Should Workplaces Be Re-Defined To Retain Older Tech Workers? (wired.com)

rgh02 submitted this article from Backchannel which argues companies "need to work harder and more persistently to attract, retain, and recognize talent" -- especially older talent: We "elders" know perfectly well that our workplaces are by and large not about us. We don't drive how roles, functions, advancement, and success are seen. Career development options and the hierarchical career ladders everyone is expected to climb are designed for the majority: younger workers. What can be done? There has to be a systems overhaul...
The article suggests restructuring workplaces with "individual contributor tracks" which reward people who don't go on to become managers, as well as things like paid mentoring positions and "phased retirement" programs that create part-time positions to allow a more gradual transition into retirement.

Comments

Re:No

[Applehu Akbar]

Older workers should adapt with the times, not vice versa. That's the only way progress will be made.

AC because I have a feeling the downmod from some pissed off old geyser is coming...

This is what happens to an old geyser that was famous for years but is now past its prime:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

His kid Strokkur gets all the attention now.

I've been making this argument for 20 years

[bfwebster]

As noted, the problem with most organizations is that there is no technical advancement track. I actually proposed back in the late 90s at one organization that we establish a full technical track that went from entry-level coder all the way up to CTO (with a layer of 'senior technical officers' below the CTO level).

Other organizations -- such as Bell Labs in its heyday -- simply had everyone as 'Member of Technical Staff', with ad hoc organization around research and technical projects.

Sadly, though, most organizations do, in fact, force technical people to become managers to advance, regardless of whether they want to or are suited for it. It's one of the reasons IT remains so dysfunctional throughout most organizations.

Agree in some part

[sunking2]

Most of this is garbage, however the phased retirement is something I've always believed in. I work in at an engineering space orientated firm that has been doing this since pre Apollo days. More often then not people work until the day they retire and 6 months later are back as contractors because they don't know how to do the transition to non working and more importantly the transfer of knowledge didn't happen because nobody wants to pay to have it done. A slower transition both lets people start to enjoy a bit of retirement earlier while they are a year or two younger and allows companies to see where the knowledge is actually lost and adjust.

the problem with is is your hours worked doesn't really show your salary. It becomes a mess from an insurance and overall compensation perspective to institute such a thing. Things that are hard for HR and financial planny typically don't happen. They don't like things that are hard.

Young people? What young people?

[__aaclcg7560]

When Social Security was created in the 1930's, there was 19 workers for every retiree. In 2030, there will be two workers per every retiree. It's going to get really hard to find enough under 30 people to support an aging society. The IT industry alone will have a 1.5M+ shortage of skilled workers as older workers retire and foreign workers go home.

Been there back in 1999

[Anonymous Coward]

When I was working for a big consulting firm in 1999 there was a big push at the time to create multiple tracks of "advancement" specifically for the people that had no desire to be anywhere near the line of management.

It worked to a degree, where the "Subject Matter Expert" in their field would be brought in as a tech resource - but like many initiatives it got bogged down by more and more layers of people trying to get a "piece of the pie" and hang on to the billable hours. The loudest people and the ones closest to where the money flows will always be more successful.

The only way us "old farts" can compete is be just as nimble as the younger people and adapt to the game. Anyone who says we can't learn a new language, a new tech or whatever passes as "employably hot" never met one of us who are more than happy to come in and do what needs to be done - and we have the knowledge to Make Shit Happen. I don't need "corporate love" to keep me trained. I am a fucking geek all the way - and when I'm not writing medical interface code, I'm building/flying/racing drones, building robots, taking a plasma torch to metal sheets and building dragons for yard art, to messing with all flavors of IoT boards just for shits and giggles. It's all about attitude and a willingness to learn on your own. If there is a new language or tech I need to know to stay marketable? Then I do it. I don't wait for some employer to train me because sure as fuck if they get a client that has a need? They're not going to pay me to try and learn it - they'll hire someone else with that skill.

Just be adaptable and open to change and you'll always have people wanting to work with you and hire you to do tasks that need to be done. The only thing that is permanent in life is change - and the sooner everyone embraces that instead of whining about it the better off we'll be.

Is ageism a thing? Sure. But know your shit and be willing to eat the occasional effluvia from some corporate suit turd-hammer? You'll always make it work.

I don't bitch. I laugh about it - all the way to the bank.

IT is not unique

[Bruce66423]

There are many professions that make little provision for people who don't want to become 'managers'. The classic examples are police, nurses and social workers; if you want to carry on engaging with people, you can't accept promotion. In IT being a contractor often offers the opportunity to stay coding - though at the cost of long term stability in employment. Large organisations may have the space and sense to recognise that the geek over there knows stuff that they need to have on tap, but sadly the temptation is to assume that modern technology renders the knowledge obsolete; outsourcing is an experiment based on this hypothesis...

Re:No

[nospam007]

"AC because I have a feeling the downmod from some pissed off old geyser is coming..."

At least we old geezers know what a geyser is, you young whippersnapper obviously don't.

Re:No

[ShanghaiBill]

companies have moved from offices and cubicles to giving everyone one or two meters of desk space sitting face to face and side to side of each other

Can you cite any actual evidence that open offices are more prevalent today?

My experience has been the exact opposite. I worked as a programmer in a bullpen in the 1970s, a cubicle in the 1980s, and a real office ever since. Apple is famously moving in the wrong direction, but I don't think that is typical. I am aware of several companies that switched to quiet offices with walls.

Also, as an old geezer, I have never felt discriminated against, and I have never felt that my age or experience was a handicap. I am open to learning new skills, and often start using new tech before the younglings, but I love it when a 20-something learns about an elegant tool from a more civilized age.

unlink health care from jobs

[Joe_Dragon]

unlink health care from jobs.

That can free up people who are just there for the health care

Re:No

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

Older workers should adapt with the times, not vice versa.

Older workers are experienced enough to know that not all change is for the better.

Also, it's tough to make progress if you keep throwing out all the people who learned lessons already, and then spend the next generation of staff learning all the same lessons again.

Re:No

[PPH]

adapt with the times

Been there. Seen too many instances of Language Du Jour come and go. I don't want to split the office into the tabs vs spaces warring camps. I don't want to incorporate some state of the art 3D gaming graphics engine into our simple engineering app interface. And I don't need every inter-office communication in PowerPoint.

Re:No

[Pig Hogger]

Older workers should adapt with the times, not vice versa. That's the only way progress will be made.

As an old fart (look at my #), yes, old farts should adapt, but young squirts need to listen to old farts’ experience.

Retaining older workers is easy

[ErichTheRed]

I'm 42, so I think I officially qualify as old. Yet, here I am still doing senior-level engineering work. I'm not a DevOps ninja (yet...) and don't code 16 hours a day, but I really enjoy my job. I'm hoping for the day that more employers will see that older workers who are still contributing aren't a drag on the company they work for -- they're the adults that are needed to redirect some of the "bright ideas" and temper them with reality and experience. Unfortunately, we're a society that worships Silicon Valley wunderkinds and 24-year-old CEOs, and even boring old school companies are trying to behave like web startups. So here's my suggestions -- companies shouldn't try too hard; if they do even some of these things they will retain talented older workers:

• Like the article says, have a technical track people can move along. Before my company implemented an "official" parallel career track for skilled technical people, lots of older people were "promoted" into management. It was the only place to go if you wanted to continue up the career ladder. This works great in traditional paper-shuffling corporate work, but IT, science, R&D, etc. is work that people actually don't mind doing and some of us would rather continue doing so. Traditional corporate jobs tend to promote people out of work, and most people are happy for this because who wants to shuffle paper? But, technical work and managerial work are _not_ related, not even close. The alternative for promotion on the technical track (at least for me) is being trusted with greater responsibility and helping with developing our junior staff. This (IMO) is a much better use of my skills than a management job would be.
• Understand that older workers can't live at work. It's not a sign of disloyalty or laziness to put in a reasonable amount of hours. Most older workers don't want to continue their college dorm days and live at an office with their co-workers. The way I manage it (with a huge volume of work) is to stay reasonably productive during the actual workday so I don't have to spend 13 hours a day at the office. Many older workers have kids and families, but it's also not the 1950s anymore where the husband was the sole breadwinner and would do anything the company told them to keep their job.
• Be flexible! This is one that gets major flak from the vocally child-free crowd and the younger set who have fewer out-of-work responsibilities. I have 2 kids, and the shorter work commute between my wife and I, so I do a lot of school activity appearances and other things during the day. But, I also regularly do the odd task for an hour or two after the house goes to bed. The company I work for gets plenty of work out of me; it's just not all in contiguous blocks.
• Lay off the preschool workplace furniture a little bit. Most older workers can be trusted with a little personal space. Most of us also don't want to attend meetings sitting on orange and blue beanbag chairs against a bright white wall. Have a mix of traditional office space and Millenial preschool office space -- our company does because we tend to skew older. Not everyone is happy with open plan offices and for some people (like me) they can be productivity killers.
• Appoint older workers as informal trainers. This is part of my job, and I'm actually someone who enjoys doing it. If you can convince your older workers that there aren't a bunch of MBAs waiting to lay them off as soon as the younglings' training is complete, this is a great way to pass on institutional knowledge. For this to work though, you have to provide...
• Job security. I'm not talking union-level or tenure-level "we can't fire you for any reason", I'm just talking about dialing back the outsourcing/offshoring/layoff drama a little bit. I would (and have!) taken a lower salary to work somewhere that is more stable than your average web startup. Older workers with families want an income they can count on. Part of that is up to us (by keeping o

Re:Retaining older workers is easy

[Teun]

Spot on, when I turned 60 I became a full time mentor and instructor for the newly hired engineers.
It's a win-win for all, the new guys don't have to repeat the stupidities of the past, I get exposed to some of the new tech they bring out of university and the company keeps the good parts of its proven production methods yet advances with the new hires.
The older workers can be an effective glue between existing products, future developments and management.

Re: manifesto

[PopeRatzo]

Back when I decided to lose 50 pounds I discovered that the key is to find something you really enjoy. For me that was trail hiking.

For me, it was hiking the block and a half to the Italian beef stand. Had to take an Uber home, though.

Wrong problem

[rsilvergun]

with automation and productivity improvements it's going to get hard to find enough work to go around. For example, with Trump & co blocking farm immigration farmers are finally implementing the kinds of labor saving practices (like growing food at waist height so it's easier to pick) that Europe's had for 20 years.

That IT shortage is a lie. I've got a guy at my job with a CS degree from a public University who's doing crap IT work instead of programming for a living. 20 years ago he would have been snapped up a day after graduation. But 20 years ago the H1-B program was in it's infancy.

There's plenty of money to go around. You're being lied to so a small group of lucky assholes can take everything. Not that I know what to do about it.

Re:No

[thinkwaitfast]

I've worked with old engineers who were still stuck in the mainframe mindset and totally unaware of the raw computing power of a generic garage assembled PC. OTOH, they had deep hardware experience for which they earned $5000/day consulting on problems that teams of younger engineers couldn't solve in a month - because they had already solved the same problem 30 years before. This is the black magic that made Intel what it is.

Old engineering joke:

Henry Ford once balked at paying $10,000 to General Electric for work done troubleshooting a generator, and asked for an itemized bill. The engineer who performed the work, Charles Steinmetz, sent this: "Making chalk mark on generator, $1. Knowing where to make mark, $9,999." Ford paid the bill.

Personal responsibility

[Snufu]

These people chose to be old. Nobody forced them. Hold people responsible for their decisions.

Damn nanny state.

Re:No

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

I am open to learning new skills, and often start using new tech before the younglings, but I love it when a 20-something learns about an elegant tool from a more civilized age.

Interesting. I'd say the biggest difference between 20-year-old me and 30-year-old me was probably was that 20-year-old me wanted to learn All The Things, while 30-year-old me was a lot more choosey about where limited time was spent.

I find bleeding edge technologies interesting, but I only rarely spend much time on something that is still in its early adopter phase any more. Consequently, I often am a little behind the enthusiastic youngsters in adopting new tech.

However, if you look at how effectively I use the new skills and technologies that I do adopt, or the proportion of the new skills and technologies I adopt that remains useful in the long term rather than quickly becoming obsolete, older me does much, much better than younger me.

Re:The problem is obvious

[zifn4b]

Older workers aren't obsolete, they're just more expensive

Managers need to re-calibrate their measurements

Young managers who fail to do this, or who care more about culture than results, are missing out on a vast talent pool

You get what you pay for. I've seen quite a few companies go under with software platforms written almost exclusively by recent college grads and H1B visas. As soon as they put any real load on the system, it buckles. When this situation occurs, the people who created the problem due to incompetence and inexperience just jump ship and go do it all over again somewhere else.