They won't accept work for less than premium wages, don't need to.
That being said, I admit that there is also another part of the population who is struggling and desperate for work at any price.
Last but not least there is the question of what is premium wage. In London for instance, a lot of folks over 30 moved to contracting where they can charge a good daily rate, without the hassle of whiteboard interview, overtime or politics. You'll see many companies (see the HN who is hiring) allegedly struggling to recruit at their great wages, but the truth is that employees have moved out to greener pastures for twice the money.
I must travel in lowly circles.
Like, cashflow at 50 with 3 kids is important.
Yeah, you've saved for retirement at ~65ish, but you have 2 kids in college with one on the way up, plus a mortgage, plus just regular life stuff. That's not an unreasonable scenario at all.
Like, do you live in a first world nation? Honestly, the paradigm changes a lot in the 3rd world and your confusion would be more appropriate in Chad or something.
(In Chad, average age of first birth is 18, so you'd reasonably be a grand parent by 50, plus cost of living is very low)
If you have kids before your thirties, they will all be +25 when you are 55. They most likely finished college, they probably left the family home.
https://www.gao.gov/assets/680/670153.pdf
Edit: below, the table contents
Households age 55-64 with Households age 55-64
no retirement savings with retirement savings
Percent of house- 41% 59%
holds age 55-64
Median net worth $21,000 $337,000
Median non-retirement $1,000 $25,000
financial resources
Median income $26,000 $86,000
Home ownership rates 56% 87%
Percent who own a home 22% 27%
that is paid off
Percent with a 32% 45%
defined benefit planThen an additional 50% who have a home but still a mortgage to pay. The statistics don't say when mortgages will end, so we can't do any meaningful analysis on the majority.
There are more people on the low side, not WAY MORE contrary to your statement.
Which is to say there are some people who don't have their house paid off yet, but will have it paid off before they retire, and then live rent free (but with other bills and taxes). There are other people who will not have anything paid off.
That is the EXTREME minority of people over 50, at least in the US
>I admit that there is also another part of the population who is struggling and desperate for work at any price.
I would not say they are "desperate for work at any price." but most people over 50 need a fair wage for work, and by fair wage I mean a wage comparable to younger people as well
My dad was in fact laid off at 50. Everybody knew he was very careful to save a lot of money, so they always said "but you must have enough money saved away to retire by now". His response was always "yes, but I don't have enough money to get to retirement". In the 15 years between 50 and 65 his money is expected to double twice which makes a big difference to his retirement income. If he had started drawing at 50 would have much less money to work with. He needed a job to pay bills.
That is an assumption that may be invalid. Everybody is in their own private situation. Your assumption will be true for many but not for all. Many older folks may not need a top salary anymore and will take an average income for the pleasure of working with other fine people and doing interesting things. At some point in your life the career ladder will be less important than quality of life.
So, the only way that is even in the realm of possibility is if the kid was making $30K and the greybeard was making $300K. That's another benefit of greybeards: you get more bang for the buck simply because of the way salaries scale vs. performance that comes with good experience.
Costs is more than just salary. 5 weeks vs 2 weeks of hollidays, 401k, health insurance, etc...
More like 50% more or at most twice as much.
This notion that experienced developers, as a whole in the industry, are making x times more than junior developers is nonsense. Utter nonsense spoken by people who have no idea of what they're talking about. It's true you can find outliers for that kind of thing, and I'm willing to bet they are specialty cases.
Early in my career I would get huge jumps in pay when I proved myself at a project. Almost fifteen years into this career and I don't get those huge jumps in pay anymore after a successful project. Not because I'm not deserving of the praise, but I'm already paid well to deliver based on my experience. A junior succeeds and gets a raise; a senior succeeds and moves on to the next project.
Could I get one of these mythical 300k jobs? I know I can. I'm willing to bet I could snag a 500k job if I pushed myself. But that would require sacrifices I'm not willing to make, give up hobbies that I enjoy, and live in a city I really don't care for. A city that would eat up the extra income anyway.
I'm more than happy with my current job that pays well and I get to mentor juniors every day, which I enjoy.
In SF/NYC, juniors can start under 100k, seniors can go over 300k. Either number could go either way, let's not argue about who got what. The point is, there is a LARGE multiplier.
I recall one friend in London, in a junior position. Left his company because of bad conditions and bad pay. One of his last assignment was to interview some possible replacements. There was one senior guy 20+ years of experience that was great, the company made an offer for around double his own salary.
Do you know what happened? The guy declined.
Guess what we found out later? He joined another company that offered him around three times that double.
Young folks don't realize how expensive experienced folks can be.
I'm drawing the same salary as I drew twenty years ago. (Never mind adjustment for inflation. It's the same actual number of dollars.)
I have a clear enough understanding of my trade that I'm willing to buy my own tools when they save me time (keyboards, monitors, development tool licenses, VM service fees, etc).
This all works for me. My kids are out of college without debt. I've got some money stashed in 401(k). I wouldn't mind retiring, but my small-company employer can't afford to hire somebody younger and they've asked me to stick around.
All other roles for different ages I've ever seen has been based on experience and not age, and at the companies I've been that experience is only about 30-50% higher at the worst.
He could be 10 times more expensive than you. Did you consider that?