Welcome to College Confidential!

The leading college-bound community on the web

Sign Up For Free

Join for FREE, and start talking with other members, weighing in on community discussions, and more.

Also, by registering and logging in you'll see fewer ads and pesky welcome messages (like this one!)

As a CC member, you can:

  • Reply to threads, and start your own.
  • Post reviews of your campus visits.
  • Find hundreds of pages of informative articles.
  • Search from over 3 million scholarships.

Study finds that workers over 50 are highly vulnerable to job loss

1235

Replies to: Study finds that workers over 50 are highly vulnerable to job loss

  • oldfortoldfort Registered User Posts: 22,997 Senior Member
    Due to labor shortage, I think more firms are trying to tap into less traditional work force. Microsoft and other tech companies figured out people with certain disability can be very good programers, so they have set up programs to recruit those people and also provide support for them (dorm like living space, mentorship). I just saw on a news that GM started a program to help older stay home parents to return to work because they can't get enough experienced workers. The program is 12 weeks. The workers are trained with latest work technology and are assessed during that period, and at the end 12 weeks some people are offered a position (85%+). I have similar type of program at banks and technology companies. I think it is encouraging.
  • oldfortoldfort Registered User Posts: 22,997 Senior Member
    I was in a similar position as iaparent this year. I started looking when my manager was let go. I was able to collect close to a year of severance and started a new job within a month. It was pretty good for only have worked there for 8 months (a month after I started they decided to wipe out my department). What is interesting is I am working with my old manager again, more as a peer, even though I didn't know he was working there when I applied. He helped me in getting the job by giving a great recommendation. As posted by iaparent, networking is key.
  • CTmom2018CTmom2018 Registered User Posts: 793 Member
    edited December 2018
    My husband was let go at age 61, and it was blatant age discrimination. One day, management assembled all the employees and told them that the company's cost for insuring people over 53 was higher, "but you older employees are welcome to stay on." The very next day my H got his pink slip.

    He briefly considered pursuing legal action, but his father had died not 2 months earlier and my H was the named executor. We had my FIL's house to renovate and sell, and my H decided to use the down time to do those jobs while looking for another job.

    He encountered more age discrimination while interviewing for the next job. At one place, the first thing said to him as he walked in the door was not "Hi Mr. X" but "How's your health?" The bald, not-young interviewer then said to him, "You're getting up there, aren't you?" Needless to say, he didn't get that job.

    The job he finally got 8 months later (2 months after his unemployment benefits ran out) paid only 78% of what he was getting at the job he was let go from. Our D was in 6th grade at the time so it greatly impacted saving for college, retirement etc.
  • yourmommayourmomma Registered User Posts: 1,304 Senior Member
    It cracks me up about this younger-people-are-more-productive myth. People in their 30s and 40s are having/raising children. That means maternity/paternity leave, doctor's appoinments, staying home with sick kids, having to go to soccer games on Saturdays, take kiddos to and from ballet on Tuesdays and Thursdays -- and picking them up from after-school care no later than 6.

    Contrast that with someone in their late 50s, who can stay late on weekdays, work weekends and not have to take time off during school spring break. And on top of that is eager to work and learn because they know their age makes them vulnerable. Yes, our healthcare may cost more -- but by late 50s many won't have their kids on their insurance anymore.

    If only corporate America understood this, and paid attention.

    It's not one dimensional. It's more productive relative to their cost. Younger workers are cheaper. Thus, they don't have to be as productive as older workers. Older, more expensive, workers have to be a lot more productive than a younger worker to make up for their cost. A younger worker can be a complete dope but may still be better deal than the more experienced older worker. Once you know the math and how your employer makes it's money you have the keys to longevity.
  • emptynesteryetemptynesteryet Registered User Posts: 209 Junior Member
    Age discrimination is real and I'm in my early 40's just fine :) but I've seen it so often in my career. I wish age discrimination received the same voice as the other social justice talking points that are so "popular" these days.
  • CCtoAlaskaCCtoAlaska Registered User Posts: 583 Member
    @yourmomma totally agree about knowing where your employer makes its money. But a lot of employers make their money by laying people off or don't really have a clear profit motive (ie. nonprofit) or getting rid of people is the profit motive or the worker is literally just there to keep the lights on - nonprofits, health care, retail. I think the biggest crisis is a crisis of lack of meaningful jobs. Even meaningful jobs like EMT are paid rock-bottom in our society and seen as expendable. How do you argue that you are an Important Worker when the actual work most of us do is generally considered to be unimportant, even things like teaching?

    In the nonprofit world, I watched grant writers and fundraisers become king. The people who actually carry out the work all got laid off. The actual work used to be considered essential for good donor relations but it's all smoke and mirrors now.
  • yourmommayourmomma Registered User Posts: 1,304 Senior Member
    @yourmomma totally agree about knowing where your employer makes its money. But a lot of employers make their money by laying people off or don't really have a clear profit motive (ie. nonprofit) or getting rid of people is the profit motive or the worker is literally just there to keep the lights on - nonprofits, health care, retail. I think the biggest crisis is a crisis of lack of meaningful jobs. Even meaningful jobs like EMT are paid rock-bottom in our society and seen as expendable. How do you argue that you are an Important Worker when the actual work most of us do is generally considered to be unimportant, even things like teaching?

    In the nonprofit world, I watched grant writers and fundraisers become king. The people who actually carry out the work all got laid off. The actual work used to be considered essential for good donor relations but it's all smoke and mirrors now.

    A couple of things. First, you cannot cut your way to prosperity. Just look at Sears. They have been cutting for years and are just about done. So laying people off just to get profitable isn't going to work. Restructuring to change your business is sometimes necessary.

    Second, there is no such thing as a "non-profit." In order to survive, "non-profits" have to earn more than they spend and need to put something away for the future. No different than a "for profit." The only difference is the non-profit doesn't distribute its profits.

    Third, from a business perspective it's not about "importance." It's about value -- does this person earn me a profit. The reason you saw grant writers and fundraisers become kings is because they brought in the dollars. Without an inflow of money you're toast. Same can be said for that salesman you leads sales every year. So if you're not related to the "sales" function you better figure out how you earn the company money. Today in many cases it's the use of technology.
  • CreeklandCreekland Registered User Posts: 5,569 Senior Member
    I would change "boss" to "owner". Even "bosses" are vulnerable. Unless you own the company outright, there is no such thing as job security anymore.

    @momofsenior1 Yes, the more I read about and see the experiences of others the more I'm glad H decided in his 30s (20 years ago) to start his own firm. It took us some very frugal living to get it going, but we've been reaping the benefits ever since - job security being a biggie as he gets older.

    Nothing is without risk though. If the economy tanks, so do many in his line of work (Civil Engineering). He's good enough at his job and was able to expand worldwide to survive the recession of 2008+, but so many around us did not. We're watching world events very cautiously. Still, being an employee isn't better than being the owner when cutbacks are needed.
  • lookingforwardlookingforward Registered User Posts: 32,345 Senior Member
    I would not say younger employees "don't have to be as productive as older workers." Ever deal with the kids who routinely miss Mondays, leave early on Fridays, take 2 hour lunches? Not to mention maternity leaves.

    There are great employees at any age. But I'm reacting to what strikes me as some ageism in this thread. You may know some aged "place holders," but generalizing about our age group bites.

    Maybe some know young folks who got away with lower commitment. Not good advice for our own kids. And surprising on CC, where the subtext is often pushing forward, getting ahead.
  • MaineLonghornMaineLonghorn Super Moderator Posts: 39,251 Super Moderator
    I could have written @Creekland's post word for word - it's even been 20 years since we started our civil engineering firm. It's been a blessing in that I can work as much or little as I'm able, depending on our family's circumstances.
  • CCtoAlaskaCCtoAlaska Registered User Posts: 583 Member
    @yourmomma totally agree with you, but it doesn't mean that management won't try to cut their way to a profit!
  • kelsmomkelsmom Registered User Posts: 15,484 Senior Member
    My H had the same experience as you, Rockvillemom. As an engineer who was loyal, hardworking & always on top of his game, he found it incredibly insulting that the organization felt his expertise was something that could be replaced by a user’s manual. The company actually did say that everything needed to be run like an assembly line, including engineering functions. Oh, if only it were so simple. He was thrilled to take a buyout last month.
Sign In or Register to comment.