Slashdot Mirror


Why Companies Should Hire Older Developers

Nerval's Lobster writes: Despite legislation making it overtly illegal, ageism persists in the IT industry. If you're 40 or older, you've probably seen cases where younger developers were picked over older ones. At times we're told there's a staffing crisis, that companies need to import more developers via H-1B, but the truth is that outsourcing and downsizing eliminated a subset of viable developers from the market. Those developers, in turn, had to figure out if they wanted to land another job, freelance, or leave the technology industry entirely. But older developers still have a lot to offer, developer David Bolton writes in a new column: They have decades of experience (and specialist knowledge), they have a healthy disregard for office politics (but can still manage, when necessary), they're available, and they're (generally) stable.

35 of 429 comments (clear)

  1. Around the block by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Here's why I advocate for hiring older developers. I'm in my mid-30s now and I've seen it happen so many times. Some kid comes in fresh out of college thinking he or she knows all the answers. They don't. I don't. They are so trigger happy to re-invent the wheel and over engineer everything.

    You know what I've learned after all these years. I may not know "what works", but I sure do know what won't.

    1. Re: Around the block by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This. I've had trouble with know it alls of all ages really, but more with younger people. That's to be expected really. General lack of experience plus sometimes inflated egos plus the perceived need to prove something just leads to that. Good developers listen to reason and take advice. Bad ones leave, and if we're all lucky, they leave the profession.

      Older developers have experience and a general lack of tolerance for nonsense, but sometimes need to understand why doing something different is a good thing. (Though you may want to listen to them when they tell you different isn't really different. Lots of crap people push as new has been done before.) Good ones take advice, and bad ones leave.

      It's almost like developing is a mindset rather than something one gets worse at with time. (Sarcasm of course. Most of us without a bias against younger or older developers know this and have known it for a while now.)

    2. Re: Around the block by TWX · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The most dangerous person that one would voluntarily hand-over control to is the relatively inexperienced person that thinks they know everything and attempts to remake their piece of the organization the image of what they see as being correct.

      I've seen it first-hand, and it's quite ugly when those preconceived notions run head-first into a cold, stark reality, and it takes a lot of messengers being shot before the actual problem of inexperience is recognized.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    3. Re:Around the block by HornWumpus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Part of an Engineers job is applied science. They are not scientists. Engineering is much more complicated than science.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    4. Re:Around the block by radtea · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I may not know "what works", but I sure do know what won't.

      Age is not a great arbiter of such things, but it's still true that without age there are some experiences that are hard to get.

      I remember when "structured programming" was the silver bullet du jour. Then it was OO. Then it was Java (this is hard to believe, but really, Java was touted as the solution to all our ills, and people believed it for a while, rushing out to re-write perfectly good code in Java and frequently ruining it in the process) Today it's FP.

      All of these, except maybe Java, brought some real good to the table. There were a variety of side-trends that never really got off the ground, at least as silver bullets, like 5GLS, whatever they are.

      An older developer has had the opportunity to watch these decade-long trends and make better judgements about the curve of adoption. Will Haskell ever become a mainstream language? Nope, although it'll be used in some niche areas, the way SmallTalk still is. Will FP techniques and ideas filter in to all kinds of other languages? Well, duh. Already happening. Is it worth learning a little Haskell and maybe come category theory? Sure. You can do that even while thinking the claim "apart from the runtime, Haskell is functionally pure" is precisely as impressive as the claim "apart from all the sex I've had, I'm a virgin."

      Not all older developers will get any utility out of their experience. Some become cynical and dismissive. A very, very few retain their naive enthusiasm for the Next Great Thing. But many of them have a nuanced and informed attitude toward new technology that makes them extremely valuable as the technical navigator for teams they're on.

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
    5. Re: Around the block by TWX · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Inexperience can even come in the form of someone that has experience with a small version, but never worked in a huge organization. Some things simply don't scale well, and the labor estimates to implement or maintain are WAY off.

      It also doesn't help when the new manager assumes that existing employees don't know how to do anything and micromanages, such that the employees stop engaging him. The boss ends up stepping in a lot of piles that he didn't see because no one has any desire to help him avoid them.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    6. Re: Around the block by sycodon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      80% of IT happens away from the code editor.

      It involves knowing the current business needs, anticipating the future business needs, communicating that to the business , the ability to prioritize, communicate, fix broken stuff (know what needs fixing first and what can wait), working with vendors, working with other businesses, etc.

      In short, knowing how to be an asset to the business instead of just being another expense.

      Kids that waltz in from college wanting to switch your Manufacturing systems to PHP or whatever is the latest craze don't have any of these things.

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    7. Re:Around the block by Alomex · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You know what I've learned after all these years. I may not know "what works", but I sure do know what won't.

      Gosh, you just said one of the things I dislike the most about the old timers. They tried something, they failed at it, and the conclusion they bring to the table is unpossible!

      To be sure, by all means yes, I want to hear about what went wrong the last time around, but one failed attempt does not prove much.

      As I remind them every time, the real lesson they bring is that, if we were to do exactly what you did, back at that moment in time, we would fail... likely.

      Instead I refocus the meeting on whether it really is different this time around: has technology evolved? the market place matured? are we architecting the solution differently? better team? etc. /rant

  2. The problem with older developers... by QuietLagoon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem with older developers is that they have too much experience. Or at least, that is what I was told by the HR persons who did not want to interview me when they saw my resume.

    1. Re:The problem with older developers... by jandersen · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problem with older developers is that they have too much experience. Or at least, that is what I was told by the HR persons who did not want to interview me when they saw my resume.

      Meaning, they are too expensive and are able to look through the incompetence of managers. I suppose it is quite daunting for a mediocre manager to try to dominate a mature engineer, who doesn't fall for his bluster and can't be scared into submission.

    2. Re:The problem with older developers... by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The real problem with people hiring developers is that they often see development as a first step in life, which a preparation for another job having management responsibilities for instance. They don't understand that some people consider development to be a career, like to code, like to learn technical stuff and don't consider changing for management positions. Moreover, a "natural selection" eliminates the worst developers in their 20's who naturally turn to other jobs after a while. Of course, there are still a bunch of incompetent older developers - but thanks to these many years of experience, it is usually much easier to discern the good and the bad from older developers than from beginners.

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    3. Re:The problem with older developers... by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Meaning, they are too expensive and are able to look through the incompetence of managers.

      Which is the signature of a company to be avoided at all costs.

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    4. Re:The problem with older developers... by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 4, Insightful

      they are too expensive

      and a quick note about that: a competent manager should know it's worth paying someone twice to do a program 3 times faster that will not have to be rewritten 3 times by 3 different persons within the next 3 years.

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    5. Re:The problem with older developers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Each of the "good points" in the article is actually a downside in disguise.

      According to the article, older developers are available, stable, specialists who are better at office politics.

      Available = undesirable

      Stable = works less hours trying to prove himself = less value for money

      Specialists = likely to say "no" a lot, likely to not want to go along with the newest fad

      Better at office politics = hard to manipulate, possible threat

      So you see, you definitely don't want to hire older people. I wish people wouldn't write these articles. I'm an older developer myself and this article probably decreased my worth on the job market by another €100 or so. Thanks a lot.

    6. Re:The problem with older developers... by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't code that much these days, but the question is familiar. Why do you still code? Yet no one asks an architect, surgeon or lawyer that question.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
  3. Re:Capitalism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Capitalism should sort out the underperformers.

    Greed and executives' immunity from the consequences of their bad decisions cause a lot of bad.

  4. Re:let's be real for a second by grimmjeeper · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You really think that a college class is the only thing that can make you aware of all the threats out there. I mean, you honestly believe that.

    Interesting.

  5. Re:let's be real for a second by cfalcon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What on earth.

    I expected some reasonably sensational comments, but this one really stands out. Why would you think this? Are modern CS classes somehow better at security? In my ACTUAL experience, the only people I've ever had thinking that declaring a member variable as private increases the security of the product or enforces an actual restriction in the compiled code are younger. Certainly I haven't seen attention to security as being present primarily in the young or old.

  6. Re:Capitalism by cfalcon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Expecting capitalism to select for high performers is like expecting natural selection to select for really long lived red blood cells. If your selection criteria are on the organizations, you select for organizations, and the individuals are just a function yielding that.

  7. Salary Cap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    In a lot of sports there are salary caps. Players develop, get more experience, and the good ones get a really big raise when their entry level contract ends. Eventually teams have to trade off players to stay under the cap and they rely on the draft to supply them with serviceable players on entry level contracts to fill the holes. The cycle repeats.

    I see companies do the same thing. They aren't just going to continue to give out raises until every person in a department earns a much higher than average salary. Companies have a few people with experience and skill that they keep and compensate well, and they let a lot of people walk and then hire younger cheaper people to back fill. Eventually those people develop and deserve a higher salary and they are either retained or enter free agency and go somewhere else.

    There is a reason most young people can get huge raises by job hopping every few years where if you stay at a company you most likely wont see as much of a salary increase. Companies don't want to pay people what they are worth, they want to pay people what is required for the company to continue to make profit. Most companies don't need a team of super experienced and skilled devs. They get by with a core team of talent and a bunch of cheap supporting players. Just like a lot of sports teams.

    Just my observations. YMMV

  8. Re:Its more complicated by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's like that old joke about the young and the old bulls ... Hey, let's run down there and fuck one of those cows. No, let's walk down and fuck them all.

    Instead of asking your employees to knock their brains out, read the fucking Mythical Man Month and realize that the death march is an idiotic way to do things which doesn't really work.

    Too many companies are being ran by MBAs who have no understanding of how to build stuff, and think 9 women can have a baby in a month. Or even that 4 women working really long hours can do it in half the time.

    The problem is companies are being ran by short sighted idiots who don't understand the nature of their business.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  9. Read lord of the flies sometime by iamacat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Do you want your corporate culture to be like that? Then by all means only hire kids. Any healthy human society needs an age/gender/personality diversity of contributors to thrive. There are certainly brilliant 20 year old programmers, but they don't have practical experience keeping a project or a team alive and working well for a decade. And once they acquire such experience, they will leave your company because it'a not friendly to their needs.

  10. Makes no sense by GeekWithAKnife · · Score: 2, Insightful


    Older people have families, experience and have been around the circus before.

    Young programmers are much better. Firstly they often have nothing better to do. Their living expense tend to be lower and they often cannot tell when they are being screwed over for pay until they are are feeling the shaft for a couple of years.
    They have no family commitments and when the big boss man smiles and asks if you can do this one extra thing for the team you say "sure boss!" and not "My boy has this thing at school..."

    Why hire old programmers? they question the logic, they see through the corporate bullshit, they won't work for peanuts and often cannot do overtime. Forget that they actually know what their contract means and exactly what you can and cannot get them to do. They are not cool. They don't any Justin Bieber songs and they don't play COD.

    Why bother with those old people when you can have fizzy drinking kids willing to bend over backwards? -code quality? -efficiency? -less re-work? most managers have very little grasp of how those looks like & those people make "suggestions for the business".

    Old developers...as old as 40...they are practically dying already, why hire their kind? -makes no sense I tell you.

    --
    A 'singular oddity' is an event that cannot be explained and only happens when you are alone.
  11. No talk is complete without Dunning-Kruger Effect by scorp1us · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm showing my age here, 38, but no talk is complete without mentioning the Dunning-Kruger Effect. I have witnessed this first hand, even with myself. When you are young and full of vigor, you charge forth into the great unknown t eagerly writing lots of code. As you gain experience the code decreases but is of higher quality. I've now taken to assign a valuation to each line of code as liability vs added value. because in a few years some kid will come behind me other the other side of Dunning-Kruger and change this without really knowing what it is doing. I also spend more time doing research on what I am doing so my execution is flawless. Experimentation is rare. In the Art of war, the battle is only the last step and the preparation is really what determines the outcome. Similarly, code is only written when the planning is complete. This is the difference between code monkeys and engineers.

    But older engineers often get complacent. I too went through this phase. Many get comfortable with one technology, (Java, .Net) and no longer keep up with new efforts. But in the past 2 years alone, I've taken to learning Machine Learning, Node.JS, mobile platforms, Big Data.

    My advice is if you're old, don't get complacent, keep learning. If you're interviewing one of us veterans, keep an open mind. We might not be as cheap on paper, or outwardly enthusiastic. But if we're still in it after 20 years, we love what we do just as much as a new guy, and we will pay dividends in the long run.

    --
    Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
  12. Re:Capitalism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You assume the "selection" is a one way street. Good companies and good employees will find another in a free system, and as a result, they will prosper in the long run. Like evolution, it doesn't happen quickly though. Most good employees in any discipline have a set of criteria they demand from an employer. Developers are no different. If you don't believe a free system doesn't benefit those that hire and pay intelligently, then you are simply ignoring reality.

  13. We can't all work as greeters at Walmart, damnit! by kheldan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Here's the fact of the matter: There are MANY, MANY older folks now, and they're already hurting for work. Guess what? There's going to be MANY, MANY MORE, sooner than anyone wants to believe. Turning us into Soylent Green isn't an option, kids, and despite what some of the edgier of you post online, we're not just going to 'kill ourselves' to make way for YOU. I don't know about the rest of you guys, but I'm actually getting stronger, quicker, and overall healthier as I get older, not fat, decrepit, and addled-brained. There won't BE any 'retirement' for someone like me, I'm going to WORK until I drop dead., most likely. You think there's a homelessness problem now? How about it being multiples of ten times worse, except it's all people who had professional careers at one point, and have been kicked to the curb for the 'new hotness' that will accept a fraction of the salary and twice the abuse with a smile? Meanwhile even Social Security means nothing, it's all going to collapse into dust long before someone like me and my contemporaries will ever be eligible to collect on it, despite paying a nice sized chunk of our earnings into it our entire lives. To make matters worse I see people getting stupider and lazier instead of smarter, more skilled, and more active; I see a recipe for disaster in the making, all so some dickhead CEOs can improve this quarter's bottom line, and get a bigger bonus. You want to see the U.S. get back on top with regards to innovation and tech in general? Stop pushing out the experienced people so you can hire know-nothing twenty-somethings for less pay.

    --
    Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
  14. Re:Its more complicated by Jason+Levine · · Score: 5, Insightful

    they are perceived to not be willing to put in the hours that younger developers will.

    A younger developer will often need 40 hours to write the same code that an older developer will write in 10 hours. The only problem is when management sees TIME_SPENT_CODING as equal to QUALITY_OF_WORK. So they prefer the younger coders who will put in 60 hour weeks over the older coders who do that same work and more in 40 hours and then go to spend time with their families.

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  15. Re:Capitalism by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There are two kinds of approaches to profit. Short term profit, risking long term viability, and long term approach to profit, that risks short term viability. A third kind, using a balanced approach, risks some of both; short term profit, long term profit in exchange for viability.

    Realizing that profit, viability and so on is neither good nor bad, but how we measure things is key to understand economics. Arguing "morality" in economics is simply a fools errand and distracts from free flow of commerce. PEOPLE on the other hand are supposed to act morally.

    --
    Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  16. Re:Capitalism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I believe he understands it perfectly. He's just using the same "take it to the extreme" that the OP is using when doing a full and total damnation of capitalism.

  17. Re:Capitalism by gtall · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And if capitalism decrees that workers older than 40 should not be allowed to work any longer, we should salute capitalism because it has achieved optimum performance? Capitalism does a lot of things well, but it does a lot of things poorly as well. It underlies uninsurance companies cherry picking only healthy people, leaving government to pick up the tab on the uninsured and sick leftovers. Them includes many of those over 40 which no longer have jobs.

    Capitalism doesn't do well with pollution, it rewards passing that pollution onto someone else to clean up, probably government. It doesn't do well with global warming where it cannot point the finger quickly enough at those causing the problem since it may not be a problem until 40-50 year after the pollution that causes it, leaving government to figure out what to do.

    Capitalism doesn't do well in funding poor people to go uni so they'll get better jobs since they have precious little capital to secure the loans necessary to go, leaving government to provide those loans in its stead. Capitalism gives us payday loan sharks so the gullible get gulled more often, many of these tend to hold low paying jobs with little education leaving government to pick up the tab.

    See a trend here?

  18. Re: Its more complicated by HornWumpus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The reason to work sane hours under normal conditions is so you will have something in the tank for the crises weeks.

    If you work in 'constant crisis' mode a real crisis will sink the company. To say nothing of what the stress does to the people involved. Soon they are zombies doing negative work and not seeing it.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  19. Re:None of that will matter by grimmjeeper · · Score: 1, Insightful

    A small part of Amazon is a computer company. The part that designs and sells their consumer electronic devices. But by in large, they are just a modern day catalog sales organization. They've made great use of computers to improve their efficiency and as a result are very competitive. But just about every company in the country uses computers to one extent or another. Hell, junk yards coordinate with each other on a big network to help each other sell used car parts. That doesn't make them computer companies.

  20. Re:Capitalism by whitroth · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Another datum proving that what Americans know of socialism is exactly what a Good German (tm) knew of Jews in the late 1930's.

    Yes, evil socialism. We know how nasty the socialist dictatorships are in, um, Norway and Sweden, and under the British Labour Party, and the French socialists (the ruling party).

                  mark "there are two kinds of Republicans (and libertarians): millionaires, and suckers"*

    * And since you're posting here, we know you're not rich....

  21. Re:Capitalism by jythie · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Arguing morality in economics is critical for understanding real world systems though. It is only the simplified toy systems where morality is dropped in order to make the models easier to work with.

  22. Re:Capitalism by GLMDesigns · · Score: 1, Insightful
    Capitalism is the freedom of exchange through trade. What is possibly wrong with me trading one value (good or service) to you for another value? That, in essence is all capitalism is: the freedom to trade. Socialism states that this trade must first be approved by a government entity.

    So, if I grow, make, create X and you're willing to pay for X what is the harm in that? Must everything (like kids selling lemonade) be documented, regulated and approved by a bureaucrat? You sure you want to live like that.

    --
    If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
    Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond