
Google Age Discrimination - blahblah12
http://www.wsj.com/articles/BL-DGB-41451
======
mark_l_watson
I worked at Google in 2013 when I was 62 and I didn't sense any age
discrimination.

I have experienced it elsewhere though. This case was at Electronic Arts. They
called me several times over a one year period (I must have received a fine
recommendation from someone :-) and I talked on the phone to some of their
tech staff - really fun conversations. I arrive in their Vancouver offices
looking forward to my interview and it started right away when I identified
myself to the receptionist, she looked at my greying hair and literally
started to giggle. She showed me into a conference room with three developers
and their jaws dropped when they saw me. Their interview process was the
rudest behavior I had ever seen in a work environment. The interview,
technically, was fairly easy. I had a fair amount of experience in game AI
which is what they were interested in. I did enjoy a free trip to Vancouver.
From my experience, if any company deserves to be sued for age discrimination
it is EA.

It is obvious how old I am from my resume and consulting web site. (This
occurred many years ago when I was in my mid 50s).

I have never complained before publicly about this - it felt good :-)

~~~
wglb
You spring chicken, you.

------
makeitsuckless
Regardless if it is true in this particular case, the real big red flag is in
the final sentences:

> _The lawsuit notes that Google’s Diversity webpage does not include age-
> related workforce data, despite disclosing data about other worker
> characteristics. Other tech companies releasing workforce diversity data did
> not typically disclose age data either._

The entire industry really trying hard to cover up the issue.

~~~
gaius
I expect that economics of many of these companies doesn't work with people
doing 35 or 40 hours a week. Which means that all these castles are built on
sand because this _will_ catch up with them.

~~~
natrius
A quick glance at Google's profit per employee disproves that. After paying
for employees and everything else, Google profits $270,123 per employee.

I'm not sure what would make you think that some of the most profitable
companies in history are castles built on sand.

~~~
dennisnedry
Mind explaining how you got that number? Not being snarky, just curious.

~~~
ChuckMcM
No idea how he got it but you can do this from their earnings statement
yesterday [1]:

Free cash flow $3.69B, total employees 55,419

$66,583 per employee of free cash flow (that is simply money they deposited in
the bank) or

GAAP Net Income $3.556B for $64,166 per employee in net income.

I believe the $270K/employee is long gone and won't be seen again.

[1]
[http://investor.google.com/earnings/2015/Q1_google_earnings....](http://investor.google.com/earnings/2015/Q1_google_earnings.html)

~~~
jsnell
You're looking at quarterly numbers, the original poster was almost certainly
talking of annual ones.

~~~
ChuckMcM
Ah there is that so 4x those numbers.

------
slg
One tidbit in this article caught my attention and was particularly
surprising. The median age for computer programmers according to the
Department of Labor is 43. That seems perfectly normal for any random
profession (the number for the general workforce appears to be 42), but is
higher than I expect for programmers.

First off, it is a profession that has been increasing in importance and size
in recent decades, I assumed that would lead to a larger younger generation of
workers. Second, there is the industry perception that many programmers age
out into other related careers like management. None of these assumptions
appear to be bearing out in the numbers (although the median age obviously
doesn't disprove any bias).

~~~
jimrandomh
I couldn't find the Department of Labor's numbers, but I checked the Bureau of
Labor Statistics' numbers, and it disagrees.
[http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat11b.htm](http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat11b.htm)

~~~
fweespeech
The median for Computer Programmers is 42.1. That isn't a big difference?

------
gaius
Any 20-somethings working in tech, remember that you too will age. And what
goes around comes around.

~~~
magnifyingglass
I am a 20 something in tech, and I just don't understand the mentality that
doesn't value the perspective that age affords. It just seems really stupid,
like overwhelmingly stupid.

Even if a young person can hold as information as an older person does, I bet
it's not as nuanced. There's a huge difference between seeing generations of
people age and seeing the way culture moves across the internet. Socio-
cultural shifts are not the same as generational, age shifts. And growing up
in an economy of technological boom and prosperity is not the norm either.

People would benefit just from having the experience from a different
perspective of how to observe the world, interpret information, and relate to
it. I view my generation as one that is intrinsically linked with technology,
and I think it blinds us to a lot of assumptions as to how we think the world
functions, and I think there is a lot of stuff we haven't existed long enough
to observe and become aware of. It's like an invisible divide. I don't know
how much I take for granted about my perspective, and I don't know how much
others take for theirs, but I know that often, I am rarely correct in
understanding how other people think, and I know often, that there is so much
more variance that exists, that doesn't get translated through numbers and
words. It's like it disappears, but it affects the way one navigates and
establishes their own existence.

Even thinking in terms of how a computer 'thinks' versus how people
'irrationally' think is a ridiculous and absurd irony. Judgment is overrated.

~~~
codecamper
Maybe it's more about being a young manager & a little weak in the knees about
managing someone older?

------
fishtoaster
I'd be really interested to hear the facts of the case. From the article, the
only evidence of discrimination listed are that he was rejected despite:

1\. A recruiter thought he would be a good fit

2\. Working at several well-known companies (IBM, Compaq, and General
Dynamics)

3\. Only receiving a single phone interview

None of those seem like they'd be at all indicators of discrimination.
Recruiters often say anything they can to get candidates through the door,
companies regularly fail people at the first phone interview, and none of
those companies are ones I'd necessarily associate with high-quality
developers.

So, I look forward to seeing what else comes out of this story, since I can't
imagine a decent law firm would go this far without some more damning evidence
that will be forthcoming.

~~~
jusben1369
I agree. Based on this article the individual case looks super weak. Sounds
like the email was too spammy "We want YOU!" (we'll actually we just want you
to put your hand up so we can then decide if we want you). It doesn't take a
genius to look at a resume and see work history and college graduation to
piece together if they're in their 30's/40's/50's etc.

------
smtddr
Disclaimer: I'm a Google fanboy, so feel free to discount this comment.

Google's interview process is a magical opaque box. You have no idea what
happened. All kinds of people who seem like an excellent fit somehow end up
getting rejected multiple times. And I mean excellent fit in the most cynical
worse-case way possible. The _" right gender", "right race", "right age",
"right school"_. I interviewed at the big G back in 2012, did 2 phone screens,
made it to the on-site, thought I did well... but no dice. It's like an f(x,y)
then divide by z algorithm. X = You, Y=Them, but Z is generated by a random
number depending on the zodiac sign of yourself and 2 random people somewhere
on earth. You can do everything right, Z = 0 and segfault you're disqualified.
Just gotta try again. Not excusing Google per se, but I doubt age-
discrimination. They're just crazy like that.

Of course, I don't know all the facts and it would probably make a lot of
people happy if Google made their interview process more understandable. Maybe
G's HR should stop getting people's hopes up saying _" “embarking on its
largest recruiting / hiring campaign in its history,” and “you would be a
great candidate to come work at Google.”_

Just tell them the truth. _" We're gonna interview you, then at the end you're
gonna pull this slot machine and you better hope it comes up 7-7-7. Because
that's basically what we do after you leave the building."_

~~~
infinotize
This lawsuit is exactly why most companies have opaque interview processes.
Once you start providing feedback, especially if any of it is positive, you
are giving leverage to a potential discrimination suit.

~~~
smtddr
Actually, I totally agree. I'm almost sure that if any major corp gave out
more info about how the final candidate decisions were made the number of
lawsuits would increase no matter what. The reason being is that there is no
fair algorithm for evaluating people. It's subjective and someone will find
something unfair to complain about. They won't be wrong, it's just that humans
judging other humans is a process doomed to faultiness & unfairness.

------
chollida1
> The lawsuit says Google based its decision not to hire Heath on a brief
> phone interview, despite telling him in an email that the company was
> “embarking on its largest recruiting / hiring campaign in its history,” and
> “you would be a great candidate to come work at Google.”

I really hope the lawsuit doesn't go forward on the basis of a recruiter
saying "you would be a great candidate to come work at Google", mostly because
if you can get sued for not hiring someone after you say that then pretty much
every single company on the face of the earth can be sued.

who hasn't used language like that when trying to recruit someone?

~~~
imh
It's class action, so to succeed do they need to show that this particular guy
was discriminated against, or that some people were?

------
kin
There's not enough information here. Just because Google says you're a good
candidate does not mean that you're going to get the job. It just means you
look good on paper. I'm curious how the phone interview went. What details
were discussed? And experience means nothing. If your skill set doesn't match
what Google wants then you're a pass.

------
DannyBee
Considering how many HN/Reddit people who have been turned down after phone
screens have complained the interviewer never even read their resume, this is
somewhat ironic (since it was a phone screen, it's unlikely you could even
guess the age of the interviewee without one)

~~~
hn_
Are you saying you can't predict the age of someone without a phone screen and
that a phone screen predicts age? I'm not sure how I would know a person's age
by talking to them on the phone. Do people "sound old?" Not something I've
noticed. On the other hand it is easy to know someone's age from their resume.
If they graduated college in 1965 and have 20 years at two companies than you
know they are pretty old.

Though now that I think about it, the other day someone on the phone asked me
if I was over 21. When I said I was 32 she was like "oh, I'm sorry, you sound
so young."

~~~
defen
No, he's agreeing with you. "it's unlikely you could even guess the age of the
interviewee without one" ("one" referring to the resume).

He's saying that people complain about being turned down by Google after phone
screens and say that the interviewer never even read their resume. For example
maybe they applied for a sysadmin position and their resume was full of
relevant experience and no college, and the phone screen leads off with a
hardcore CS theory question.

So if it's the case the interviewers don't read resumes prior to phone
screens, then the odds are low that they discriminated against this guy for
age-related reasons.

However I suspect the truth lies somewhere in between - e.g. _sometimes_
interviewers don't read resumes. I doubt it's an all or never situation.

~~~
hn_
Thanks! The wording wasn't clear to me even though I reread it a couple times.

Though people _do_ talk about their experience on phone screens so that gives
an indication of their age. But if the age was a problem you'd think they just
wouldn't give him a phone screen (of course there is the aforementioned
alleged "not reading the resume" too)

~~~
DannyBee
Sorry, I was kind of in a rush, looking back, i wish i had worded it a little
more clearly.

For the record, Google is probably the least ageist company i've _ever_ been
at or worked for.

~~~
hn_
How have other companies you've worked at been ageist? In their hiring
practices? Or job duties? I can't say I've ever personally witnessed any agism
in my career (that I could identify) but my current job pretty much only hires
entry level people. Not agism, its just that we promote to fill senior level
positions then hire a replacement for the entry level person.

------
kabdib
On the other hand, how many older folks in high tech feel the need to look
younger, through cosmetic, styling or dress?

I myself have adopted a "buzz cut" hair style that minimizes grey. I would
consider going bald. I know that I'm not the only person over 50 that does
this.

~~~
stronglikedan
I'm over 40, but the only way people can tell is from the grey in my hair.
I've been successfully compensating for that through my less-than-mature
personality.

------
joshavant
Honestly, the more I work with older developers, the more I realize how much
of an asset they are.

These developers have programming paradigms + design patterns down pat, after
years of experience. Don't expect that with your 20-something programmer.

~~~
trhway
>These developers have programming paradigms + design patterns down pat

i think you've just tried to gravely offend us, the "older developers". :)

------
whybroke
The difference is that a fair effort is (quite rightly) made to counter
misogyny and racism while none (quite inappropriately) is made to counter
ageism.

And while comments like "men are just smarter" or "whites are just smarter"
are quite rightly unthinkable, ageist comments by major tech figures are not
unheard of. Which actually amount to judging people by their appearance with
some post hoc justification coming out of pop science.

But if I'm wrong, it could be demonstrated here. ycombinator makes wonderful
efforts to counter obviously skewed demographics on other fronts. Perhaps
ycombinator makes a similar effort to attract founders over 40?

Alas though I fear that this conversation will somehow prove too controversial
to remain visible for long enough to discuss.

------
DannyBee
One of the problems most older employees face (and i'm 36, which in silicon
valley, is no spring chicken) interviewing is that nobody wants to take a
chance on them.

Let's say you work for a company that has "up or out" until a certain level (a
lot do). Let's say they do that for reasonable reasons (IE i don't want to
argue about whether this is a reasonable policy, it's not the point here).

Let's say you have a position to fill, and your candidates are a 30 year old
woman with 1 year of experience and a 99 year old woman with 45 years
experience (the fact that you were able to get two female candidates should
make it clear this is a fake story in silicon valley)

You interview them both.

30 year old does okay. The 99 year old does okay.

Neither one of them would really meet the bar for any level above "up and
out", and so if they don't grow, they're going to get fired. Let's say they
have about 2 years.

Here's your problem: The 30 year old is just starting out. So while they
aren't at the "up and out level" yet, there is some hope they may be in a year
or two, and can demonstrate continuous growth until then.

The 99 year old has been at this for 45 years. If they haven't become that
good in 45 years, it's pretty close to certain they never will.

Thus, the 30 year old gets hired over the 99 year old, but not because the 99
year old is 99, but because he hasn't grown to be good enough in 45 years.

Now you realize it's not about age, but often about years of experience vs
what you've done with them, and that a guy with 1 year of experience has a lot
more uncertainty and possible positive than a guy with 45 years experience.
There is basically no uncertainty about where that guy will top out.

~~~
tptacek
Is it legitimate to assume that someone with 45 experience who is not yet
"principal" level is _incapable_ of making "principal"? Aren't there lots and
lots of explanations for them not being at that level yet?

~~~
tptacek
I mean, that's a banal observation, and maybe this is too, but: the fact that
there are persuasive stories we can tell ourselves about why we're better off
not hiring older people (or [insert minority here]) seems like one of the big
reasons why we make it unlawful to discriminate against them.

~~~
DannyBee
Actually, if you want to get into that side of it, one of the main reasons
it's unlawful to discriminate against them is because they are more expensive
to companies (health, pensions, 401k, etc). Because these are often the things
that drive expenses at company, so they like to _terminate_ them when they
become too old.

The ever-growing aging workforce being terminated unilaterally is what caused
most of these acts.

~~~
tptacek
I have no snappy answer to either of those comments. Thanks for giving me more
to think about.

------
kelukelugames
This is not news. Large companies deal with frivolous lawsuits all of the
time. Until the case progresses we should ignore it.

On the other hand, as a 31 year old in a company of mostly 20 somethings and
only 1 or 2 40 year olds, I welcome a discussion about age related issues.

------
eps
Payscale age data, being based on _self-reporting_ of the employees, obviously
suffers from the selection bias. Older people are simply far less likely to
spill their guts on a random website, be it payscale, facebook or what have
you.

------
VikingCoder
This is _a_ lawsuit, and it hasn't been won.

Let's hold our judgement, okay?

~~~
JoeAltmaier
Its just the judge that has to do that. We're actually free to draw our own
conclusions. The evidence seems compelling?

~~~
oh_sigh
From reading the article, is the evidence that this person was denied after a
phone screen, or that the median age is 29? If anything it seems like the
title should be "Google Sued by Job Candidate for Age Discrimination", which
is the title of the linked WSJ article.

------
elliotec
Why is there ageism in tech? Why don't companies want people that were part of
the movement of personal computing? Many of the pioneers of the movement are
still around, what is it about the industry that looks down upon their wisdom?
We could learn a lot from them, why are they treated this way?

~~~
greenyoda
_" Why don't companies want people that were part of the movement of personal
computing? Many of the pioneers of the movement are still around..."_

Even the pioneers of web development are getting on in years. If your job was
doing web development 20 years ago in 1995, you're probably in your 40s now.
(I'm in my 50s, and I got to work with the first IBM PCs and then years later
with the first web software.)

------
chrisbaglieri
Listen, I'm sure this complete nonsense. I mean, Google has resource group
called “Greyglers,” they clearly care about age. You can't make this stuff up
=) [http://www.google.com/diversity/at-
google.html#tab=greyglers](http://www.google.com/diversity/at-
google.html#tab=greyglers)

~~~
codeonfire
Didn't they create that in response to the previous ageism lawsuit?

------
wehadfun
Does Google still give those technical interviews? I could be wrong but if
this person got past Googles interview would then the other reason they may
not hire them is the cultural fit thing I'm assuming

------
steamy
Tech like sports favors young people and discriminates against old folks.

~~~
michaelochurch
In athletics, people reach a physical peak when they're young. Athletics
doesn't care about age. It just happens that no one is at his physical peak at
65.

Tech is different because the abilities involved peak, for most people,
between 40 and 65. (There are outliers who peak as early as 20 or as late as
70+.) In fact, the bizarre cruelty of tech's age discrimination is that people
get pushed out of this game as soon as they're any good at it.

~~~
ojbyrne
That isn't even completely true for athletics. In some sports the peak is
reached at a point older than you'd think, and the decline is much slower as
well. For example:

[http://www.arrs.net/SA_Mara.htm](http://www.arrs.net/SA_Mara.htm)

------
ash
I think age discrimination laws actually hurt older workers because companies
don’t want to hire them and incur the litigation risk. And after this case
Google would probably think twice before deciding _even to interview_ older
people.

~~~
balls187
> Google would likely think twice before deciding even to interview older
> people.

What? You can't actively avoid interviewing people because they belong to a
protected class. That is very much still discriminating.

~~~
ash
I didn't say whether avoiding to interview older worker is discrimination or
not. It's irrelevant. What I'm trying to call attention to is the likely
actual (not intended, but actual) effect of age discrimination law. Also note,
the earlier in the hiring process company avoids older people, the harder it
is to prove that the law was broken.

~~~
balls187
> What I'm trying to call attention to is the likely actual (not intended, but
> actual) effect of age discrimination law.

If your logic holds, Google would actively not try to interview people at all,
because Race, Origin, Gender, and Military Status are all protected classes
with anti discrimination laws.

~~~
ash
How does this disprove what I'm trying to say?

~~~
hn_
Everyone is in a protected class. Everyone. Even white male Christan
Americans. Sure they are _less likely_ to be discriminated against but it
surely can and _does_ happen. And lawsuits can and have been filed. There was
one the other day here on HN, a company was accused of favoring SE Asians over
Americans.

Also despite what crazy MRAs claim the courts have been working to correct
gender imbalance that favor females. I can think of a couple off the top of my
head - a case that involved male military spouses having to prove they were
financially dependent on their spouse in order to receive military benefits
and one that involved social security surviving widows getting survivors
benefits but not widowers. Both were successfully argued and ruled
unconstitutional.

Besides your logic makes absolutely no sense - "I'm going to discriminate
against a protected class to avoid lawsuits accusing me of discriminating
against a protected class."

------
FreakyT
I've read about this sort of discrimination in many industries outside of
tech. However, what I'm curious about is this: what is the likelihood that
someone this age will retire in < 5 years? If that likelihood is high, I could
see why a company would pass over hiring them (though I know how annoying this
can be if you're in that age range and looking for a job).

I wonder if anything could be done to make hiring someone who is potentially
near retirement more appealing to companies?

~~~
MrZongle2
_However, what I 'm curious about is this: what is the likelihood that someone
this age will retire in < 5 years?_

In terms of headcount, how does that differ from (for example) a 25-year-old
leaving for another employer after a couple of years?

~~~
wrsh07
I don't think it does, but in terms of absolute numbers, if a hundred 25-year-
olds are hired, how many will stay for > 5 years?

Because those ones will become extremely valuable to the company. Especially a
company that has eg a 6 month ramp-up period.

------
mc32
So are companies now supposed to mirror the demographics of a population
exactly? Maybe they should all move to small college towns so they can reflect
the local pop more closely.

On the other hand it is curious none of the companies self reporting their
diversity demographics included any age information, but then, age is not a
protected class, as far as I know.

As tech jobs become the mainstream of jobs, it'll be interesting to see if the
median ages of workers continue to skew younger than the workforce in general.

~~~
DenisM
>So are companies now supposed to mirror the demographics of a population
exactly?

Uhm, no, that is not at all the argument being made here. The argument is:

 _Google had a median age of 29 in 2013, while the U.S. Department of Labor
reported that the median age was 43 years in the U.S. for computer
programmers_

~~~
magicalist
_"...based on the self-reporting of 840 Google employees..."_

~~~
jusben1369
Yes but the OP wasn't questioning the accuracy of the data - in fact quite the
opposite.

------
dba7dba
I hope Google gets cleaned out and set the example for the rest of the startup
industry.

Worker Visa wouldn't be needed as much if older workers were given a fair
chance in recruitment process.

I am sick of hearing tech industry boasting about their diversity. They mean
diversity in color and culture. But when it comes to age, it's not a diverse
environment.

