Do you guys think ageism really exist?

[-]

CodelinesNL@reddit

Agism is absolutely a thing. I just don't believe that our business suffers more or less from it than other jobs.

Most claims I've seen around "agism" were from developers who had completely stagnated and were surprised that "doing the same thing for 20 years" did not count for much. I'm 46 and have no issues whatsoever, but I've always in technical leadership roles the past 8+ years, not "give me a specced story and I'll write the code for it"-roles.

[-]

NortySpock@reddit

"I met a person, but they didn't know my_current_thing , so clearly they are bad at all things."

What tech stack was he familiar with?

What was the gnarliest bug he encountered or fought while using that tech stack?

A meditation: Everyone you talk to, knows something you don't know.

[-]

wmichben@reddit

I was having trouble landing interviews so I fed my resumé into one of the AIs and asked it to evaluate it for issues. It had me remove numerous dates and any mention of my years of experience. When I asked why, it said something along the lines of: Though age discrimination is illegal, it is still a big problem in tech. It then told me I would be seen as "too expensive" by most hirers. *shrugs*

It kind of blew my mind. For one, I am only 43 now and was 42 when this happened. I didn't realize I was "old" but now that I see so many senior devs or senior software engineers that are about 5-6 years out of college, I guess it makes sense.

And I sure as hell am not expensive though I wish I were!

[-]

DeterminedQuokka@reddit

It definitely exists. Smart people don’t say it out loud.

The most common thing I see people say is “with 20 years of experience they should know more than that”. When someone with 10 years of experience would easily be given the same job.

It’s literally built into the system in start ups. If someone retires it makes your option/rsu plan immediately more complicated. Because retirement is much better regulated.

[-]

WiserVisor@reddit

Ageism does exist, and for a good reason, because age can affect job performance. Older developers are typically less able to pick up new knowledge. They are also often more stubborn, which can be both a good thing and a bad thing. Ironically, older developers can also be prejudiced toward younger developers and may refuse to learn from them.

I have worked with developers who are over 50. In general, they are useful, but the true high performers are those who are open to learning anything, from anyone. I’ve seen a few who become locked into their own knowledge patterns, and these people can be a real hindrance to the organization.

[-]

Gunny2862@reddit

Yes, especially since age comes with a inevitable skepticism about how much you should be working.

[-]

engineered_academic@reddit

Yes it does, but not for the reasons you think it does.

1.) Older employees have more out of work commitments, generally. If not kids, it could also be caring for an ailing parent. This makes them less tolerant of work-related schedule disruptions.

2.) Most jobs won't pay you to learn. They want you to maintain their tech stack. This either leads to resume driven development, or stagnation because you focus in a certain tech stack.

3.) Because of 1 and 2, most older employees are hesitant to leave their jobs voluntarily because time off resets at every job unless you negotiate, and insurance benefits (in the US at least). This leads to a self-reinforcing cycle of unemployability.

You need to be conscious of this as you move through life and obtain more responsibility.

[-]

Inner_Butterfly1991@reddit

Ageism isn't even always some nefarious "I hate old people" thing. If you're on a hiring committee a lot of the hiring criteria is "is this the type of person I want to be around 40 hours/week?" It's not a shock why older folks would have it tougher on that metric.

[-]

HRApprovedUsername@reddit

I'd rather work with older people than younger people 40 hrs/week

[-]

ninetofivedev@reddit

How old are you?

[-]

HRApprovedUsername@reddit

Old enough

[-]

SheriffRoscoe@reddit

In my late 50s, I literally had a Fortune 10 manager tell me we "just need to find some cheap kids and put everyone else on PIP".

[-]

itix@reddit

It is not necessarily because someone refuses to adapt, but only because they never had a chance to adapt. If the software is written in an ancient C++ dialect, it sticks, and it sticks to devs working on it.

[-]

ninetofivedev@reddit

Any sort of “ism” will be justified by people that don’t want to be “ist”.

[-]

obelix_dogmatix@reddit

depends on the roles, but yes. My GM is never signing off on a 50+ hire who isn’t principal or above.

[-]

HigherominousBosh@reddit

On average, most people are average. I think you just showed your ageism.

[-]

obelix_dogmatix@reddit

not sure what your point is. I literally said ageism exists because of the preconceived notions I mentioned.

[-]

HigherominousBosh@reddit

You literally said they were facts, not preconceived notions.

[-]

obelix_dogmatix@reddit

Call it whatever you want. Stereotypes exist for a reason. I am sure there are solid people who lose out. Doesn’t change the fact that it is easier to hire someone younger and mold them to the company’s culture. I have been on both sides. It is what it is.

[-]

HigherominousBosh@reddit

Call it what I want? It was you that said they were both preconceived notions and facts simultaneously. What you mean is that you’ll call your comments what you want so long as you don’t have to present a well argued viewpoint.

What other stereotypes do you believe in? I’m interested to know what stereotypes about women and gay people must “exist for a reason”?

[-]

obelix_dogmatix@reddit

not sure why you are triggered. I am not arguing anything. Stereotypes exist. Hence ageism exists. You think they don’t. Glad that you can afford to live in disney world 24/7.

[-]

HigherominousBosh@reddit

A minute ago stereotypes existed “for a reason”. You’re a Trump! Brilliant!

[-]

Headpuncher@reddit

Or they’re experienced enough to recognise BS, see the same trends and fads come and go yet again and know this weeks cool new thing won’t last so why even bother?

I’ve seen so many young devs come in with confidently incorrect opinions about everything imaginable. Telling everyone else about xyz thing that’s going to change the face of… etc. yeah yeah, we had that one 10 years ago too. Don’t work then either.

[-]

engineer_in_TO@reddit

Depends on the level and company, older people at Senior+ and the rest of the team is older?, no discrimination.

Younger company where everyone is super young? Or 40+ and looking for a junior job? You'll see some discrimination for sure.

[-]

GnarlyHarley@reddit

I always looked young, so when I was first starting my career… it was rough having opinions respected but I didn’t have trouble advancing or promotions cause I have a technical role.

Now I am 45 and I still look young for my age but I’m more respected but still only progress due to technical achievements. I went into an architect path and it works for me. I would say it’s there but it’s still possible to jump hurdles depending on your path.

[-]

HigherominousBosh@reddit

You’re not old enough yet. You’re at your career peak. Report back in 10 years.

[-]

GnarlyHarley@reddit

Feels that way, so would have to agree 👍

[-]

Successful-Actuary74@reddit

That is about to change in the next few years.

[-]

GnarlyHarley@reddit

Yeah - I call it retirement lol

[-]

TheTacoInquisition@reddit

So the thing you remember about a candidate from years ago, is that you perceived him as old and didn't know enough about react... and you assume he didn't know because he was "old", rather than something else, like preferring other frameworks, or not having much excuse to use one professionally. And you don't think you and your colleagues were bias...

If he were younger appearing I can guarantee you'd have made other assumptions, or just wouldn't remember him at all. You more than likely have some bias yourself, so yeah, ageism not only exists, it's still widespread and systemic.

[-]

fsk@reddit

The problem with him "not knowing react" is that, if he hasn't worked in a React job before, he isn't going to know it as well as someone who had used it before. He needs React experience to get more React experience, so he's kind of stuck. Even if he could have learned React quickly given the opportunity, he wasn't given the opportunity.

Why are you interviewing someone based on their knowledge of API trivia (how well do you know a language or library) rather than overall ability?

[-]

vnayin@reddit

The question I have about this situation is how important really was it that they knew the ins and outs of React? Was it clear in the job posting that this role required React knowledge and that was a deal breaker if not there? Did his resume state he had a deep React knowledge and that the interviews showed that to be false? Did his resume give the since of lack of ability to adapt or did it suggest that he was changing stacks with each job and could pick it up quickly on the job? If his resume didn't have recent React experience or minimal React experience and it was so important that he couldn't learn it on the job, why was he interviewed?

Sometimes I feel for roles that expect 5-8+ years experience have the expectation to get someone with exactly that experience in their complete end to end stack. There is just so much to software development knowledge out there that no one can really be an expert in everything but often can quickly pick things up on the job.

All of my cloud experience is on AWS, but it would be trivial for me to pick up Azure or GCP, so I will still apply for jobs that say they work in non-AWS cloud stacks. Unless I'm told ahead of time by the recruiter though that there will be GCP questions being asked because GCP knowledge is a hard requirement, I'm not going to study for that specifically and bomb any of those interview questions. That's not because I refuse to adapt to other technologies, just that there is only so much time in the day to work on things and experience life and only so many things you can get exposed to on the job.

In fact I would say you assuming he was refusing to adapt to changing technologies vs someone asking him in the interview why he didn't have more experience in React is a kind of ageism bias.

[-]

bcameron1231@reddit

No, because that's not what ageism is.

You didn't hire them because of their skillset, not their age. Put simply, that's not ageism.

Plenty of folks, young and old don't keep up with technology.

[-]

mltcllm@reddit

Old guy has family duty and can't be on call for the whole weekend like those college grads. nothing about keeping up.

You are just out of touch

[-]

e430doug@reddit

“Old guy” has kids that have moved out of the house already and have tons of time. The people you are describing are in their 20’s and early 30’s.

[-]

mltcllm@reddit

If you are 35+ you are consider an old guy in China. This thing happen after the famous 996.

Ofc it doesn't mean no one hire anyone above 35, they use the same execuse. Oh the technology is evolving fast the old engineer can't keep up, we have a fast pace culture and need young people to bring in new idea blah blah blah.

If you don't think this is agesim then fine whatever

[-]

bcameron1231@reddit

Yes, saying "old engineers can't keep up" is ageism.

Not hiring someone because they have an outdated skill set (like OP described and further followed up with an opinion of "what we think ageism is") is not ageism.

Hope that clarifies the difference.

[-]

mltcllm@reddit

Yeah but I got hired into senior position for a a new stack I have never used. No use doubt my ability to learn maybe because of my look? One day we will all be that old guy

[-]

bcameron1231@reddit

You're introducing a hypothetical here. There's no proof you got hired over an older man or that they chose you because you were young.

What if they hired you because you interviewed better? What if they hired you because you communicate better? What if they hired you because the other candidates experience wasn't as aligned as yours to the industry? What if they did hire someone but they accepted another offer and you were second in line? What if they hired you because they appreciate you wanting a challenge and work in a language you've never done? What if you had better architecture experience? What if... What if... What if...

[-]

mltcllm@reddit

You definition of agesim is only if they explictly mention age.

I understand maybe legally this is how it works. But in the real world it comes in many form.

[-]

bcameron1231@reddit

That is not my definition. You don't have to specifically mention age. But you're just making up hypotheticals for some reason.

My definition is also not "because they don't keep up with the latest technology".

In fact, the only thing that is ageist in this Reddit post is actually trying to equate the definition of Ageism to people who don't continue to learn the latest stack. That opinion, yes, is ageism.

Not hiring someone because they didn't keep up with a tech stack however, is absolutely not ageism.

[-]

bcameron1231@reddit

I'm a young guy (30s), I also have duties and can't be on call the whole weekend. I guess that is ageism?

Or maybe...just maybe.... My life and responsibilities don't work with Call of Duty, and other people are better suited for that, young or old.

[-]

mltcllm@reddit

I have no intention to play words with you. Just for some reason of all the 100+ people for my org 90% of them are 35 under.

[-]

False_Secret1108@reddit (OP)

you clearly misunderstood

[-]

bcameron1231@reddit

I didn't. Ageism has a legal definition.

What we think is irrelevant.

[-]

st4rdr0id@reddit

Yes but don't mind too much. The industry evolved to the next discrimination: human-ism. Basically if you are human there is no job for you.

[-]

swiebertjee@reddit

Maybe it depends on the org but the older guys here are highly valued.

That said they are also very good and up-to-date. In your example that wasn't the case. As devs we are lifelong learners, it is expected. If you don't and you are passed for younger, less experienced folks that are up-to-date, that's not ageism, that's just the reality of this profession.

[-]

relevant_tangent@reddit

In my experience, the old guys at a job are well respected. But there's ageism during the hiring process.

[-]

sheriffderek@reddit

Yeah. But - I'm not sure if it's that black and white. People aren't always -- "Well, they're too old/young" - sometimes people just want to be around people their own age / or whatever bias they might have - that's not active "ageism." All manner of "choices based on anything" exist and end up adding up to reality. I'd bet its more about culture than age.

[-]

kevinossia@reddit

Probably, but it's likely much rarer than folks here think it is. The example you gave in your post is not ageism in any reasonable sense.

In the late nineties/early aughts, you could get a cushy software "engineering" gig by just barely knowing a little bit of HTML and not much else. Some of those guys coasted through their 20+ year careers on just that alone.

Those same guys are now in their 40s and 50s and wondering why they can't get hired. It's not ageism: it's a lack of skill commensurate with their "years" of experience.

A common refrain is, "Why would someone hire me, an old guy, when they can hire a college grad who can do the same work, but cheaper?"

The clear and obvious answer to that is, if your skills are the same as that of a college graduate, you have failed in your career. You're supposed to grow. You're supposed to be worth more than a college grad in terms of your track record and skill set.

20 years of experience vs one year of experience repeated 20 times.

---

Technology doesn't even move that fast anyways. We're all still using languages invented decades ago, and the core fundamentals are all the same.

[-]

HigherominousBosh@reddit

We don’t know the example isn’t ageism because we don’t know if unconscious bias affected the judgement on the interviewees skills.

[-]

ikk_ah@reddit

Ageism exists. Some EMs in their mid 20s feel uncomfortable asking mid-50s Sr engineer to work overtime when necessary.

Hence, it is easier to come up with an excuse to reject them (unfortunately), I am 95% sure no one will say I felt they're too old, there will always be some kind of proper excuse

[-]

Dangerous-Quality-79@reddit

Years ago, when react was still newish, I was very adept with it (still am) but I didnt use early returns, for example, so I was deemed to have "old man code". It is far more than using "modern tech stacks". Regardless of what stack you use, if you use Hungarian notation because that is familiar, you will still deal with ageism.

[-]

Careful_Ad_9077@reddit

It depends .

If age is a factor is ageism, regardless of how you paint the optics.

For example in your case, let's say you hired a 20 something guy who also does not know react , because young people can learn better and old people can't learn. That would be ageism.

[-]

OkidoShigeru@reddit

Depends on the level we are hiring for, but I don’t think we’d hesitate to hire an older person for an SSE, Tech Lead, Staff, etc role at my current job. I work and have worked with many developers over 50, 60 or more years old and they have been fantastic leaders and mentors that have shaped my career. Having said that yes, if we were looking at a more junior or mid-level role as an interviewer I would almost certainly be biased towards younger candidates, as that’s just part of that kind of role, being young and open to new ideas and growth is pretty much your job as a junior.

[-]

HigherominousBosh@reddit

I don’t believe that most people recognise they are doing it. What I find really common is people explaining things to me, without stopping to ask if I need them explained. So they walk away thinking “That old guy needs some really basic stuff explained” and I’m sat there too tired to keep saying “yes I understand that. You haven’t understood me.”

None of those people would consider themselves biased. Because the bias it’s so automatic they don’t recognise it.

[-]

Boring_Pay_7157@reddit

I've met hiring staff and management that openly gave age limits above which they will not even look at the CV nor consider a candidate.

[-]

ratttertintattertins@reddit

Yeh, I’ve literally been in conversations where other hiring managers have explicitly mentioned wanting younger workers. It’s not usually framed as an explicit “we wouldn’t hire someone older”, more as a “let’s get a mid level dev in with about 3-5 years of experience”.

The perception is often that such a person would be better value for money and lower risk. Hiring seniors is trickier to get right. They cost a lot and it’s surprising easy to hire someone who doesn’t justify that larger wage.

[-]

mltcllm@reddit

10 years ago I mention the job envrionment here will become more like China's 996 and people call me crazy.

Now I predict here will follow the same 35 year old rule like china does very very soon.

[-]

Early_Rooster7579@reddit

I know it does. It starts to become very suspect if you’ve remained a senior dev all your career to HR types

[-]

TonyNickels@reddit

There's conscience bias and unconscious bias. Ageism occurs because of both forms. It's occurring earlier and earlier in careers these days as well. Not knowing a technology does not mean someone refuses to learn it or start up to date. It typically means they may come from a different vertical and have different opportunities. At some point you learn the tech stack is nearly irrelevant in comparison to the high level approaches. AI is honestly making that even more evident now.

[-]

Wide-Pop6050@reddit

There are laws about this. It's a thing

[-]

publicclassobject@reddit

Not if you are good

[-]

Diligent-Floor-156@reddit

Not entirely sure about that. I've seen 55+ swe being the absolute GOAT of their teams so obviously the good engineers remain super valuable to their company while aging, but at the same time, as good as they are, I suspect they wouldn't have it easy should they need to job hunt again.

[-]