|
|
|
|
|
by srevenant
3155 days ago
|
|
General "wisdom" is to only show the last 10 years of experience on your resume. This is for a variety of reasons, but it largely is because there is an age bias. It makes it harder when you have things older than 10 years you want to show, but the X-Y year doesn't matter more than "spent 3 years working on OSS project doing ..." There are certainly things that try to weed out inexperienced as well, but there are also people who simply would rather hire a younger person because they have a perception that somebody older would be harder to train (right or wrong). |
|
I think the preception of ageism comes from the fact that more experienced employees come with with more expectations (of performance and pay). If you've been in industry ten or twenty years and havent' (by choice or by ability) then you've all but proven you're "harder" (Id say neigh impossible) to train. One of the few metrics that correlate well to performance in knowledge work appears to be ambition so it naturally results in older workers either doing very well or washing out.
The problem, as I see it, is those washouts are the ones crying "ageism" the loudest and doing their best to stifle talent entering the workforce.