Colleen Paulson’s Post

With the reality of companies not keeping up with market rates from year to year in comp reviews and raises, younger generations have learned TO jump ship every 1-2 years to keep pace. The new reality is, recruiters and hiring managers may have a longer run from the older generations. Yes, they may cost a bit more up front, but with that you get an employee with embedded knowledge that you simply can’t get from a quick onboarding of a fresh from school hire. The learning curve is eliminated with older generations and they are likely looking to stick around and not job hop because they and their families are settled. That’s the reality of the way things are NOW. If only the hiring teams would stop leaning on old ways of thinking, they might pick up some very valuable, longterm team members.

"They aren't looking to jump ship soon". A company's top brass value that. But I think sometimes younger recruiters and hiring managers don't realize the value of that. Institutional memory is key at any company - at the very least it saves on retraining costs every time a new person comes on board and often it's a key to making good decisions. Furthermore, hiring somebody who already knows how to do the job AND doesn't want to leave after twelve months will save the company on training costs with or without the institutional memory issue. Recruiters need to seek out and promote over 50's better and hiring managers need to get over their personal surprise when an over 50 walks into the interview. It will benefit the company. And by the way, a twenty-something who goes out on disability costs the company just as much as a fifty-something who goes out on disability. It's not the age that matters, it's the time away from the desk.

Well, my clients who are 40 something are already hearing the same phrase from recruiters and hiring managers... Is 40 the "new 60's"? It's about time that companies realize that people are living longer, so we are working longer too. Also, the value that can be added to the company by someone with more experience can be amazing, so a big change in the approach is needed...

The easiest way to fix this isn't to blame employees and candidates. It's to treat people well enough that they don't want to leave. Some are addicted to constantly climbing, but most, I'd argue, are just looking for stability and a job that provides a decent living arrangement so they can enjoy their lives. If a company is worried about the things in your post, then just start paying better and offering better working conditions.

I’ve faced ageism in the past. In a former job, I was asked how long until I retire. I’m in my mid-50s now, and am looking again. Companies should know that people my age aren’t looking to retire…at all. Money or no money. There’s still a lot of energy in these bones.

Many times people in there 50s and 60s just want to go to work and contribute. They aren’t looking to climb ladders. They can be very stable members of organizations. And if they leave in 5 or 6 years what difference does it make? Young employees are always looking for their next gig too.

I hate those assumptions. People are working into their 70s and the ones that do that are raring to go. I hope hiring managers see their value like we do.

All of these points about the hiring process are spot on. It's frustrating to see so much discussion about the problem without any real action to fix it. You're right: these assumptions and biases are incredibly harmful and keep us stuck in a broken system. It's clear we need to change how we approach hiring. But, instead of just talking about it, there needs to be a push for real changes. Surely there are HR associations that "guide" the industry that can influence hiring biases. I get it, it's human behavior and you won't ever really take that out of the process... but I see a lot of posts about how this shouldn't be a thing, and how older folks should work the system to their benefit, but not a whole lot of effort going into leveling the playing field. We can't just keep discussing the issue and "supporting each other"—we, as a society, need to make actionable changes.

Nearly all of us who post are in this classification of “old”. It is sad but true. There is more talent, drive and wisdom on these chain of posts than any group of 30 year olds can bring! Keep looking, posting and talking. It helps us all!

Two key words used in your content share, Colleen Paulson: 1. Assumption 2. Biases I would love to see is the statistical data to support each of these two preconceived ideologies and how they differ from other generations in the workforce today. Something tells me the difference would be negligible or significantly lower than other generations. It’s time employers end agism and support a multi-generational workforce. If not, they should stop saying they support diversity in the workplace. Which may explain why, age is typically not included in most companies DEI statements.