ER not by design....

It's too bad. Society makes it hard for people who are deemed to pass their prime time will not be able to find a job. It is a common trend that companies (even those at China) prefer to hire young workers because of their energy, fresh knowledge, and health. Older workers are simply not committed, too expensive, and obsolete according to those who have the power to hire today. This kind of thinking will someday have serious ramifications when they become older. How will they feel when the new younger generation treat them with disrespect and disdain?
 
This is an interesting subject.  Maybe I should write a book.

There is an interesting issue with "older workers" flushed from companies within industries and the other companies within the same industry when hiring avoid these same ex-workers.  It's hard to find an engineer in Germany over 50.  Somehow they are always selected for forced early retirement.

Our tax and pension laws also encourage this.  Thank God the Dems are protecting the real oppressed people that never graduated from high school.  If they ever woke up and smelled where the real votes were they'd suddenly create a "new majority."
 
This is an interesting practice. Us old folks have talents and characteristics that make us ideal for some work. But I can understand the caution about managerial positions. You need a lot of ambition or gullibility to deal with the rah rah side of management - for me that was the "bucket of BS" we talk about here. When I retired I was still highly valued at my agency (or at least I thought I was ;) But I had to implement a "new" performance management systems in the final months. The problem was it was essentially the same failed system I developed 22 years previously and dumped 10 years after that. I found myself being the cynical old timer thinking "been there, done that..." I knew I was leaving and my subordinate directors were going to have to continue dealing with this BS, so I didn't voice my despair and instead tried to focus on how they could best implement the dumb thing. At that point I realized that the organization might not know it but they were better off without me. It helps to have a top boss who cares and is enthusiastic about what he or she is doing. In my later years I could protect my employees so was valued by them, but I probably wasn't the best leader.

I think a lot of companies worry about getting someone who may be smart and experienced but doesn't have the enthusiasm of previous years. I know I wouldn't hire me now to do my old job ::)
 
donheff said:
I knew I was leaving and my subordinate directors were going to have to continue dealing with this BS, so I didn't voice my despair and instead tried to focus on how they could best implement the dumb thing. At that point I realized that the organization might not know it but they were better off without me.
::)

A couple things come to mind.

There is no right way to do the wrong thing!

Also saw a Dilbert cartoon once. They introduced the new young CEO that didn't know yet that what they were trying to do, could not be done. :D
 
donheff said:
The problem was it was essentially the same failed system I developed 22 years previously and dumped 10 years after that.

That's funny. I was at an IT conference a few months ago and a vendor rep was touting their new release system. He seemed to be excited about it since it was going to fix all the problems that the old release system had.

There was only one problem -- the "new" system was effectively identical to the system that this vendor was using over 10 years ago. They got rid of it after widespread customer complaints  :D
 
Spanky said:
Older workers are simply not committed, too expensive, and obsolete according to those who have the power to hire today.

Not Committed - How can you say that ! My high level of committment to Megacorp is the same high level that Megacorp has to me.

Too expensive - Hardly, my wages are but a pitance. If only they paid me my true value they would go broke.

Obsolete - hardly, I am always amazed at how little the younguns' know and how twisted and bizarrely they approach a given project. Experience is worth alot.
 
donheff said:
The problem was it was essentially the same failed system I developed 22 years previously and dumped 10 years after that. I found myself being the cynical old timer thinking "been there, done that..."

God forbid that you actually point that out to anyone. First they shun you as a unclean heretic, and then after it's revealed as a gigantic failure they still shun you because you are a reminder of just how unsmart an idea it was in the first place.
 
There is no right way to do the wrong thing!


Leonidas said:
God forbid that you actually point that out to anyone. First they shun you as a unclean heretic, and then after it's revealed as a gigantic failure they still shun you because you are a reminder of just how unsmart an idea it was in the first place.

I pushed back hard when the retro system was proposed but it was the politically correct approach in the Bush second term so it quickly became clear that we were doing it. With policy matters, once the decision is made you have to get behind it or leave. If a bad policy decsion was something that truly mattered (life and death, ethics, etc) I would have to decide whether to let my feet do the talking. With flavor of the month management techniques like this was there is normally no reason to bail. I would have been able to get behind it and do the best I could to make it work a few years back. But at this point in my life I just found the whole thing depressing. Time to let someone who could enjoy it take over. The fact that I was already planning to ER made it substantially harder to summon an interest.


Don
 
Yup, I agree that workers over 50 are not valued or even seen much in the work place. The exception may be teachers in public schools and in universities where there is some protection/tenure. I trained as an occupational therapist, and was always amazed that there were so few workers over 40 in health care. I realize that some jobs are very physically demanding, such as physical therapy, but not all are. And where do older workers go, who wnat/need to work? Whether it's in sales (retail/outside), office work, IT, anything----if there's so many of us baby boomers, where are we?

Definitely there's age discrimination. Saw it blatantly in England about ten years ago---seems to be legal for want ads to specify that they want a female 20 to 24 years old!
And saw it here, when DH lost his job in pharmaceutical sales due to a buy-out. With over ten years experience in the field and graduate school in the sciences, we were sure he could easily find another. How naive! Pharmaceutical sales jobs now go to females in their twenties and thirties.
I'm not imagining this---check out the next time you go to your doctor's office and see if there aren't a number of young, attractive (usually blonde) women in suits and sample cases below 35... And a news article came out acknowledging that pharmaceutical companies are now recruiting college cheerleaders, regardless of their majors, because they think they're peppy and enthusiastic!

At the age of 52, I did become burnt out on my job. But this was because I was striving for and achieving maximum productivity and quality---and not strictly a function of age. At the pace I was going (doing two to four times what others people in my position do), I couldn't continue---but I question whether someone half my age would be able to keep the pace for more than a year or two--or would even be willing to.

Younger workers may techically have more physical energy, but if they party til late at night, they may not come in to the work the next day with any more energy than a middle aged person. And they tend to have more personal crises than older workers, and this drains time, productivity, and concentration. I think younger workers are less committed---to hard work and staying with a company. And they're less skilled at thinking and problem-solving---look how dumbed down education has gotten.

I do think older workers have something to contribute to the work world---but I'm sure glad that I'm not in the cold, cruel work world anymore!
 
MasterBlaster said:
Not Committed - How can you say that ! My high level of committment to Megacorp is the same high level that Megacorp has to me.

Too expensive - Hardly, my wages are but a pitance. If only they paid me my true value they would go broke.

Obsolete - hardly, I am always amazed at how little the younguns' know and how twisted and bizarrely they approach a given project. Experience is worth alot.

I concur completely.
 
Pharmaceutical sales jobs now go to females in their twenties and thirties.

Good observation. A friend of mine, a pharmaceutical sales manager, says she prefers young and attrative women as sales reps because she thinks women have the ability to listen and work well with doctors (keep in mind that most doctors are male). The medical device companies also adopt similar approach (but not as apparent).
 
Spanky said:
Good observation. A friend of mine, a pharmaceutical sales manager, says she prefers young women as sales reps because she thinks women have the ability to listen and work well with doctors. The medical device companies also adopt similar approach (but not as apparent).

Especially if they look like Pamela Anderson did when she was 25! :D
 
Spanky said:
Good observation. A friend of mine, a pharmaceutical sales manager, says she prefers young and attrative women as sales reps because she thinks women have the ability to listen and work well with doctors (keep in mind that most doctors are male). The medical device companies also adopt similar approach (but not as apparent).

Not to be cynical about this but in fact the pharms, God lovem, often send young, pretty and fashionable-going-on-sexy dressed women to see the male physicians, and young, handsome, and fit young men to see the lady doctors in my experience (generalizing to be sure). I don't personally meet with drug reps for lost of reasons, but I do see who's calling on my colleagues.

I don't think it's for their respective listening skills.

Doubt you'll see this in their policies and procedures but they will do what their marketing research tells them to do.
 
Doubt you'll see this in their policies and procedures but they will do what their marketing research tells them to do.

I doubt that also. It is not illegal, however, to hire attractive people.
Since the government has placed a lid over gifts, dinners, and golf outings, the pharmaceutical companies are simply testing the waters in desperation to increase sales.
 
After the age of 50, I lost interest in my job and was too lazy no longer interested in learning anything new so I created my own obsolescence. I was ready to retire when I got the great news about my lay off after I turning 57. I suspect I would have had a difficult time finding a job that would come anywhere near the 6 figures I was getting. I probably would have had to settle for a job that would have got me 60% to 70% of my salary.
 
tangomonster said:
And where do older workers go, who wnat/need to work?  Whether it's in sales (retail/outside), office work, IT, anything----if there's so many of us baby boomers, where are we?

There is a fair amount of stratification out there. Back when I was starting out in the IT business, almost 20 years ago, we hardly had anybody over 30 at the company I was working for, except for the owners. Now that the technology that I specialize in is obsolete mature, the company I work for doesn't have a single employee under 30. And the section of the IT department of the MegaCorp that I am currently helping out doesn't have anybody under 40, the median age being around 50.

On the other hand, a friend of mine who is in his 40s and deals with the bleeding cutting edged of technology mentioned the other day that he has been consistently the oldest person in his clients' IT departments over the last few years.
 
Spanky said:
I doubt that also. It is not illegal, however, to hire attractive people.
Since the government has placed a lid over gifts, dinners, and golf outings, the pharmaceutical companies are simply testing the waters in desperation to increase sales.

Actually, it is illegal. That's discriminatory hiring practices if someone wanted to pursue it.

I speak from past experience. The company I worked for was encouraged by the governement to hire women into hourly plant jobs -- about 30 years ago. The men doing the hiring decided that the women in the work force would "ruin marriages." So to make it less likely, they only made offers to "ugly" women. I will agree that they made good on their goal. Word leaked out about the special job requirement and the company was forced to reinterview any women turned down that had applied.
 
2B said:
Actually, it is illegal. That's discriminatory hiring practices if someone wanted to pursue it.

I speak from past experience. The company I worked for was encouraged by the governement to hire women into hourly plant jobs -- about 30 years ago. The men doing the hiring decided that the women in the work force would "ruin marriages." So to make it less likely, they only made offers to "ugly" women. I will agree that they made good on their goal. Word leaked out about the special job requirement and the company was forced to reinterview any women turned down that had applied.

You may be right. Rejected but fully qualified applicants can definitely file law suits if they can prove that the only reason of not getting the job was their looks.

http://www.ceridian.com/myceridian/connection/content/1,4268,13758-61510,00.html
 
Spanky said:
You may be right. Rejected but fully qualified applicants can definitely file law suits if they can prove that the only reason of not getting the job was their looks.

http://www.ceridian.com/myceridian/connection/content/1,4268,13758-61510,00.html

Despite what that article says, unless a law prohibits discrimination, discrimination is ok. I don't know of any law anywhere that prohibits discrimination based on looks. The suit refered to in the article was for discrimination based on race and possibly age.
 
Martha said:
Despite what that article says, unless a law prohibits discrimination, discrimination is ok. I don't know of any law anywhere that prohibits discrimination based on looks.  The suit refered to in the article was for discrimination based on race and possibly age. 

I would love to defer to you since I have no specific statute to reference. I do know that the company I worked for was threatened with an EEOC compliance action. Whether they could have won if they fought it or not, I don't know. I do know they rolled over like a trained poodle.
 
If you have the situation where any guy is hired but only attractive women, then you have a sex discrimination claim. Or, if a business only hires lovely young women, but not older women, there may be an age discrimination claim. I bet a lot of these types of claims are couched in terms of some other type of discrimination.
 
Martha said:
If you have the situation where any  guy is hired but only attractive women. 

Come on Martha, you know any guy is cute. Put us in a suit, with a good harcut and a decent pair of shoes and look out ladies!  :)

Ha
 
Cut-Throat said:
Especially if they look like Pamela Anderson did when she was 25! :D

You mean like a post-surgical transvestite?
 
Back
Top Bottom