Companies Paid Big for Age Discrimination

Wonderful article.

Exquisitely written. Another of my favorite loaded comments is, "over skilled" and "tenured". Keep it up. The culture here does not seek experience and maturity.

@Kathy thanks for your comment. Maybe it's age discrimination. Did you ask what the new direction was and why you would not be a good fit? Did you ask if there was anything that you could do to stay with the company and go in this new direction? Many times we are afraid to ask because we are afraid of the answer.

What if you are told the company is moving in a New Direction and they don't think you would be a good fit. Then you look through the company and and size the employees up and they are 99% all in their 20,30,and 40's. Age descrimination?

@Catherine thanks for your comment. I am sure that many others have the same question. It's tough to prove. Some of the ways would be through direct evidence such as you overheard a conversation where age-related terms are used - like old, or fart, etc:. Another way is harassment that is age-related. Maybe you start getting disciplined now whereas before you were their star. Maybe the company sponsors events and outings and they pick you to stay and answer the phones because it might be too challenging for you to be involved in the events. How about seeing a lot of promotions around you but none for you. Or maybe you noticed that there are more millennials in the company than ever before. Many ways to check but, still, it's hard to prove.

I'm interested in how people prove that age discrimination took place when they were fired. I'm guessing most people this would apply to would not be able to obtain evidence that they were fired simply because of their age or their higher salary because they have been at a company for a long time. What kind of evidence is needed in these cases? Is it simply enough to show that an older person had consistently good reviews when they were fired? Or do you need proof of the bosses actually talking about firing someone because of their age?

Thanks for the comments. @Hema I had to laugh at yours because I have always wondered the same thing. When I was younger, I would always seek out a more mature coworker for advice and training. I never saw them as being dinosaurs like they are seen today. Age discrimination is huge in our work world today. It amazes me that we don't hear about it as much as we should. Another thing - not all mature workers are breaking the bank in terms of salary. Just because a person is more mature doesn't mean that their salary is prohibitive. On the contrary, they could be making less than that new 20 year old that just got hired yesterday. Age discrimination is rampant and very real. What is it going to take to stop it? Would love to hear your responses.

I’m surprised to read that age discrimination exists in Silicon Valley. I would have thought that talent and not age mattered for technology companies. I wonder what the company founders are going to do when they themselves become old. There needs to be more awareness about age discrimination and workers of all ages need to know what their rights are.

I am so glad that those banks had to pay up. They were using some very nasty practices. This is a very explicit example of how language can be used as a weapon, It all goes back to the "Nudge" theory, coined by Cass Sunstein. Basically, the theory goes, that if you perform certain actions, such as putting unhealthy foods out of sight so that people must ask for them, you indirectly get them to eat healthier, because most won't go against the group and ask for the forbidden food. It's a very sinister and insidious way to control people and circumstances. That companies use these tactics is a frightening thought. Also, I wasn't aware that age discrimination was so widespread. I'd like to say that this shocks me, but these days are so surreal that nothing shocks me anymore.

This is very troubling. It seems quite incomprehensible that experience--real, on-the-job experience--is so completely overlooked when age comes into question. This sentence in particular: "Many companies are also motivated to lay off mature workers because of their higher salaries, not their ages." is concerning. The salary of a mature worker reflects the experience they bring to their job; constantly replacing workers with untrained and younger individuals seems like it would have a negative impact on overall productivity over time.

I strongly agree with the final point of this article. Employers shouldn't discount older workers regardless of the law. The right employee for any position could be lurking in an age group that a hiring manager initially feels is less than ideal. I am an older applicant, and I feel that my wisdom and experience greatly outweigh any disadvantages I might have from not growing up in the digital age.

As @Shannon pointed out, this ageism works both ways. I think more attention is drawn to the discrimination against older workers because older workers tend to be more aware of their rights and more willing to fight for them. However, my experience has been that younger people are not given the same opportunities many times. There is an underlying belief that they'll be irresponsible, change careers too soon, have babies, etc. Perhaps a lot of the perception is directed by the hiring person and/or upper management.

This current (and very ageist) attitude toward workers over 40 really baffles me. Given their experience, older workers ought to be valuable assets to their employers. So why don't some employers see this? If anything, I think we should be aiming to be inclusive — particularly given our rapidly aging population.

While I'm glad to see that this issue is coming to light, especially in the courts, I think that age discrimination goes both ways. In my 20s, I had several employers fully admit that they were concerned about hiring me because they were worried that I would not fit into the company culture because I was young. One employer admitted (years after the fact) that the best thing they ever did was hire someone young with renewed energy to inspire the employees who had been working for the firm for more than 20 years.

Thanks for the comments. @William you would think that would be true but, sadly, it's not. Companies still want to hire younger workers thinking that they can get digital natives and pay much less than they would for a non-digital native. But truth be told, I am from the older generation and I started using computers in 1981 - even before the Internet. Once the internet started, I was one of the first users of it and have been using it since. So, to say that you won't hire me because I am not a "digital native" would be to let all of my years of experience go to waste. I might be able to run circles around some of the younger generation. And the experience and knowledge of the more senior workers should always be taken into account. Salary is not necessarily the issue that companies make it out to be. Yes seniors typically do make a greater salary than that high school graduate but it's not true across the board. Many of the older folks just want to work. They are not seeking a huge salary but just a nice working atmosphere where they can earn enough to meet their needs but also to have a purpose. Today it's like if you are older than 45 you can't get hired. So crazy the way that companies think. Makes your wonder why they are this way and where they are deriving their information! All companies should have a diverse workforce.

I don't understand how and why companies foster this culture of age discrimination. We live in the 21st century, not the Dark Ages. My dad, in his late 60s, knows how to use a smartphone and a laptop computer just as well I can and he's not a "digital native." Employment, hiring and promotions should be based on merit as opposed to companies that stress a "youthful" culture. I would think that employers know about these lawsuits and then stop before they have to pay an expensive settlement.

The article points out that one of the motivations behind decisions to lay off older workers is "their higher salaries, not their ages." While I agree with this observation, I would also add that this could also be a factor in companies reluctance to hire middle-aged and elderly applicants as well. Greater career experience brings with it an expectation of a higher salary. Additionally, more mature workers often have a stronger grasp of their labor rights than recent graduates do, making it harder for unethical managers to exploit them.

The most discouraging part of this information to me is that we continue to point at 'companies' that commit or foster this type of behavior. The reality is not no hiring manager is making a unilateral decision to hire a particular age, gender or race; that is a corporate culture decision that is typically incubated from above - to address kind of issue, people should be held accountable, not just corporations.

It's scary to read about this, and disheartening to hear about some of these workers' experiences. It's tough because you can't usually prove that a person wasn't hired because of his/her age. There's just so much more to consider than being a "digital native"- these employers really could be missing out on something. In particular, when I think about a company like Google: people of all ages use Google, so shouldn't people of all ages work there, so as to ensure that the site appeals to/works for people of all ages?