete methods, or because they say they're going to take leave in excess of what's offered, or because they say they're going to resign in short order. Just don't use old age -- instead of statements like these -- to make assumptions! When someone is too young, however, there can be some guaranteed deficiencies that don't require any assumptions in order to know the requirements can't be met; for example, if you are looking to hire someone to create and execute a 10-year plan with prior experience doing so, it's impossible for a very young person to be qualified.
- native_samples 4y ago
  A young person could simply argue that requiring prior experience is a form of age discrimination no different to saying "We are looking to hire someone to run a project, no usage of obsolete methods allowed" and then not defining what that means. After all, "years of experience" is a rather arbitrary measure, it's easy for people to rack up years on projects and learn nothing, and it's common for young people to have insights their elders lack despite the YoE difference. See: Larry Page, Sergey Brin, Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, the young Steve Jobs etc. Lots of young world-changing founders out there who easily beat people with far more experience.
yjftsjthsd-h 4y ago
> theyve already been trained in some other work method, We hired them for prior experience on purpose, yes. > have/spend time with their families, If that stands out, your company has a serious culture problem. > have retirement sooner, Isn't the average time at a job like 3 years in tech? Who cares if they leave for another company or retire at the end? Outside of tech I'm still skeptical that the odds of jumping for another job vs retiring is that different, actually.