We welcome you to JobBank USA and hope your job hunting experience
is a pleasant one. We hope you find our resources useful.
October 24, 2007
There’s supposed to be a “war for talent” going on, but I keep meeting “talent” who can’t get drafted to serve.
Businesses say they need to attract and keep experienced, willing workers, and that they’re dreading the exodus of the baby boomers from the work force.
But day after day, I hear from experienced, willing professionals, age 40 and up, who have been let go. Some have been job hunting for two years.
To be clear about the kind of “talent” I’m talking about: They’ve been vice presidents, department heads and project managers. Many have advanced degrees.
Is it age discrimination?
Do corporate resume screeners or hiring managers believe that over-40 job hunters are too hidebound, too unteachable, too disinclined to report to younger bosses to merit an interview?
Is it salary discrimination?
Do hirers refuse to believe that someone who once earned more will be satisfied — elated, even — to work for less?
Is it fear that older workers will cost too much in health benefits or be absent too much?
If so, please show me definitive demographic studies that the over-40 work force is less productive or more expensive than the younger set. (I see reports that are all over the map on this issue, depending on many variables.)
Is it concern that older workers won’t stick around long?
The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics says that median job tenure among 25- to 34-year-olds is 2.9 years, compared to 7.3 years among 45- to 54-year-olds and 9.3 years among 55- to 64-year-olds.
Is it that some of the unemployed aren’t nearly as good as they think they are? Or do their resumes overhype?
That could be. But why don’t they get introductory interviews to find out?
There appear to be huge hiring barriers for those over 40 who are trying to be re-employed in a corporate setting.
Doubt it? Just visit the job “transition” groups. Too often, these are job loss support groups for boomers let go in corporate cost cuttings.
Were they separated because they weren’t as good as the employee at the next desk?
Were they fabulous workers who were in the wrong company, the wrong division, at the wrong time?
Were they paid a relative lot and therefore created the bigger buck bang when let go?
Whatever the reason, corporate re-entry barriers are frustrating many intelligent, professional, experienced job hunters. I met four such job searchers for coffee last week. They posed a seemingly simple question:
Are there any companies that will give older workers a fair shake in the interview and hiring process?
Well, that’s not a simple question.
Employers can give countless reasons — some true, some smokescreens — as to why older workers are fired, early retired or not hired.
But I’ll put the question out there again on behalf of what seem to be capable and eager workers (who have more skills than are needed to work the aisles part-time at home improvement or drug stores).
And add two follow-up questions:
How do those applicants get through the screening systems to nab interviews in which they could sell themselves?
And, when they feel like they nailed an interview and are told they’re perfect for the job, why do they later hear the “war for talent” is being fought by someone less experienced?
Email This Page!