7 ms·
Google Age Discrimination
- wehadfun 11y agoDoes Google still give those technical interviews? I could be wrong but if this person got past Googles interview would then the other reason they may not hire them is the cultural fit thing I'm assuming
- DannyBee 11y agoConsidering how many HN/Reddit people who have been turned down after phone screens have complained the interviewer never even read their resume, this is somewhat ironic (since it was a phone screen, it's unlikely you could even guess the age of the interviewee without one)
- hn_ 11y agoAre you saying you can't predict the age of someone without a phone screen and that a phone screen predicts age? I'm not sure how I would know a person's age by talking to them on the phone. Do people "sound old?" Not something I've noticed. On the other hand it is easy to know someone's age from their resume. If they graduated college in 1965 and have 20 years at two companies than you know they are pretty old. Though now that I think about it, the other day someone on the phone asked me if I was over 21. When I said I was 32 she was like "oh, I'm sorry, you sound so young."
- defen 11y agoNo, he's agreeing with you. "it's unlikely you could even guess the age of the interviewee without one" ("one" referring to the resume). He's saying that people complain about being turned down by Google after phone screens and say that the interviewer never even read their resume. For example maybe they applied for a sysadmin position and their resume was full of relevant experience and no college, and the phone screen leads off with a hardcore CS theory question. So if it's the case the interviewers don't read resumes prior to phone screens, then the odds are low that they discriminated against this guy for age-related reasons. However I suspect the truth lies somewhere in between - e.g. sometimes interviewers don't read resumes. I doubt it's an all or never situation.
- hn_ 11y agoThanks! The wording wasn't clear to me even though I reread it a couple times. Though people do talk about their experience on phone screens so that gives an indication of their age. But if the age was a problem you'd think they just wouldn't give him a phone screen (of course there is the aforementioned alleged "not reading the resume" too)
- DannyBee 11y agoSorry, I was kind of in a rush, looking back, i wish i had worded it a little more clearly. For the record, Google is probably the least ageist company i've ever been at or worked for.
- hn_ 11y agoHow have other companies you've worked at been ageist? In their hiring practices? Or job duties? I can't say I've ever personally witnessed any agism in my career (that I could identify) but my current job pretty much only hires entry level people. Not agism, its just that we promote to fill senior level positions then hire a replacement for the entry level person.
- mc32 11y agoSo are companies now supposed to mirror the demographics of a population exactly? Maybe they should all move to small college towns so they can reflect the local pop more closely. On the other hand it is curious none of the companies self reporting their diversity demographics included any age information, but then, age is not a protected class, as far as I know. As tech jobs become the mainstream of jobs, it'll be interesting to see if the median ages of workers continue to skew younger than the workforce in general.
- fiatmoney 11y ago"Over 50 years old" is a protected class for employment purposes. Which has gotten hairy in circumstances where employers have been accused of discriminating against <50 year old workers, or in favor of older workers.
- DenisM 11y ago>So are companies now supposed to mirror the demographics of a population exactly? Uhm, no, that is not at all the argument being made here. The argument is: Google had a median age of 29 in 2013, while the U.S. Department of Labor reported that the median age was 43 years in the U.S. for computer programmers
- magicalist 11y ago"...based on the self-reporting of 840 Google employees..."
- kabdib 11y agoOn the other hand, how many older folks in high tech feel the need to look younger, through cosmetic, styling or dress? I myself have adopted a "buzz cut" hair style that minimizes grey. I would consider going bald. I know that I'm not the only person over 50 that does this.
- sigzero 11y agoI cut my hair short because I look better that way. Not for any other reason.
- shawndumas 11y agoI pluck the majority of the grey hairs in my beard.
- gaius 11y agoOr go "silver fox", you will be upper management material!
- stronglikedan 11y agoI'm over 40, but the only way people can tell is from the grey in my hair. I've been successfully compensating for that through my less-than-mature personality.
- pcl 11y ago> I would consider going bald. If only I had a choice about that...
- gaius 11y agoAny 20-somethings working in tech, remember that you too will age. And what goes around comes around.
- shogun21 11y agoUntil we invent anti-aging tech!
- magnifyingglass 11y agoI am a 20 something in tech, and I just don't understand the mentality that doesn't value the perspective that age affords. It just seems really stupid, like overwhelmingly stupid. Even if a young person can hold as information as an older person does, I bet it's not as nuanced. There's a huge difference between seeing generations of people age and seeing the way culture moves across the internet. Socio-cultural shifts are not the same as generational, age shifts. And growing up in an economy of technological boom and prosperity is not the norm either. People would benefit just from having the experience from a different perspective of how to observe the world, interpret information, and relate to it. I view my generation as one that is intrinsically linked with technology, and I think it blinds us to a lot of assumptions as to how we think the world functions, and I think there is a lot of stuff we haven't existed long enough to observe and become aware of. It's like an invisible divide. I don't know how much I take for granted about my perspective, and I don't know how much others take for theirs, but I know that often, I am rarely correct in understanding how other people think, and I know often, that there is so much more variance that exists, that doesn't get translated through numbers and words. It's like it disappears, but it affects the way one navigates and establishes their own existence. Even thinking in terms of how a computer 'thinks' versus how people 'irrationally' think is a ridiculous and absurd irony. Judgment is overrated.
- codecamper 11y agoMaybe it's more about being a young manager & a little weak in the knees about managing someone older?
- deleted 11y ago
- makeitsuckless 11y agoRegardless if it is true in this particular case, the real big red flag is in the final sentences: > The lawsuit notes that Google’s Diversity webpage does not include age-related workforce data, despite disclosing data about other worker characteristics. Other tech companies releasing workforce diversity data did not typically disclose age data either. The entire industry really trying hard to cover up the issue.
- gaius 11y agoI expect that economics of many of these companies doesn't work with people doing 35 or 40 hours a week. Which means that all these castles are built on sand because this will catch up with them.
- michaelochurch 11y agoI expect that economics of many of these companies doesn't work with people doing 35 or 40 hours a week. I doubt it. Google would be just fine if 99% of employees limited themselves to 40-hour weeks. People aren't productive-- not in the long term-- when pushed to work longer hours. The age issue isn't about work hours; besides, I know plenty of older people who work quite a lot. It's about pliability, deference to authority, and not knowing what they're worth. There's also a bit of union-related fear in it. I think that the likelihood of Google unionizing is very low, but Silicon Valley's leaders are terrified of collective bargaining arrangements (even if they come in a form like the lightweight unions of Hollywood for actors and writers) and one of the best ways to prevent that is to avoid hiring older, seasoned people with the organizational skills and experience to pull it off. Age discrimination also puts a harmful time pressure on workers. It encourages to take career risks (and, often, those risks are unwise for them) because, at least as things are presented to them, they have to do everything in the first third of a normal career or they will be cast aside. It's much easier to push someone into bad decisions (or, I should say, decisions where he'll defer to your expertise because he's out of his depth and scared) if you convince him that he'll probably never get another chance to be a founder, learn a new technology, program again, etc. I look forward to the outcome of this suit. There's bound to be more gold dug up in discovery than there was for Ellen Pao. I hope it doesn't end in a settlement, because I want this issue to see enough air to set off a chain reaction and crush this age discrimination problem. After all, we're all going to get old.
- kin 11y agoThere's not enough information here. Just because Google says you're a good candidate does not mean that you're going to get the job. It just means you look good on paper. I'm curious how the phone interview went. What details were discussed? And experience means nothing. If your skill set doesn't match what Google wants then you're a pass.
- FreakyT 11y agoI've read about this sort of discrimination in many industries outside of tech. However, what I'm curious about is this: what is the likelihood that someone this age will retire in < 5 years? If that likelihood is high, I could see why a company would pass over hiring them (though I know how annoying this can be if you're in that age range and looking for a job). I wonder if anything could be done to make hiring someone who is potentially near retirement more appealing to companies?
- MrZongle2 11y agoHowever, what I'm curious about is this: what is the likelihood that someone this age will retire in < 5 years? In terms of headcount, how does that differ from (for example) a 25-year-old leaving for another employer after a couple of years?
- wrsh07 11y agoI don't think it does, but in terms of absolute numbers, if a hundred 25-year-olds are hired, how many will stay for > 5 years? Because those ones will become extremely valuable to the company. Especially a company that has eg a 6 month ramp-up period.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- hn_ 11y agoYou can't count on someone retiring at a certain age. Many can't wait to retire and many can't imagine retiring at all.
- locahost 11y agoI'm 48. I'd love to retire in < 25 years, but that isn't looking financially realistic. There are legions of "older" workers like me. Given that the average stint for employees at SF/SV companies these days seems to be about two years, I don't understand why these companies think older job candidates pose flight risks. It's certainly not that they're obliged to pay pensions.
- ash 11y agoI think age discrimination laws actually hurt older workers because companies don’t want to hire them and incur the litigation risk. And after this case Google would probably think twice before deciding even to interview older people.
- balls187 11y ago> Google would likely think twice before deciding even to interview older people. What? You can't actively avoid interviewing people because they belong to a protected class. That is very much still discriminating.
- ash 11y agoI didn't say whether avoiding to interview older worker is discrimination or not. It's irrelevant. What I'm trying to call attention to is the likely actual (not intended, but actual) effect of age discrimination law. Also note, the earlier in the hiring process company avoids older people, the harder it is to prove that the law was broken.
- balls187 11y ago> What I'm trying to call attention to is the likely actual (not intended, but actual) effect of age discrimination law. If your logic holds, Google would actively not try to interview people at all, because Race, Origin, Gender, and Military Status are all protected classes with anti discrimination laws.
- ash 11y agoHow does this disprove what I'm trying to say?
- hn_ 11y agoEveryone is in a protected class. Everyone. Even white male Christan Americans. Sure they are less likely to be discriminated against but it surely can and does happen. And lawsuits can and have been filed. There was one the other day here on HN, a company was accused of favoring SE Asians over Americans. Also despite what crazy MRAs claim the courts have been working to correct gender imbalance that favor females. I can think of a couple off the top of my head - a case that involved male military spouses having to prove they were financially dependent on their spouse in order to receive military benefits and one that involved social security surviving widows getting survivors benefits but not widowers. Both were successfully argued and ruled unconstitutional. Besides your logic makes absolutely no sense - "I'm going to discriminate against a protected class to avoid lawsuits accusing me of discriminating against a protected class."
- VikingCoder 11y agoThis is _a_ lawsuit, and it hasn't been won. Let's hold our judgement, okay?
- JoeAltmaier 11y agoIts just the judge that has to do that. We're actually free to draw our own conclusions. The evidence seems compelling?
- oh_sigh 11y agoFrom reading the article, is the evidence that this person was denied after a phone screen, or that the median age is 29? If anything it seems like the title should be "Google Sued by Job Candidate for Age Discrimination", which is the title of the linked WSJ article.
- magicalist 11y agoThe title of the submission is pretty bad. The WSJ title is "Google Sued by Job Candidate for Age Discrimination"
- steamy 11y agoTech like sports favors young people and discriminates against old folks.
- michaelochurch 11y agoIn athletics, people reach a physical peak when they're young. Athletics doesn't care about age. It just happens that no one is at his physical peak at 65. Tech is different because the abilities involved peak, for most people, between 40 and 65. (There are outliers who peak as early as 20 or as late as 70+.) In fact, the bizarre cruelty of tech's age discrimination is that people get pushed out of this game as soon as they're any good at it.
- ojbyrne 11y agoThat isn't even completely true for athletics. In some sports the peak is reached at a point older than you'd think, and the decline is much slower as well. For example: http://www.arrs.net/SA_Mara.htm http://www.arrs.net/SA_Mara.htm
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- joshavant 11y agoHonestly, the more I work with older developers, the more I realize how much of an asset they are. These developers have programming paradigms + design patterns down pat, after years of experience. Don't expect that with your 20-something programmer.
- trhway 11y ago>These developers have programming paradigms + design patterns down pat i think you've just tried to gravely offend us, the "older developers". :)
- slg 11y agoOne tidbit in this article caught my attention and was particularly surprising. The median age for computer programmers according to the Department of Labor is 43. That seems perfectly normal for any random profession (the number for the general workforce appears to be 42), but is higher than I expect for programmers. First off, it is a profession that has been increasing in importance and size in recent decades, I assumed that would lead to a larger younger generation of workers. Second, there is the industry perception that many programmers age out into other related careers like management. None of these assumptions appear to be bearing out in the numbers (although the median age obviously doesn't disprove any bias).
- revelation 11y agoNo, it just means the Hacker News bubble isn't representative of a whole industry. There are 100 Senior Java Enterprise engineers for every Ruby-suffocating-Moores-law rockstar here.
- jusben1369 11y agoI gave you an upvote mostly because I think you'll need it soon!
- kelukelugames 11y agoMe too. Just another rockstar upvoting my fellow rockstars. /s
- jimrandomh 11y agoI couldn't find the Department of Labor's numbers, but I checked the Bureau of Labor Statistics' numbers, and it disagrees. http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat11b.htm http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat11b.htm
- kelukelugames 11y agoI clicked on your link. All of the programming related fields are in the low 40s for median age. Web developer at 36.5 is the exception.
- elliotec 11y agoWhy is there ageism in tech? Why don't companies want people that were part of the movement of personal computing? Many of the pioneers of the movement are still around, what is it about the industry that looks down upon their wisdom? We could learn a lot from them, why are they treated this way?
- michaelochurch 11y agoWhy is there ageism in tech? We're a colonized culture (see: https://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2014/01/05/vc-istan-8-the-damaso-effect/ https://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2014/01/05/vc-istan-8-t...). There's ageism in the mainstream business culture that is sometimes called "MBA culture". Among them, it's generally assumed that if you're not an executive by age 40, you've failed. True technologists don't think this way, because we know how skill-intensive programming is and how long it takes to get good at it. But as a colonized people, we don't get to call the shots. 40-year-old VCs fund 35-year-old founders (or younger) who hire 30-year-old executives and they bring in 25-year-old engineers.
- greenyoda 11y ago"Why don't companies want people that were part of the movement of personal computing? Many of the pioneers of the movement are still around..." Even the pioneers of web development are getting on in years. If your job was doing web development 20 years ago in 1995, you're probably in your 40s now. (I'm in my 50s, and I got to work with the first IBM PCs and then years later with the first web software.)
- fishtoaster 11y agoI'd be really interested to hear the facts of the case. From the article, the only evidence of discrimination listed are that he was rejected despite: 1. A recruiter thought he would be a good fit 2. Working at several well-known companies (IBM, Compaq, and General Dynamics) 3. Only receiving a single phone interview None of those seem like they'd be at all indicators of discrimination. Recruiters often say anything they can to get candidates through the door, companies regularly fail people at the first phone interview, and none of those companies are ones I'd necessarily associate with high-quality developers. So, I look forward to seeing what else comes out of this story, since I can't imagine a decent law firm would go this far without some more damning evidence that will be forthcoming.
- jusben1369 11y agoI agree. Based on this article the individual case looks super weak. Sounds like the email was too spammy "We want YOU!" (we'll actually we just want you to put your hand up so we can then decide if we want you). It doesn't take a genius to look at a resume and see work history and college graduation to piece together if they're in their 30's/40's/50's etc.
- chollida1 11y ago> The lawsuit says Google based its decision not to hire Heath on a brief phone interview, despite telling him in an email that the company was “embarking on its largest recruiting / hiring campaign in its history,” and “you would be a great candidate to come work at Google.” I really hope the lawsuit doesn't go forward on the basis of a recruiter saying "you would be a great candidate to come work at Google", mostly because if you can get sued for not hiring someone after you say that then pretty much every single company on the face of the earth can be sued. who hasn't used language like that when trying to recruit someone?
- imh 11y agoIt's class action, so to succeed do they need to show that this particular guy was discriminated against, or that some people were?
- kelukelugames 11y agoThis is not news. Large companies deal with frivolous lawsuits all of the time. Until the case progresses we should ignore it. On the other hand, as a 31 year old in a company of mostly 20 somethings and only 1 or 2 40 year olds, I welcome a discussion about age related issues.
- eps 11y agoPayscale age data, being based on self-reporting of the employees, obviously suffers from the selection bias. Older people are simply far less likely to spill their guts on a random website, be it payscale, facebook or what have you.
- smtddr 11y agoDisclaimer: I'm a Google fanboy, so feel free to discount this comment. Google's interview process is a magical opaque box. You have no idea what happened. All kinds of people who seem like an excellent fit somehow end up getting rejected multiple times. And I mean excellent fit in the most cynical worse-case way possible. The "right gender", "right race", "right age", "right school". I interviewed at the big G back in 2012, did 2 phone screens, made it to the on-site, thought I did well... but no dice. It's like an f(x,y) then divide by z algorithm. X = You, Y=Them, but Z is generated by a random number depending on the zodiac sign of yourself and 2 random people somewhere on earth. You can do everything right, Z = 0 and segfault you're disqualified. Just gotta try again. Not excusing Google per se, but I doubt age-discrimination. They're just crazy like that. Of course, I don't know all the facts and it would probably make a lot of people happy if Google made their interview process more understandable. Maybe G's HR should stop getting people's hopes up saying "“embarking on its largest recruiting / hiring campaign in its history,” and “you would be a great candidate to come work at Google.” Just tell them the truth. "We're gonna interview you, then at the end you're gonna pull this slot machine and you better hope it comes up 7-7-7. Because that's basically what we do after you leave the building."
- infinotize 11y agoThis lawsuit is exactly why most companies have opaque interview processes. Once you start providing feedback, especially if any of it is positive, you are giving leverage to a potential discrimination suit.
- smtddr 11y agoActually, I totally agree. I'm almost sure that if any major corp gave out more info about how the final candidate decisions were made the number of lawsuits would increase no matter what. The reason being is that there is no fair algorithm for evaluating people. It's subjective and someone will find something unfair to complain about. They won't be wrong, it's just that humans judging other humans is a process doomed to faultiness & unfairness.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- chrisbaglieri 11y agoListen, I'm sure this complete nonsense. I mean, Google has resource group called “Greyglers,” they clearly care about age. You can't make this stuff up =) http://www.google.com/diversity/at-google.html#tab=greyglers http://www.google.com/diversity/at-google.html#tab=greyglers
- codeonfire 11y agoDidn't they create that in response to the previous ageism lawsuit?
- mark_l_watson 11y agoI worked at Google in 2013 when I was 62 and I didn't sense any age discrimination. I have experienced it elsewhere though. This case was at Electronic Arts. They called me several times over a one year period (I must have received a fine recommendation from someone :-) and I talked on the phone to some of their tech staff - really fun conversations. I arrive in their Vancouver offices looking forward to my interview and it started right away when I identified myself to the receptionist, she looked at my greying hair and literally started to giggle. She showed me into a conference room with three developers and their jaws dropped when they saw me. Their interview process was the rudest behavior I had ever seen in a work environment. The interview, technically, was fairly easy. I had a fair amount of experience in game AI which is what they were interested in. I did enjoy a free trip to Vancouver. From my experience, if any company deserves to be sued for age discrimination it is EA. It is obvious how old I am from my resume and consulting web site. (This occurred many years ago when I was in my mid 50s). I have never complained before publicly about this - it felt good :-)
- wglb 11y agoYou spring chicken, you.
- dba7dba 11y agoI hope Google gets cleaned out and set the example for the rest of the startup industry. Worker Visa wouldn't be needed as much if older workers were given a fair chance in recruitment process. I am sick of hearing tech industry boasting about their diversity. They mean diversity in color and culture. But when it comes to age, it's not a diverse environment.
- whybroke 11y agoThe difference is that a fair effort is (quite rightly) made to counter misogyny and racism while none (quite inappropriately) is made to counter ageism. And while comments like "men are just smarter" or "whites are just smarter" are quite rightly unthinkable, ageist comments by major tech figures are not unheard of. Which actually amount to judging people by their appearance with some post hoc justification coming out of pop science. But if I'm wrong, it could be demonstrated here. ycombinator makes wonderful efforts to counter obviously skewed demographics on other fronts. Perhaps ycombinator makes a similar effort to attract founders over 40? Alas though I fear that this conversation will somehow prove too controversial to remain visible for long enough to discuss.
- DannyBee 11y agoOne of the problems most older employees face (and i'm 36, which in silicon valley, is no spring chicken) interviewing is that nobody wants to take a chance on them. Let's say you work for a company that has "up or out" until a certain level (a lot do). Let's say they do that for reasonable reasons (IE i don't want to argue about whether this is a reasonable policy, it's not the point here). Let's say you have a position to fill, and your candidates are a 30 year old woman with 1 year of experience and a 99 year old woman with 45 years experience (the fact that you were able to get two female candidates should make it clear this is a fake story in silicon valley) You interview them both. 30 year old does okay. The 99 year old does okay. Neither one of them would really meet the bar for any level above "up and out", and so if they don't grow, they're going to get fired. Let's say they have about 2 years. Here's your problem: The 30 year old is just starting out. So while they aren't at the "up and out level" yet, there is some hope they may be in a year or two, and can demonstrate continuous growth until then. The 99 year old has been at this for 45 years. If they haven't become that good in 45 years, it's pretty close to certain they never will. Thus, the 30 year old gets hired over the 99 year old, but not because the 99 year old is 99, but because he hasn't grown to be good enough in 45 years. Now you realize it's not about age, but often about years of experience vs what you've done with them, and that a guy with 1 year of experience has a lot more uncertainty and possible positive than a guy with 45 years experience. There is basically no uncertainty about where that guy will top out.
- tptacek 11y agoIs it legitimate to assume that someone with 45 experience who is not yet "principal" level is incapable of making "principal"? Aren't there lots and lots of explanations for them not being at that level yet?
- tptacek 11y agoI mean, that's a banal observation, and maybe this is too, but: the fact that there are persuasive stories we can tell ourselves about why we're better off not hiring older people (or [insert minority here]) seems like one of the big reasons why we make it unlawful to discriminate against them.