Unconscious bias

[Antonio1981]

I’ve been with my current company for 35 years and feeling the need to pursue something new in the near future if my work environment doesn’t improve. I am 58yo and wondering if there might be hiring biases due to my age and closer to retirement than a fresh face out of college?  
 

I work in retail and have had many assignments working my way up the ladder. I’ve been in leadership assignments for the last 20 years and have a current team of 250 employees and 23 leaders. I have also been a buyer and planner for 10 years which was an amazing job but a crazy travel schedule. 
 

It would be a big change for me considering I’ve been a loyal employee for as long as i have and wonder if I would be a viable candidate at my age for positions similar to what I have experience in?  I’ve always wondered if employers steered away from those closer to retirement age? I know labor laws prohibit age discrimination, however I’m always concerned about hiring biases that might be unconscious and not given a fair opportunity? 
 

I haven’t started any steps in seeking employment other than my LinkedIn profile and available to recruiters. When I did not post a salary requirement, I was getting bombarded by headhunters. When I included my current salary (and then lowered it by $15k), I have not received any recruiting inquiries. Im not feeling inspired working with my current VP and looking for some options (or hoping she gets a new assignment soon - unlikely) 

[acks01]

Possibly yes, possibly no, but at the end of the day it doesn't hurt to take a look elsewhere. It's currently a really good environment for people to look for new positions because of the high demand, but some companies may wonder why you're looking to make the jump after so long.

I think if you state it as wanting a more stable job without having to have a crazy travel schedule like you stated, that's something that makes sense. You're not bad mouthing your old employer and are just looking for something more grounded. At the end of the day, go in with confidence and they'll either like you or they won't, but you'll never know if you don't try.

[jeezifonly]

Your concerns about age-related bias are justified. Retail is not exactly a field of expanding opportunity right now either. Emphasize your skills and experience that translate across industries, like management and purchasing. Best of luck to you! 

[+ Tygerscent]

5 hours ago, Antonio1981 said:

I’ve been with my current company for 35 years and feeling the need to pursue something new in the near future if my work environment doesn’t improve. I am 58yo and wondering if there might be hiring biases due to my age and closer to retirement than a fresh face out of college?  
 

I work in retail and have had many assignments working my way up the ladder. I’ve been in leadership assignments for the last 20 years and have a current team of 250 employees and 23 leaders. I have also been a buyer and planner for 10 years which was an amazing job but a crazy travel schedule. 
 

It would be a big change for me considering I’ve been a loyal employee for as long as i have and wonder if I would be a viable candidate at my age for positions similar to what I have experience in?  I’ve always wondered if employers steered away from those closer to retirement age? I know labor laws prohibit age discrimination, however I’m always concerned about hiring biases that might be unconscious and not given a fair opportunity? 
 

I haven’t started any steps in seeking employment other than my LinkedIn profile and available to recruiters. When I did not post a salary requirement, I was getting bombarded by headhunters. When I included my current salary (and then lowered it by $15k), I have not received any recruiting inquiries. Im not feeling inspired working with my current VP and looking for some options (or hoping she gets a new assignment soon - unlikely) 

One of the greatest operating costs to a company is Labor… while companies have an appreciation for reliable labor and employees, at some point they don’t want to pay for them. It’s better to groom them slowly and keep only a few at the top who are getting those crème de la crème wages and control the direction of the company. 
 A Company will pay some higher wages to experienced employees but, hope to buy them off with vacation time, some benefits and maybe some bonuses… Otherwise, it’s to the companies benefit to rotate out employees so that have newer ones coming in that they can pay lower wages to and give fewer benefits to. Lately I see people getting risky stock options~ (usually Pharma companies and start ups). If you’re only planning 6 to 12 years or so before retiring, stock options may or may not be  a good deal.
  I worked for a corporation for a number of years. It was very much that way. Grow, expand, weed the garden, repeat… always a new crop of faces though they keep a few dedicated before giving them forced early retirement. (Not always). The higher you go, the more moves sideways and the greater demand of time and effort for that salaried bit~ There’s a bit of fight on your part and lots of patience.

 My career experience in medicine and research was different. The wages are more consistent throughout your career… if not predictable~ 
 Had I stayed in Wisconsin and continued working for Milwaukee County Park System, I’d have retired years ago with a fantastic pension. 
 The older County jobs really were a good deal back in the day if you got in young~ I started there when I was 16yrs old~ By 24yrs old I was up for being a park supervisor with a bump up to district and regional manager shortly there after, (especially with university training). I could have left after 30 Yrs or stayed on for awhile to build up a bit more retirement~ (all prior to Scott Walker). Instead, I moved to the west coast in 1990 to continue my career in academia and medicine/research… Then left that in 1998 to Escort~ Those were that two best decisions I have ever made in my life~ 

 The modern trend is to cut costs not increase financial liability and labor is a liability: benefits, sick pay, holiday pay, bonuses, continued education/training, workman’s comp, general business insurance… etc~ 
 I know a number of people who worked for companies their entire life and towards the end, got the “golden boot”: a watch and early retirement or choice of decreased wages or decreased work hours~ Saw that a lot around 2000 and forward. 
 There’s a fine line between age discrimination and what’s financially wise for a company: ie. Keep labor costs down. It’s cheaper to hire someone with less experience, more energy and who may have a goal for higher wages but, hasn’t yet achieved that. They can keep you and groom you, or subtly force you to move on via boredom or negative pressure~ 
 You could go a tier higher in your field and then plan for retirement in a few years… a company will know that’s part of the deal upon hiring you~ 
 Whatever you pursue/decide, I hope that it brings you the greatest satisfaction and happiness now and in the long run~ 

 
 

Edited February 9, 2022 by Tygerscent

[+ Lucky]

A friend did well when re-entering the job market at 66 years old.

[+ WilliamM]

I would hire an older person, female or male, depending on the interview and the answer to the question "how do you do on interviews in general."

[jeezifonly]

8 hours ago, WilliamM said:

I would hire an older person, female or male, depending on the interview and the answer to the question "how do you do on interviews in general."

My undoing is when they ask “where do you see yourself in five years?”
   “Probably a skilled nursing facility.”

[+ WilliamM]

3 minutes ago, jeezifonly said:

My undoing is when they ask “where do you see yourself in five years?”
   “Probably a skilled nursing facility.”

Is the goal to make the possible employee comfortable? 

[+ nycman]

18 hours ago, Antonio1981 said:

I am 58yo and wondering if there might be hiring biases due to my age and closer to retirement than a fresh face out of college?

There is. 

18 hours ago, Antonio1981 said:

I’ve always wondered if employers steered away from those closer to retirement age?

They do.

18 hours ago, Antonio1981 said:

I know labor laws prohibit age discrimination, however….

Huge "however".
Truth is it’s near impossible to prove age discrimination in the hiring phase.
Conversely, during the firing phase it’s pretty easy.

Unless you’re considered one of the "top in your field" and stealing you from a competitor
would be considered a "coup", I wouldn’t expect much.  They’d rather take their chances on
a cheaper, younger, and more moldable version of you. As your exploration into the world of
recruiters has shown, they’ll snap you up if they think they can get you cheap. You can’t make
yourself younger but you can make yourself cheaper. Ultimately that is about the only card
you’ve got, and they know it.

Sorry to be a downer, but reality sucks. Best of luck. 

[dbar123]

When it comes to hiring, 60 is the new 90. Keep your expectations in check and go for it. Everyone wants young cheap workers with 5 years of experience. With labor tight there will never be a better chance to spin the dice. Good luck.

[xyz48B]

20 hours ago, Antonio1981 said:

I’ve always wondered if employers steered away from those closer to retirement age?

Yes. Especially for full time.

1 hour ago, dbar123 said:

Everyone wants young cheap workers with 5 years of experience.

May I offer a friendly amendment? Everyone wants workers between 18-25 years old with 25 years of experience.

[jeezifonly]

1 hour ago, xyz48B said:

Yes. Especially for full time.

May I offer a friendly amendment? Everyone wants workers between 18-25 years old with 25 years of experience.

Providers included… 🤩

[Rudynate]

I know a guy who coaches retiring executives wanting to become entrepreneurs.

[+ cougar]

On 2/9/2022 at 6:22 AM, Tygerscent said:

One of the greatest operating costs to a company is Labor… while companies have an appreciation for reliable labor and employees, at some point they don’t want to pay for them. It’s better to groom them slowly and keep only a few at the top who are getting those crème de la crème wages and control the direction of the company. 
 A Company will pay some higher wages to experienced employees but, hope to buy them off with vacation time, some benefits and maybe some bonuses… Otherwise, it’s to the companies benefit to rotate out employees so that have newer ones coming in that they can pay lower wages to and give fewer benefits to. Lately I see people getting risky stock options~ (usually Pharma companies and start ups). If you’re only planning 6 to 12 years or so before retiring, stock options may or may not be  a good deal.
  I worked for a corporation for a number of years. It was very much that way. Grow, expand, weed the garden, repeat… always a new crop of faces though they keep a few dedicated before giving them forced early retirement. (Not always). The higher you go, the more moves sideways and the greater demand of time and effort for that salaried bit~ There’s a bit of fight on your part and lots of patience.

 My career experience in medicine and research was different. The wages are more consistent throughout your career… if not predictable~ 
 Had I stayed in Wisconsin and continued working for Milwaukee County Park System, I’d have retired years ago with a fantastic pension. 
 The older County jobs really were a good deal back in the day if you got in young~ I started there when I was 16yrs old~ By 24yrs old I was up for being a park supervisor with a bump up to district and regional manager shortly there after, (especially with university training). I could have left after 30 Yrs or stayed on for awhile to build up a bit more retirement~ (all prior to Scott Walker). Instead, I moved to the west coast in 1990 to continue my career in academia and medicine/research… Then left that in 1998 to Escort~ Those were that two best decisions I have ever made in my life~ 

 The modern trend is to cut costs not increase financial liability and labor is a liability: benefits, sick pay, holiday pay, bonuses, continued education/training, workman’s comp, general business insurance… etc~ 
 I know a number of people who worked for companies their entire life and towards the end, got the “golden boot”: a watch and early retirement or choice of decreased wages or decreased work hours~ Saw that a lot around 2000 and forward. 
 There’s a fine line between age discrimination and what’s financially wise for a company: ie. Keep labor costs down. It’s cheaper to hire someone with less experience, more energy and who may have a goal for higher wages but, hasn’t yet achieved that. They can keep you and groom you, or subtly force you to move on via boredom or negative pressure~ 
 You could go a tier higher in your field and then plan for retirement in a few years… a company will know that’s part of the deal upon hiring you~ 
 Whatever you pursue/decide, I hope that it brings you the greatest satisfaction and happiness now and in the long run~ 

 
 

Damn, you have stated the truth in the most factual sense.

I was laid off at age 54 after 28 years in the same industry but only two companies and found that my age, salary and experience was NOT what any modern organization desired. I had to completely re-invent myself at age 54 after two years of answering hundreds of job postings. I survived only because I was in good financial health when laid off (downsized) and made major changes to my life. I had to sell my home and used the proceeds to pay cash for a smaller ranch style home that is actually a good fit for me and the dog. I ended up in a job making less than 1/3 of my previous salary and currently still in that job but have received promotions and salary raises that have made life better. My salary is now about 65% of my career salary. So, age 64 is around the corner and I am counting the days to retirement and hope that my retirement will be comfortable as I have SSI and two pensions that will become available on that magic 65th birthday. 

Wow, I think I really went down a different road, but I have been needing to tell my story. Before you make any moves consider my experience. One thing that really did hurt after being downsized at age 52 was the length of time it took for me to stop financially sinking and the fact that I could not afford to do any traveling for the last 10 years. Travel still is not much of an option as money is tight, but I can make a few small trips but not to any of the places I have dreamed of my entire life. 

[rvwnsd]

After working for my now-former employer for 18.5 years, in July 2021 my role ended as a result of a reorganization. I received a generous severance package and at 57 was able to take my retirement benefits. They aren't enough to live on, but they are certainly a plus. My package included nine months of outplacement, including the services of an executive coach. She has been very helpful, and I would encourage you to hire one who has experience with people in your profession and age bracket.

You've mentioned being 58 and having 35 years at the same company a few times. You've also mentioned the number of people who report to you and the number of them who are managers. Do yourself a favor if and think beyond age, longevity, and number of reports. Instead, think in terms of the skills you bring to an employer. Managing a 230-member team with 20 leaders is irrelevant if you are interviewing with a retailer who has ten stores and 100 employees. However, leadership, communication, and interpersonal skills plus resiliency will be relevant.

In a different post, you mentioned concerns had been raised about your leadership. I worked for someone I like quite a lot who happens to be 61 or 62. She learned how to be a leader in the 1980's and 1990's and it shows. One day we were chatting, and I just blurted out "1991 called and it wants its management style back." She laughed hysterically and said she was working on it. Given the concerns that were raised about your leadership you might want to ask yourself what decade your leadership style belongs in vs what decade we are in today.  You might also want to ask yourself what steps you can take to address the concerns that were raised.

 

[+ Tygerscent]

3 hours ago, cougar said:

Damn, you have stated the truth in the most factual sense.

I was laid off at age 54 after 28 years in the same industry but only two companies and found that my age, salary and experience was NOT what any modern organization desired. I had to completely re-invent myself at age 54 after two years of answering hundreds of job postings. I survived only because I was in good financial health when laid off (downsized) and made major changes to my life. I had to sell my home and used the proceeds to pay cash for a smaller ranch style home that is actually a good fit for me and the dog. I ended up in a job making less than 1/3 of my previous salary and currently still in that job but have received promotions and salary raises that have made life better. My salary is now about 65% of my career salary. So, age 64 is around the corner and I am counting the days to retirement and hope that my retirement will be comfortable as I have SSI and two pensions that will become available on that magic 65th birthday. 

Wow, I think I really went down a different road, but I have been needing to tell my story. Before you make any moves consider my experience. One thing that really did hurt after being downsized at age 52 was the length of time it took for me to stop financially sinking and the fact that I could not afford to do any traveling for the last 10 years. Travel still is not much of an option as money is tight, but I can make a few small trips but not to any of the places I have dreamed of my entire life. 

You bring up another good point: companies would rather “down size” you than “retire” you, (meaning move you sideways or cut your hours/responsibilities rather than keep paying you more or moving you up). The longer they keep you, the greeter loss you are to them: pension obligation, costs of being an employee to them~

[+ Tygerscent]

2 hours ago, rvwnsd said:

After working for my now-former employer for 18.5 years, in July 2021 my role ended as a result of a reorganization. I received a generous severance package and at 57 was able to take my retirement benefits. They aren't enough to live on, but they are certainly a plus. My package included nine months of outplacement, including the services of an executive coach. She has been very helpful, and I would encourage you to hire one who has experience with people in your profession and age bracket.

You've mentioned being 58 and having 35 years at the same company a few times. You've also mentioned the number of people who report to you and the number of them who are managers. Do yourself a favor if and think beyond age, longevity, and number of reports. Instead, think in terms of the skills you bring to an employer. Managing a 230-member team with 20 leaders is irrelevant if you are interviewing with a retailer who has ten stores and 100 employees. However, leadership, communication, and interpersonal skills plus resiliency will be relevant.

In a different post, you mentioned concerns had been raised about your leadership. I worked for someone I like quite a lot who happens to be 61 or 62. She learned how to be a leader in the 1980's and 1990's and it shows. One day we were chatting, and I just blurted out "1991 called and it wants its management style back." She laughed hysterically and said she was working on it. Given the concerns that were raised about your leadership you might want to ask yourself what decade your leadership style belongs in vs what decade we are in today.  You might also want to ask yourself what steps you can take to address the concerns that were raised.

 

Good points also you mention here: concentrate on skills, (rather than achievements), and gear them towards present day marketability and need for “reorganizing” companies~ Lots of “reorganization” going on these days