Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by e_i_pi_2 702 days ago
I think the biggest thing that I haven't seen in another comment is that companies aren't being explicitly ageist, they just want cheaper labor and younger/less experienced people are willing to work for less money. I'm sure plenty of companies would be more than happy if you said "I have decades of experience but I'll take the salary of a junior position".

Without something similar to a union or a change in laws to better incentivize pay raises, I don't see a great way out of this :/

I'd say my company is "grey-hair-friendly", but they're still hiring for way more junior roles than senior roles. I'm not sure if there are companies that explicitly don't hire junior engineers, but then you'd at least be competing against other people looking for the same salary range. Working with a recruiter might also be a good idea if they can help find companies that would be a good match

3 comments

This is match my experiences.

Saddly, bad middle manager wants to hire a yesman (or women). Not an experienced engineer that will challenge them by highlighting to upper management the project technical debt, the lack of tests or the broken CD pipeline.

Possibly they might like a tactful experienced engineer who's careful not to make them look bad to senior management, but quietly fixes some of the more glaring issues and makes the whole team look good? The trick I guess is showing in a job application that you will behave like that.
"Not an experienced engineer that will challenge them by highlighting to upper management the project technical debt, the lack of tests or the broken CD pipeline"

So... everywhere? Haha the tests are always garbage.

Same. I've had interviews where people (younger than me) tell me "how do I know you won't be bored doing level-10 work, while your skills are clearly level-30 work? I don't want you to debate my budget or strategy" (because the team FTE costs is $2-3m and I'll be one of the pawns, while I've ran $20m teams as a rook or king).
Frankly no one wants to hire an engineer who highlights technical debt or a lack of tests without being asked for it. This kind of negative people is annoying and IMHO is indeed a reason why employers hesitate to employ older employees. Many are a pain in the... (and I say that as someone who's turning grey as well)

Most employers want to hire someone who actively improves things, someone who solves issues, and not someone who just complaints about them and makes demands.

Seeing and raising red flags as and when they arise--or even better, even before they arise--is the hallmark of a good employee. If you don't want to hire one such, good luck. That said, there's a difference between flagging and nagging. Again, a good one will know the difference.
It's not just about salary.

Of course the assumption is that they have to pay more for more experience.

But it's also about perceived power and control. Younger workers are seen as more compliant, and many managers do not feel comfortable hiring underlings who are older.

Agreed, there are indeed managers for whom sadly its about control and compliance. However, there are also nice managers who just might feel mildly insecure having a more experienced person as a subordinate. Perhaps the onus is on the older dev to be sensitive to that and find a way to make the manager feel comfortable with sometimes being "managed up"? To know that the experienced person is a helpful ally not someone who'd undermine them. It may be something to be direct about in interviews. Obviously the interviewer is prohibited from raising the subject due to discrimination laws, but there's nothing to stop an applicant saying that they really don't mind having a boss that's a lot younger, and that they just aim to be of help.
"I'm sure plenty of companies would be more than happy if you said "I have decades of experience but I'll take the salary of a junior position"."

I'm not so sure. I think many tend to see that as a too good to be true situational and toss your resume.