Thanks to both Rahel Bailie and Tina Howe for posting this on Facebook originally.
Reading this article gave me shivers down my spine. It truly bothers me (which is an understatement) that workers over 40 years of age are considered “old” in the workplace now, especially at a tech giant like HP. Some of the precendents that are outlined in this article seem outdated (even if it’s only been 3 years) and misinformed somehow. Yes, in the U.S., we still have a retirement age of 65 (for now), but as time goes on and the population ages, the average life span continues to get older and older, which means that potentially, we could work longer if we wanted. Why cut us off mid-span, when we are just starting to hit our peak? As I’ve mentioned in other places, I can agree that younger people can bring in fresh ideas and know-how, but the 40-plus age group can bring wisdom and can still have that curiousity that the young’uns have as well. We are not limited by age at all. We just become more expensive due to our experiences, is my best guess, and companies are more interested in profits than people more often than not. It’s sad that HP is turning into one of those companies. I’m hoping this is not going to start being a bad trend similar to when Marissa Mayer decided that telecommuting was a bad thing, but then built a nursery next to her office so she could be with her kids. She set a bad precendence that damaged the progress made with remote workers everywhere. While I’ve heard of unofficial rumors about similar practices at other companies, I hope that HP is not one of those companies, and will come to their senses if they are engaging in this practice. It will end badly if they are found to be guilty of age discrimination. It will be interesting to see how this case goes forward.
What do you think? Include your comments below.