4 ms·

the challenge isn't getting the job or learning the skill, it's: * convincing someone to pay you commensurate with your age and experience over a 22 year old k

the challenge isn't getting the job or learning the skill, it's: * convincing someone to pay you commensurate with your age and experience over a 22 year old kid who needs one third the money and benefits * convincing the hiring manager that you're not in it because you are desperate or going through a midlife crisis * convincing the hiring manager that you won't mind being at the bottom of the totem pole, both at work and in society (programming is not a prestigious career to 90% of people) notice how much convincing there is to do, despite the facts? if you go down this road you will be battling perceptions, not reality.

yetanotherphd 13y ago
Where is the fairness in paying older people more because they "need" the money more? Your other two points were reasonable though.
- beachstartup 13y ago
  who said anything about fairness? what a quaint concept.
  - yetanotherphd 13y ago
    I thought it was implied by "[the challenge is] convincing someone to pay you commensurate with your age and experience over a 22 year old kid who needs one third the money and benefits ... notice how much convincing there is to do, despite the facts?" That is, the facts implied that the poster was owed a salary that reflected both is age, experience, and his need for a greater salary. Other people sometimes argue that employers don't like to employ older people because the demand more money. I always found this argument strange because that would still imply that given the same salary, the employer has no preference either way, and so the employer has no reason not to offer the lower salary to the older applicant.
DavidWoof 13y ago
You mean he'll have a hard time convincing someone to pay him commensurate with his zero years of experience? How does that work exactly?
- beachstartup 13y ago
  yes. he will have a hard time convincing someone to pay him either: 1) 35k as a 40 year old 2) 100k as programmer with no experience have you ever hired anyone in your life above the age of 40? well i have. this is all the stuff that is UNWRITTEN, and UNSPOKEN in the workplace, because writing or speaking it is extremely illegal. this is why HN exists, so you can get real life opinions instead of the smarmy, PC, CYA bullshit you will hear in real life.
srameshc 13y ago
>>if you go down this road you will be battling perceptions, not reality. Thanks @beachstartup for bringing out these key points.
nilkn 13y ago
At least in the US, software development is far , far from "the bottom of the totem pole" socially. I actually have no idea how anybody could think that. No, it's not the same socially as being, say, a heart surgeon or a senator, but it's a better career than virtually all others accessible with just a bachelor's degree, on par with chemical engineering.
- beachstartup 13y ago
  you're right - chemical engineers are also on the bottom of the totem pole. basically if you aren't in management or ownership, you are the bottom of the totem pole. this is by definition. if you look at an organization chart - who's on the bottom?
  - nilkn 13y ago
    Janitors. But they're not people, right? No reason to pay any attention to them. Also, let's ignore all the people in the world who don't even work at large, prestigious, and highly profitable companies in the first place. They don't matter and aren't to be considered even part of society. You are thinking inside of a bubble and ignoring everything outside it. You're constructing a highly exclusive slice of society with developers at the bottom, million-dollar attorneys in the middle, and rock-star CEOs and billionaires at the top. There exist thousands of towns and small cities, each with many, many thousands of people, where 95% of jobs are worse than almost any given programming job in a larger city and very significantly worse than a programming job at, say, Google or Facebook.
    - beachstartup 13y ago
      well, programmers and sysadmins are about the same level as janitors, or plumbers, or any other kind of laborer. not sure why you're upset at this.
      - nilkn 13y ago
        I think at this point you're just deliberately being obtuse. You're free to make bizarre claims like that which virtually nobody would agree with, but unless you want to take the time to elaborate I'm not going to take the time to engage with you on this.

yetanotherphd 13y ago

Where is the fairness in paying older people more because they "need" the money more? Your other two points were reasonable though.

beachstartup 13y ago
who said anything about fairness? what a quaint concept.
- yetanotherphd 13y ago
  I thought it was implied by "[the challenge is] convincing someone to pay you commensurate with your age and experience over a 22 year old kid who needs one third the money and benefits ... notice how much convincing there is to do, despite the facts?" That is, the facts implied that the poster was owed a salary that reflected both is age, experience, and his need for a greater salary. Other people sometimes argue that employers don't like to employ older people because the demand more money. I always found this argument strange because that would still imply that given the same salary, the employer has no preference either way, and so the employer has no reason not to offer the lower salary to the older applicant.

DavidWoof 13y ago

You mean he'll have a hard time convincing someone to pay him commensurate with his zero years of experience? How does that work exactly?

beachstartup 13y ago
yes. he will have a hard time convincing someone to pay him either: 1) 35k as a 40 year old 2) 100k as programmer with no experience have you ever hired anyone in your life above the age of 40? well i have. this is all the stuff that is UNWRITTEN, and UNSPOKEN in the workplace, because writing or speaking it is extremely illegal. this is why HN exists, so you can get real life opinions instead of the smarmy, PC, CYA bullshit you will hear in real life.

srameshc 13y ago

>>if you go down this road you will be battling perceptions, not reality. Thanks @beachstartup for bringing out these key points.

nilkn 13y ago

At least in the US, software development is far , far from "the bottom of the totem pole" socially. I actually have no idea how anybody could think that. No, it's not the same socially as being, say, a heart surgeon or a senator, but it's a better career than virtually all others accessible with just a bachelor's degree, on par with chemical engineering.

beachstartup 13y ago
you're right - chemical engineers are also on the bottom of the totem pole. basically if you aren't in management or ownership, you are the bottom of the totem pole. this is by definition. if you look at an organization chart - who's on the bottom?
- nilkn 13y ago
  Janitors. But they're not people, right? No reason to pay any attention to them. Also, let's ignore all the people in the world who don't even work at large, prestigious, and highly profitable companies in the first place. They don't matter and aren't to be considered even part of society. You are thinking inside of a bubble and ignoring everything outside it. You're constructing a highly exclusive slice of society with developers at the bottom, million-dollar attorneys in the middle, and rock-star CEOs and billionaires at the top. There exist thousands of towns and small cities, each with many, many thousands of people, where 95% of jobs are worse than almost any given programming job in a larger city and very significantly worse than a programming job at, say, Google or Facebook.
  - beachstartup 13y ago
    well, programmers and sysadmins are about the same level as janitors, or plumbers, or any other kind of laborer. not sure why you're upset at this.
    - nilkn 13y ago
      I think at this point you're just deliberately being obtuse. You're free to make bizarre claims like that which virtually nobody would agree with, but unless you want to take the time to elaborate I'm not going to take the time to engage with you on this.