I read the story and didn't notice anything about rejecting candidates due to their age. He mentioned the ages of a couple, but it didn't seem like anyone was ruled out because of it.
He mentioned the age of David, the guy who got out of the army in 1985. He is brought up in the fifth paragraph. I was pretty surprised age was brought. But David hadn't had a full time job in awhile either.
It's not stated or implied that such candidates were considered unfit to hire, merely less-than-ideal - I took it as an indication that in this place, pretty much all applications are from less-than-ideal candidates, some of which turn out to be very promising (Gloria), while others are impolite and entitled, or don't even show up.
As I read the story, "Dads Resume" was a specific candidate, so named because that was evidently the filename of the email attachment.
That said, there was at least one explicit age reference fairly early on. It put me on edge. But not a lot more was made of it in the article, and I had some sense that a fair number of the candidates invited for interviews were at least middle-aged.
'Dads Resume' is called like that because apparently he can't even type up a resume on a computer, a skill that is right down there under 'assumed to know, not even listed on the job requirements' along with 'tying own shoes' and 'not forgetting to breath'.
I tend to tie my shoes once and then just leave them tied until the shoe falls apart and needs to be replaced. I wouldn't consider "tying own shoes" a major requirement for anything outside of maybe an acting career. ;p
