Ageist Requirements: Why Years Of Experience Don’t Work
When I was a teenager, I thought 40 was old. Now that I’m only a year away from turning 40 myself, I feel a little differently. In fairness, middle age was treated like a curse when I was growing up. I still remember all the birthday cards for people turning any age over 40. I surely don’t find the whole “you’re going to die and your body is going to fall apart” theme so funny now.
Now I think of this age as a beginning. The first half of my 40 years was spent under the guidance of other people. Now the stats say I should have at least another 40 years to live. I’m pretty excited for all that could entail, even if my body were to fall apart.
However as the opportunities open up in our personal lives with age, that’s not always the case at work. People 40+ apply to hundreds of jobs with no response and wonder – internally and out loud on the internet – if maybe they aren’t getting a call back because of their age.
Behind The Data of Growing Older
The data supports their suggestions, unfortunately. Harvard Business Review research indicates that ageism contributes to the unemployment of older workers, with nearly 56% of workers over 50 experiencing involuntary job loss at some point. But the proof isn’t just in the data about who layoffs impact. It’s securing that next job, too.
Research from the Urban Institute reveals that older workers are more likely to face long-term unemployment compared to their younger counterparts, with the length of unemployment increasing with age. The chart makes the story obvious: the older you get, the less likely you are to be hired.
From my perspective, the reality is two-fold and it’s not all doom and gloom. On one hand, as our experience grows from a more junior contributor to a senior one, there are simply fewer roles. There’s 1 director for every 15 managers. There’s also a lot more competition. Over 75% of the workforce is over the age of 35. That also means organizations will have to hire older workers.
How To Combat Age Discrimination: Focus On Experiences
Efforts to combat age discrimination require us to change not just our job postings, but our culture. That means policy, training to build awareness of our inherent ageism, and changing how we market roles so people of any age can understand they’re qualified instead of opting out because they think they are “too old.”
The easiest way to remove ageism from your job posts? Get specific about experiences instead of quantifying them. Including years of experience is ageist: the reality is that when we say 1 year of experience, our brains assume it’s for someone young. When we say 30 years of experience, we expect someone older. It also creates room for the “they’re overqualified” conversation that I think is total bullshit.
The reality is that just because you have the same title for the same amount of time doesn’t mean you did the same work. Describe the work in detail (i.e. you worked at a tech company where you led a team of 5 that built a product roadmap) vs just listing generic years (5 years tech experience). Oh, and get rid of the range. It’s useless (and mostly made up).
But I Have To Use Years Of Experience! Compliance!
News flash: you don’t *have* to use years of experience to be compliant. However, it’s a lot easier to “prove” someone was unqualified with a number if a complaint is brought up against your organization. So, of course, the lawyers love years of experience and have forced it into people’s brains.
I also don’t like arguing with lawyers. So my suggestion? If you have to quantify, just write a minimum years of experience. Ideally one that aligns with the compensation band so you have consistency across these elements.
By doing this work to create an environment that values skills and experience over age, you can help older workers have more access to work since years of experience is ageist. Bonus: it might help you get a job someday, too.
Kat Kibben View All →
Kat Kibben [they/them] is a keynote speaker, writing expert, and LGBTQIA+ advocate who teaches hiring teams how to write inclusive job postings that will get the right person to apply faster.
Before founding Three Ears Media, Katrina was a CMO, Technical Copywriter, and Managing Editor for leading companies like Monster, Care.com, and Randstad Worldwide. With 15+ years of recruitment marketing and training experience, Katrina knows how to turn talented recruiting teams into talented writers who write for people, not about work.
Today, Katrina is frequently featured as an HR and recruiting expert in publications like The New York Times, Chicago Tribune, and Forbes. They’ve been named to numerous lists, including LinkedIn’s Top Voices in Job Search & Careers. When not speaking, writing, or training, you’ll find Katrina traveling the country in their van or spending some much needed downtime with the dogs that inspired the name Three Ears Media.
Thanks for addressing this topic. As someone who searched for a job at 59 after my school closed in the pandemic, I found the mixed messages/advice from job search experts challenging. I wanted to embrace my whole career and its trajectory. Yet, I read on a number of sites that my resume shouldn’t extend beyond fifteen years. That was hard to swallow since I felt that I had relevant work that I wanted to showcase as part of my experience. I was fortunate in that I did end up finding a job where I have been for three years. At times I think that I’d like to make a change, but feel like it is the kind of uphill battle that will only end in frustration. I think about addressing the concerns about my age in the cover letter–dealing with it more directly in terms of proactively addressing employer concerns–but friends have advised against it. It’s ironic that at 62 I would be considered on the young side if I was a candidate for President.
I have read that ageism is the only popularly accepted ism. The insidious part of that is that it starts to impact you, and self-doubt creeps in.
Thanks for what you do.
I think you’re spot on (as per usual), however, without that YOE to draw upon as something quantifiable and “objective”, it’s hard to determine an “equitable” offer amount. What’s your advice for a methodology for determining compensation offers?
They need to create a map for pay bands and leveling folks i.e. associate/manager/director and then skills at each level. I usually break it down into something like autonomy/aptitude/management/communications. Others have far more complicated systems. Then, add dimensions for location. That’s the most simplified answer for this ever. Does that help?