[broguinn]

I'm sorry they didn't hire you because of your disability. IANAL, but I suspect that your disability is a protected status in the United States. I'm not saying that you should've pursued legal action, but that what they did is both immoral and illegal.

[ChrisMarshallNY]

I’m old[ish], and wasn’t hired, explicitly because of that. In fact, a couple of the interviewers made no effort to hide it. I suspect that this may come as a surprise to a lot of folks here, but age discrimination is every bit as illegal as race, sex, or disability discrimination.

If an industry makes a lot of money (f’rinstance, the finance industry), all kinds of toxic, illegal behavior is ignored, and it’s really difficult to effect change.

In industries that don’t make much money (teaching, social work, etc.), bad behavior is not tolerated in the slightest.

[0xcde4c3db]

> age discrimination is every bit as illegal as race, sex, or disability discrimination

Oddly, this is not quite true at the US federal level. Unlike most protected categories, the one for age only applies to a specific subset of people (people over 40 years old), nor is it generally illegal to prefer an older candidate over a younger one [1].

[1] https://www.eeoc.gov/age-discrimination

[ChrisMarshallNY]

It's funny. In Japan, at my company, there were levels that were unattainable, until the applicant was a certain age. That would be completely illegal, in the US.

Ah, well, it's all water under the bridge. After a few of these hazin- er, interviews, I got the message, and accepted that I'm in early retirement, and I work for free, these days.

[Leherenn]

Would it? My understanding is that it's illegal to discriminate against people older than 40, not age in general. Maximum age would be illegal, but minimum sounds fine as long as it is below 40.

Various political offices have an age requirement, like 35 for the president. Not sure how relevant it is though.

[svachalek]

I think if you look at race, sex, and disability discrimination, there's an implicit direction as well. The law is not particularly worried about companies refusing to hire people without disabilities.

[ctvo]

> If an industry makes a lot of money (f’rinstance, the finance industry), all kinds of toxic, illegal behavior is ignored, and it’s really difficult to effect change.

> In industries that don’t make much money (teaching, social work, etc.), bad behavior is not tolerated in the slightest

This falls apart outside of your examples. The health care industry makes a lot of money. They don't tolerate this. Teaching in primary education? It doesn't make much money, but higher education? They do well, and they also don't tolerate this. The legal industry? Probably doesn't tolerate this. Etc..

[ChrisMarshallNY]

> higher education? They do well

I know quite a few, and none of them make a fraction of what they could, outside academia. Some, are, quite literally, on public assistance, with Ph.Ds.

The healthcare industry is rife with bad behavior. Their practice is restricted, but their behavior ... not so much.

Same with lawyers. They have very intense ethics laws, but they are about the practice, not the personal behavior.

But you are correct. It is a "broad brush," and not really a worthy argument.

[mattpallissard]

> I’m old[ish], and wasn’t hired, explicitly because of that.

I've been involved in a lot of hiring and I have zero doubt that you were subject to ageism. It's odd to me that discrimination based on age is somehow ok.

Not only that, what the fuck are you trying to prevent by doing so? Experienced candidates?

[ChrisMarshallNY]

I have theories, somewhat supported anecdotally, by things I've heard and been told.

I think the number one issue, that people keep forgetting, is that younger folks are fearfully insecure. I certainly was.

Even when we project great confidence, we still know, in our hearts, that we're whistling past the graveyard. It's really bravado, meant to help us feel better about ourselves.

As we get older, that particular insecurity starts to dissipate. It might get replaced by cynicism and fatalism, or fear about personal security, but the idea that we aren't "good enough," tends to lose steam. We become fairly aware of what we can (and, even more importantly -can't) do, and can often see the mistakes before they have a chance to metastasize.

Insecure folks don't want to be around people that remind them of their frailty; even if it costs them. That insecurity is painful. We may be very intelligent, well-educated, and creative, but we haven't had the forge of experience, and the infused carbon, to create the steel. We're still running on raw pig iron.

The other issue, is the "cargo cult" belief that younger folks can do the impossible, because they haven't had bitter, cynical "olds" tell them that it's impossible. That sounds silly, but I've actually heard exactly that, from a number of intelligent, well-educated people. It's a compelling myth, and many folks buy into it; hook, line, and sinker.

Basically, Wile. E. Coyote doesn't fall, until he looks down. If you don't have people around, that yell "Look down!", then you can fly.

And, finally, we all remember when we were "free," and didn't have things "weighing us down," like families and other obligations. We assume that we will always be able to remain completely self-absorbed, mobile, and somewhat hedonistic. "Digital Nomads" don't deal so well with families. I was raised by a pair of high-functioning Peter Pans, and can report that it's hard on the kids.

As long as the older folks had the power and the money, the younger folks were forced to work with them (and grow through their insecurities). However, if younger folks have the power and the money, they can prevent older folks from participating.