Two commonly cited reasons
employers do not hire older workers include:
1. Mental Flexibility. Older workers are perceived as less likely
to learn new things so employers would rather avoid
them all together.
2. Pay. Generally speaking employers
feel younger workers are more motivated and have smaller family
responsibilities so they can pay them less and work them harder.
So what are some solutions
to help forty and fifty year old professionals find a job?
First, shorten your resume and use your cover letter to address concerns. When preparing your resume it is best to only
include the last 10 to 15 years - including more is generally not relevant and
may tip your hand. Second, address any
perceived weaknesses in your cover letter and highlight experiences that are
not easily discussed in your resume. For
specific pointers on preparing a resume read my article “Tips for a Successful Job Search”.
Second, understand that more
likely than not you will have to take a
pay cut to get a job. Older workers
who have been laid off or fired are typically offered a lower salary.
Third, stay current and up to date with the latest and greatest in your
field; this way an employer will know you have the skills and knowledge to do
the job. On a related note, when you
finally get another job vie for projects that will have a tangible impact on
the organization – either make the company money or save the company
money. This way you can easily
articulate your value to an employer.
Understanding the reasons
behind a problem are the first steps toward solving it. Now with the knowledge at your disposal and
practical tips to address it you can change your situation and get back to
work. It will not be easy but you will
eventually succeed. Be sure to read my
“Think Before You Send” and “Job Search Formula for Success” articles for
general job search tips.
If you like this article
please write a comment, Google+ it or click the Facebook button to your right. Also, signup to receive exclusive content by
typing your information at the top of the page below the big blue arrow.
Now Go Get Em’
recruiterMikeC
recruiterMikeC's Recommendations. I have personally read each book listed and all items are Amazon Best Sellers.
1. "Headhunter" Hiring Secrets: The Rules of the Hiring Game Have Changed . . . Forever!
2. The Power Formula for Linkedin Success: Kick-start Your Business, Brand, and Job Search
3. See You At The Top: 25th Anniversary Edition
4. Kindle Fire, Full Color 7" Multi-touch Display, Wi-Fi
The
photo used is a Creative Commons photo created by 2inches with
Atrribution-NonCommercial – ShareAlike 2.0 Generic license; the photo can be
found on Flickr at http://www.flickr.com/photos/2inches/484133264/.
>>>
ReplyDelete1. Mental Flexibility. Older workers are perceived as less likely to learn new things so employers would rather avoid them all together.
2. Pay. Generally speaking employers feel younger workers are more motivated and have smaller family responsibilities so they can pay them less and work them harder.
OK, so how do you get past this. One would think that holding a number of different jobs over time should show a constantly varying interest and a continuation of learning skills. More critically, experience can sub for one hell of a lot of "learning skills" -- knowledge of one piece of software extends to similar softwares much as a dialect is much easier than learning a whole new language.
Knowing what something "ought" to be able to do is worth a lot, and that, too, derives from experience -- In one of my last jobs, within six weeks of using Rational Robot as a development testing-bed for daily regression tests, I was writing VASTLY more comprehensive and capable scripts than my 25/27yo coworkers who had each been using the tool for a year or more longer than I. They were stuck using Robot's automated tool, while I knew all along that it had to be capable of MUCH more than that, and so, when I spotted an obscure and not clearly documented function call, it immediately expanded what I was doing to give me the ability to implement more than 75% of the hand-done manual/exploratory testing I was doing.
Some weeks later, we handed around what we were doing to one another to get a "second eyeball" on what was getting tested. Within a couple days I spotted a large "crash to Windows" bug that they'd missed (you could not encounter it with the autoscripting tool) in each of their coverage areas.
Not only did I see this really straightforward bug they'd missed for months (in the field someone would have triggered it within day if not hours), but I can categorically state that, if you put the bug into the areas I'd scripted the tests for, my SCRIPTED TESTS would have been able to identify the bug.
On top of that, the function call allowed me to properly and fully reset the testbed environment in ways the script did not -- this meant that the output from the tests -- a sequence of tested elements -- in my case, was the form "green green red green green green red green...", whereas using the autotool, it was "green green red red red red red red ..." -- the first error caused a cascade of false errors, meaning one run, one bug -- while my testing sequence could identify multiple failures reliably.
So, in EVERY POSSIBLE WAY, my job performance was vastly greater than theirs -- not because I'm "superior" but because of my experience leading to a deeper understanding right from the start of every aspect of the software testing process.
As far as pay and hours go, well, I constantly put in more overtime than anyone else at my level in that area (about 5-6 people) and far more overtime (not less than 60h/wk for a month, compared to about 45-50 for everyone else) during one "crunch" time. Those young guys rarely worked that late, they wanted to get out and party.
Doesn't seem to do an awful lot of good.
At another job, I specifically saved them six thousand dollars in a single day, about 1/7th my annual salary+benefits. A lot of people would not have done so, it took some smarts to recognize the possible savings, and a lot of bulldog patience to track down the information needed to get the savings (an architectural company, they had lost track of two site licenses which had never been upgraded -- this saved them buying two seats at a cost of $3700, spending instead only the $700 upgrade price. It took a full day's work to chase them down.
That, too, didn't seem to do a lot of good.
Certainly it hasn't gotten me any further positive attention from employers.
Interesting examples. To better understand your points can you give me an example of how you would position the time savings (i.e. scripting example) and cost savings (i.e. license example) in your resume. Thanks.
DeleteHi, very useful post. I've just bumped into it and found it concrete and useful, very straight to the point.
ReplyDelete