[ido]

I honestly dont really understand age descriminating against someone in their 50s (even 59) - you've got a good chance to retire within a decade, but most people dont stay at the same job for longer than a few years anyway so why does it matter? If anything it's pretty likely you will stay for longer than average (let's say till 65-67, so 6-8 more years) cause you're less likely to want to find a new job in your 60s.

[bdangubic]

> discriminating against someone in their 50s (even 59)

I am in my 50's and I think the biggest discrimination I notice is not specifically age-related but cost-related. I am very expensive, a recent grad is not. Lots of companies think (some are right) that they can do well with the recent grads and are unwilling to shell out what it costs to hire me.

[raw_anon_1111]

That’s not age discrimination. Either you can not work and have an income of $0 or get paid what the market is telling you you’re worth.

For context I’m 51. I’ve made the trade off of making less than I hypothetically could if I worked at larger companies/BigTech (been there done that got the t-shirt for almost four years until 2023).

[franktankbank]

I see it as a coup on the company. You have owners who get a skim off the top who probably set it up well at the start. Then you have Xth generation of job maintainers who now run the company and don't see much good reason to make the company prosper as it could effect their career growth/stability. Politics wins out over engineering when the original visionaries hand over the wheel. Owners are too wealthy to care too much, they can sell and retire at any moment.