[kreck]

Cost/price is another key aspect that is not prominently present in the article but is a key decision driver. The assumption on the employer side is that younger folks will work for lower salaries AND can be developed to the companies needs whereas someone with 10-20 years of experience is automatically “more expensive” and has to adapt. Now there is a catch: even IF an experienced candidate would work for a lower salary, e.g. if they don’t have exactly the matching skillset and need time to learn, the employer may see this as an indication/admission of a lack of competency and decide against that candidate. It’s a tough challenge and often a lot of irrationality seems to be involved.

[itronitron]

After decades of picking up new technical skills as needed I have confidence in my ability to learn new things so I don't waste my time learning any technology for which I don't have an immediate need. Most employers, not all, seem to primarily focus their hiring decisions on 'what do you know' versus 'what have you done'. Naturally, that negates the primary advantage that more experienced workers will have.

[Cloudef]

Boomer or wageslavery :thinking: