Job Ads You Can’t See on Facebook If You’re Older (2017)

[dang]

This had a huge discussion within the window of dupeage: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15974603

[kawera]

Oh, sorry, I hadn't seen that story before.

[cm2012]

This is because it's much cheaper to get completed applications (conversions) in a younger demo.

Young people are more likely to be looking for jobs than older people, and thus click job ads more. [1] Higher click through rate means much lower cost per click. Based on the numbers in my stat link, you could likely net the same amount of new job applications spending $3000 on millennials as spending $9000 on other demos.

This is a user friendly feature - younger people want to see these type of ads more by far. By the data, older people do not want to see these type of ads.

Nothing to do with worker effectiveness or how HR treats older applicants.

[1] " About 60% of Millennials are currently open to a new job opportunity and are by far the most likely generation to switch jobs. To support that, 21% of Millennials in 2016 reported switching jobs within the past year, compared to roughly 7% of gen Xers and other non-Millennials. " https://www.forbes.com/sites/larryalton/2018/01/22/millennia....

[peteretep]

I was thinking much the same there, that it might simply be cheaper or be shown to be more effective to advertise to these groups, and perhaps there's no issue if they're not discriminating at the point of interview?

That said, that may make sense but still be illegal.

[jetru]

Those numbers you are quoting in [1] is BECAUSE of the bias.

[varenc]

I recently got a Facebook ad for a UC Berkeley coding boot camp that was explicitly targeting males 22-34. Fortunately Facebook gives you details on why you’re targeted for an ad.

Screenshot: https://www.dropbox.com/s/hpbeves1kf7bvkt/fb_ad.JPG?raw=1

[jeromegv]

In that case, this isn't a job offer, nothing illegal.

[lph]

So who has standing to sue? How can I prove I /didn't/ see a job posting because I'm too old, and what damages could I claim as a result of it?

[frankydp]

It would be difficult to sue for not being the recipient of an advertisement. While it may feel off it is most likely not illegal, because it is an ad and not part of the hiring process.

In the same way that the big bech 4 host hackathons(ie recruiting events) at colleges and not retirement communities or really anywhere other than places where the highest population of the target demographic congregates.

[paulddraper]

There are no grounds to sue.

In the US, companies cannot discriminate against 40+ ages for hiring. But that in no way applies to advertisement.

If Facebook puts a job ad billboard in Seattle (mostly white), but not in Atlanta (mostly black), there's no illegal discrimination.

And for good reason: Marketing is always about reaching the most likely targets.

[ChuckMcM]

All you could do is to file a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB - www.nlrb.gov) that you are qualified for a job that has been specifically targeted for someone who is 'younger'. They will investigate the charge, and if they find it has merit they can sanction the company placing the ad. I don't think Facebook is at risk here for facilitating but that is for a lawyer (of which I am not one) to decide.

[salawat]

Well... Try remaking your facebook profile with one difference.... Date of Birth.

See what happens.

[vadym909]

It's an open secret in Silicon Valley that most tech companies prefer younger workers. Recruiters do what hiring managers ask for. Most hiring managers won't say it explicitly- they'll say things like 2-5 years experience from top schools or from the FANG companies with experience in modern technologies.

[fjsolwmv]

It's not age discrimination to ask for relevant job skills and education.

[collatzeral]

FB has publicly defended this in the past. See https://newsroom.fb.com/news/h/addressing-targeting-in-recru...

[fjsolwmv]

Note: That post is a response to the OP, and a rather weak response saying it "may not in itself be discriminatory — just as it can be OK to run employment ads in magazines and on TV shows targeted at younger or older people"

But propublica's article is also weak. Its Facebook examples are stuff like "ad targeted to ages 21-60"

[dmoy]

So that could be damning, but without seeing the whole ad campaign it's hard to tell. If they have nearly identical ads with different age brackets running the gamut, I dunno if that's a problem. But boy does it look like a problem.

[save_ferris]

What would be a legitimate use case to segment your ad targeting for recruiting purposes? Perhaps highlighting certain perks like paid maternity/paternity leave, but even that isn't usually highlighted in job ads (at least the ones I see.)

Even if there are legitimate and pragmatic use cases for this, the likelihood of abuse seems high.

[mike_n]

instead of (perhaps illegally) recruiting for people of a certain age group, why not just search for people who liked (for example) Fortnite or Harry Potter or similar categories?

Sure, you might get a few false positives (showing your ad to a few older people) or false negatives (missing some of the target group), but it probably works just fine and isn't technically age-oriented. The company could just say that it likes people who are into hobbies (eg - reading fantasy novels or mobile games).

[blunte]

If they don't want me because of my age, I certainly don't want to work for them and provide my skills to them.

Also, it's a bit sad that Verizon can't afford an editor or reviewer to tell them to use "you're" correctly...

"Here, your more than just a number. Practice data story-telling, analytics, and more."

[mythrwy]

Maybe it's a similar concept to the Nigerian prince scam emails purposefully containing misspellings.

If you catch it and raise an eyebrow you aren't the mentality they are looking for.

[wonderbear]

"18-35"

I just realized how soon I'm going to be "older" for demographic purposes.