Re:Ask HN: What happens to old developers?
by hga on Saturday May 21, 2011 @03:00PM
(#2571437)
Prejudice (for that is what this seems to be, although I don't know not having it) doesn't have to be rational.
Some of this is almost certainly due to low quality (middle) management; people who are unable to mentor or supervise someone coming up to speed in their company's technical ecosystem are infamous for playing buzzword bingo with resumes and not indefinitely not filling positions. It's a small leap from that to e.g. not being willing to manage someone significantly older than you.
Then there are entirely rational aspects: older programmers tend to cost more per unit of time. In the US past 39 in the US they can sue for age discrimination if fired (see e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Reid_%28computer_scientis... for the current best known example). Safest not to hire them in the first place, that's legally much easier to defend.
I've been hired entirely on the basis of FizzBuzz type tests when the hiring manager took an instant dislike to me. He tried to find a reason not to hire me (as reported by one of my references, who knew both of us, me very well) but went ahead and did it because it was the only way to save his company (I was the only one who passed the tests). He was just out of college with no management experience and I was 37 (I think age was a small but otherwise minor factor in all this).
So rationality can overcome a lot. But how many times have we seen managers make "irrational" project or company killing hiring and firing decisions? How many investors have preferred to have all of nothing instead of some of something?
Some of this is almost certainly due to low quality (middle) management; people who are unable to mentor or supervise someone coming up to speed in their company's technical ecosystem are infamous for playing buzzword bingo with resumes and not indefinitely not filling positions. It's a small leap from that to e.g. not being willing to manage someone significantly older than you.
Then there are entirely rational aspects: older programmers tend to cost more per unit of time. In the US past 39 in the US they can sue for age discrimination if fired (see e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Reid_%28computer_scientis... for the current best known example). Safest not to hire them in the first place, that's legally much easier to defend.
I've been hired entirely on the basis of FizzBuzz type tests when the hiring manager took an instant dislike to me. He tried to find a reason not to hire me (as reported by one of my references, who knew both of us, me very well) but went ahead and did it because it was the only way to save his company (I was the only one who passed the tests). He was just out of college with no management experience and I was 37 (I think age was a small but otherwise minor factor in all this).
So rationality can overcome a lot. But how many times have we seen managers make "irrational" project or company killing hiring and firing decisions? How many investors have preferred to have all of nothing instead of some of something?