Okay, I know there are far greater civil rights that need to be achieved first, like the global equality of all regardless of gender, color, race, religion, or sexual orientation. Those definitely come first. Ageism, however, is one of those things that people forget about. It’s certainly an issue, as society is constantly pushed into thinking that youth and beauty count for everything. While representing and producing more variety in age imagery in marketing and entertainment output is improving, it’s not really improving in the business world.
There was a time, many years ago, where a young graduate could find a job in a company, find a mentor–either in a manager or more experienced worker–to help guide that person’s career and help that person rise within the company. The young graduate would stay with that company for many years, perhaps even until retirement. When I entered the work field, I already knew those days were over. As a young graduate, I already knew it was a world where it was everyone for themselves, nobody was going to guide you and help lift you up. There were few to no mentors for people available. If you were to move up, it was by sheer luck, or hard work, and nothing else. Nobody was going to recognize you for a promotion unless your job was your life and you produced insane sales number or stats in your support (or there was some sort of favoritism/nepotism at play).
Now, this might sound like the usual angst of a Generation-X person like myself. And unfortunately, that has almost always been the case with just about everyone of my generation that I know. But now we are facing a different battle altogether, and it’s not just affecting us, but those who might have gotten a little bit of an extra leg up being a few years older than us. It seems that the millenials are taking over. Are they any smarter than those of us with a few more years’ experience? Nope. But they are cheap, and businesses–for better or worse–are gambling their businesses on the shoulders of this younger generation and leaving those of us who aren’t even close to retirement age out in the dust. I’m not saying that millenials shouldn’t have a chance to find work, but they are easily being favored due to their youth and supposed “digital literacy”.
I can think of several examples where this ageism issue has come to the forefront for me. The first one that comes to mind is a friend from graduate school. She is super smart, has a strong background in marketing and public relations, and worked for many years in both the profit and non-profit sectors. She is highly creative, incredibly well-spoken, and a consummate professional. Add to all of that, she is a delightful person to be around. This makes her a great candidate with loads of experience that would benefit any company. However, beyond sporadic consulting and contract jobs in the last few years, she has had a very difficult time finding a permanent position, as she needs the stability and the benefits package to help support her family. She even lives in the New York City market, where you would think there are a plethora of positions that would be open to her. Heck, she’s worked on a non-profit company wage for many years, so you’d think she’d even be open to taking a lower wage with a corporate entity, and knowing her, she is. But even when she fulfills everything they ask for in a job opening, employers won’t hire her. She’s trying to figure out what’s not adding up, and ageism is the only thing she can conclude.
I also talked to another friend recently who worked for a large company. She said that there was rumor-like talk that the unofficial company policy was that when employees reached a particular age that was before retirement eligibility, they would start working on pushing those employees out, and bring in significantly younger, less experienced workers to do the same job, simply and soley to save on costs.
Seriously?
I’ve also wondered about this for myself. I’m not exactly a young woman, but in many respects, I’m still a young graduate, as I only graduated from grad school slightly less than four years ago. I’ve had some good positions, but when looking for something new, the pay rate is always just a little too low. Why? Because they are hoping for someone who has lots of experience, but is cheap. I don’t ask for less than what I’ve already made in terms of hourly rates. I’ve been told that the rate I was receiving in the past was fair for experience. I’ve even checked against the STC Salary Database for my area to be sure, and I know this to be true. And yet, recruiters call with opportunities for positions that in some cases, I’m over-qualified for yet offer the equivalent of US$12,000-$25,000 LESS per year than I’d be making at my current rate. Of course I’d like a raise, even a cost-of-living/inflation raise, but at this point, I’m just trying to make the same amount of money. Those lower pay rates would be acceptable for a single person 20 years younger than me, but not someone like me who has more experience. From what I can tell, this is a move by companies not only to save money by getting cheaper, younger employees, but also a move to edge out older, experienced, reliable workers who are still willing to learn and adapt to new practices at work, but can’t take the pay cut. This is why my friend and I went back to school–to keep up and learn to make ourselves more attractive prospective employees. That hasn’t exactly worked out the way we planned.
It’s a silent issue, but it’s evidently not just in my head. After doing a simple Google search on the topic, it’s a prevalent problem. An article put out by Reuters called, “Ageism in U.S. workplace: a persistent problem unlikely to go away” was published just a few months ago, and it reinforces this issue. To reinforce that this has been an ongoing problem, here are two articles that were published in the last two years that also reinforce this notion:
Forbes – “The Ugly Truth About Age Discrimination” by Liz Ryan, January 2014
AARP – “Forced Out, Older Workers Are Fighting Back” by Carole Fleck, May 2014
Solutions provided in these two articles are not necessarily solutions. Liz Ryan’s go-to solution is to prove to prospective employers that you can fulfill a “pain point” for them, and you are worth the money and experience for it. But how do you know what the pain points are for different companies? They aren’t always so obvious from the outside. The AARP article’s “coping skills” were going back to school, starting a new career, suing an employer, or living off 401K/retirement savings early. Those are not necessarily great solutions. Suing an employer for age discrimination would be hard to do without proof (which is difficult to provide), and going back to school requires money, too. Living off of retirement funds early isn’t a great way to go, either. In the case of my friend and I, we both went back to school and tried to revitalize our careers–or in my case, reboot my career to break into a second career. My career, in my eyes, has barely taken off. I’m still a “new” graduate in many respects. I know it was recommended that I leave the year of my undergraduate graduation off my resume to help against this ageism, but I can tell you that because of my work history, that hasn’t helped (and I already left off the first ten years or so off my resume, since they don’t apply to my current career). What the heck?
In the AARP article, there’s an infographic that says that as of 2014, 58% of American adults believe that ageism starts when employees are in their fifties. I’m starting to question if that number is getting younger, more like at the age of 45. I’m currently 47 at this writing, and I have felt the pinch already. I know people who are in their early fifties who are incredibly capable people in the tech comm world–not just the friend I mentioned here–who are feeling this pinch as well. They attend conferences and local events to stay on top of the latest and greatest information so they can not only network, but also keep their skills and knowledge fresh. Is it an effort done in vain? I’m starting to wonder…
This is a problem that’s universal, not just in technical communications, but in all fields. But I sometimes wonder if more seasoned technical writers and strategists are falling out of favor simply because it’s thought that millenials are not only more digitally savvy, but cheaper labor? Without substansive proof that this is going on, it seems to me that anyone over the age of 40 is going to be having an uphill battle fighting for relevancy in the workplace for several years to come. Anyone over the age of 40 who starts a second career has a disadvantage, as they don’t have many years of experience doing something, yet they are “too old” for the job at the same time.
Do you agree with this observation? Have you experienced age discrimination–for either being “too mature”, or even for being too young for the job? What do you think the solution is for this? What advice do you have for those who are battling this silent fight as they look for employment? Include your comments below.
TechCommGeekMom 
The problem here, as I see it, is that the gentlemen you mention don’t report for work in offices every day. Neither do they have bosses. They are their own bosses. They call the shots. That’s a huge difference between them and us.
Another sad fact is, no one wants to work with someone who reminds them of their mom or dad. Or, in this case, their grand-parents!
This is true of McCartney and Jagger. They are both older than my own mother! Even so–imagine if they did work in an office, whether as the owners or as managers. I’d bet they’d have a lot of great insight to share about what they do! I can also tell you that it was an ageist remark asking who would want to work with older people. I’m only 47, and people don’t want to work with me? Seriously? It gets bad when you are my age and its people who are the same age–or younger–who discriminate against you when you know you have a couple good decades left in you. One of my recent jobs presented me with my manager being at least 20 years younger than me. That was a new dynamic that I learned from, just as much as he learned things from me.
My main point is that just because you are a little more advanced in years from a millennial doesn’t mean you are a useless waste of space or that you have nothing to offer. The last of the baby boomers and Gen-X are starting to get the shaft in a world where we’ve had to adapt the most to constantly changing technologies that have significantly changed how business is done. If anything, that makes us more valuable, yet we are starting to be cast aside. Would a millennial know how to do a print layout without InDesign, for example? If the cable internet connection is out, does a kid know how to be resourceful to use snail mail and fax machines to get information from point A to point B? This is my point. We have an economy where the 45+ crowd still needs to work and support families, yet they are turned down because they are “old”. If they have kept up their skills and continue to adapt to ensure their skills are still useful to an employer, then it should not be this hard to find work.
A few years back, my father working at his job as a customer service representative for a large wireless communications firm. He had been there ten years and had received awards and accolades from customers for the high quality of his service. One day around Thanksgiving, a supervisor came around and was asking how old each of the reps on the shift were. If you answered an age over 65, he told them to clear out their cubicle, because that day was their last day. My dad was 73 at the time, and it didn’t matter that he knew more about the latest technology or spoke four languages fluently as part of his job. He was humiliated and kicked to the curb with the rest.
Wow, Kathy Flinsch, that sounds like a class-action lawsuit to me. I’m outraged on behalf of your father!