5 ms·

Yes I am a lifer. I prioritize personal investment and social engagement over raw salary income. I could find a better paying job tomorrow, within my current c

Yes I am a lifer. I prioritize personal investment and social engagement over raw salary income. I could find a better paying job tomorrow, within my current company. I like being up to my elbows in the business problem, and the best way to get a seat at the table is to have been around long enough to earn it. My spouse and I both work at the same company, which greatly increases the sticky-ness of it for me. I can book family meetings with them from within my work calendar. That's worth a lot. I've spend 15 years ingratiating myself across multiple teams, and multiple larger organizational slices. I have a lot of contacts to fall back on. If I needed a new job tomorrow, I could find one within the company, without having to go outside. A lot of your items are "of the moment" and could change tomorrow. I wouldn't bank on them remaining stable.

screwturner68 4y ago
I'm a lifer my self (21 years so for). The thing is I'm not even close to senior, we have lots of guys with 30+ years sitting at the head of the table. The biggest problem I see is with the older lifers not wanting to leave, not carrying their weight, not keeping up with changes and doing the bare minimum required of them. They are a wealth of knowledge, knowledge about things we haven't seen in a decade or more. I understand why they stay, they are paid very well and not much is expected of them but they are also 70+ years old with full pensions & 401Ks doing the job that a college grad could do. To me it's not fair to the young guys who we should be training and mentoring, instead a guy in his late 40's is the youngest guy on the team....sorry for my rambling but the point I'm trying to get to is longevity shouldn't be the reason you are at the table, it should be about what you bring to the table. That said like you having a wealth of contacts is invaluable -who needs to open a ticket when you can call the developer who you've known for a decade or more and who's happy to take your call.
- SamuelAdams 4y ago
  Sounds like an easy solution. If they do the bare minimum, that’s not a problem. If you want to get rid of them or take advantage of their expertise, raise the bar. Require more work in some way so that the jobs they do 6 months from now isn’t something that could be done by a new grad. If they follow you, great. Everyone wins. If they do not, here’s options to exit, take a pick, have a good life.
- bagels 4y ago
  What kind of place has 70 year old technologists sitting around doing nothing?
  - ido 4y ago
    IBM? Oracle? SAP? BTW did you know the above are the number 2, 3 & 4 largest software companies in the world respectively[0]? Also I suspect "doing nothing" is a bit of an exaggeration and/or OP isn't 100% privy to what these people actually do. It's probably a relaxed pace but not literally "nothing" & their experience and knowledge still make that valuable for the company. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_software_companies#Forbes_Global_2000 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_software_c...
  - yeuxardents 4y ago
    Universities. Politics, knowing where bodies are buried and entrenched bureaucracy can be just as much "tenure" but for staff. It can be pretty bad, and often is.
- oreally 4y ago
  If it's all about "what you bring to the table", older folk will always be at a disadvantage due to their obligations to things that isn't just the company (and disabilities as well). This is the bordering on ageism, brought on by meritocracy thinking that everyone starts from the same spot.
  - Thorrez 4y ago
    >older folk will always be at a disadvantage due to their obligations to things that isn't just the company You're talking about kids? I would think kids require less work over time. I would think a 30-year-old employee with a 1-year-old kid would have more home obligations than a 55-year-old employee with a 26-year-old kid.
  - sokoloff 4y ago
    As someone whose age starts with a 5, I don’t think it’s at all ageist to judge people on what they bring to the table at work. In fact, it would seem “reverse ageist” to have lower expectations for someone who was older. If you can (and will) do the job, you should be welcomed, respected, and rewarded without regard to age, race, gender, degree, veteran status, parenthood, height, weight, or any of 100 other irrelevant characteristics.
    - oreally 4y ago
      Even if you're in your 50s, you have to acknowledge that eventually you're going to tire out just by how our biological mechanisms wear out. Hopefully, you have a nest egg of sorts by then. And if you don't, well you can't do the job and according to your standards, be kicked/compensated less. > If you can (and will) do the job, you should be welcomed, respected, and rewarded without regard to age, race, gender, degree, veteran status, parenthood, height, weight, or any of 100 other irrelevant characteristics. I used to think in this way, that everything should be pure merit. Unfortunately reality doesn't work that way, inputs and rewards are hard to quantify, and the pareto principle exists. Eg. Your work powering millions, yet you're only paid a month's salary and have to meet next month's expense. Furthermore, if things are left to pure meritocracy you'd have more and more in-groups and imbalance. So in some sense you'll be doing society a favor by uplifting others that are not part of the in-group of meritocracy purists.
saagarjha 4y ago
Curious what kinds of things you're booking on your work calendar? I can see blocking off time but I'm not entirely sure I would be comfortable putting any details for family meetings on my work calendar…

screwturner68 4y ago

I'm a lifer my self (21 years so for). The thing is I'm not even close to senior, we have lots of guys with 30+ years sitting at the head of the table. The biggest problem I see is with the older lifers not wanting to leave, not carrying their weight, not keeping up with changes and doing the bare minimum required of them. They are a wealth of knowledge, knowledge about things we haven't seen in a decade or more. I understand why they stay, they are paid very well and not much is expected of them but they are also 70+ years old with full pensions & 401Ks doing the job that a college grad could do. To me it's not fair to the young guys who we should be training and mentoring, instead a guy in his late 40's is the youngest guy on the team....sorry for my rambling but the point I'm trying to get to is longevity shouldn't be the reason you are at the table, it should be about what you bring to the table. That said like you having a wealth of contacts is invaluable -who needs to open a ticket when you can call the developer who you've known for a decade or more and who's happy to take your call.

SamuelAdams 4y ago
Sounds like an easy solution. If they do the bare minimum, that’s not a problem. If you want to get rid of them or take advantage of their expertise, raise the bar. Require more work in some way so that the jobs they do 6 months from now isn’t something that could be done by a new grad. If they follow you, great. Everyone wins. If they do not, here’s options to exit, take a pick, have a good life.
bagels 4y ago
What kind of place has 70 year old technologists sitting around doing nothing?
- ido 4y ago
  IBM? Oracle? SAP? BTW did you know the above are the number 2, 3 & 4 largest software companies in the world respectively[0]? Also I suspect "doing nothing" is a bit of an exaggeration and/or OP isn't 100% privy to what these people actually do. It's probably a relaxed pace but not literally "nothing" & their experience and knowledge still make that valuable for the company. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_software_companies#Forbes_Global_2000 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_software_c...
- yeuxardents 4y ago
  Universities. Politics, knowing where bodies are buried and entrenched bureaucracy can be just as much "tenure" but for staff. It can be pretty bad, and often is.
oreally 4y ago
If it's all about "what you bring to the table", older folk will always be at a disadvantage due to their obligations to things that isn't just the company (and disabilities as well). This is the bordering on ageism, brought on by meritocracy thinking that everyone starts from the same spot.
- Thorrez 4y ago
  >older folk will always be at a disadvantage due to their obligations to things that isn't just the company You're talking about kids? I would think kids require less work over time. I would think a 30-year-old employee with a 1-year-old kid would have more home obligations than a 55-year-old employee with a 26-year-old kid.
- sokoloff 4y ago
  As someone whose age starts with a 5, I don’t think it’s at all ageist to judge people on what they bring to the table at work. In fact, it would seem “reverse ageist” to have lower expectations for someone who was older. If you can (and will) do the job, you should be welcomed, respected, and rewarded without regard to age, race, gender, degree, veteran status, parenthood, height, weight, or any of 100 other irrelevant characteristics.
  - oreally 4y ago
    Even if you're in your 50s, you have to acknowledge that eventually you're going to tire out just by how our biological mechanisms wear out. Hopefully, you have a nest egg of sorts by then. And if you don't, well you can't do the job and according to your standards, be kicked/compensated less. > If you can (and will) do the job, you should be welcomed, respected, and rewarded without regard to age, race, gender, degree, veteran status, parenthood, height, weight, or any of 100 other irrelevant characteristics. I used to think in this way, that everything should be pure merit. Unfortunately reality doesn't work that way, inputs and rewards are hard to quantify, and the pareto principle exists. Eg. Your work powering millions, yet you're only paid a month's salary and have to meet next month's expense. Furthermore, if things are left to pure meritocracy you'd have more and more in-groups and imbalance. So in some sense you'll be doing society a favor by uplifting others that are not part of the in-group of meritocracy purists.

saagarjha 4y ago

Curious what kinds of things you're booking on your work calendar? I can see blocking off time but I'm not entirely sure I would be comfortable putting any details for family meetings on my work calendar…