Over 50 And Out Of Work

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

wuliheron

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2011
3,536
0
0
In theory, the prices of manufactured goods produced by automation should decrease faster than any resultant decrease in wages.

The invention of the light bulb put candle makers out of work, and the invention of automobiles and the assembly line put buggy makers out of work, but our nation's economy didn't stop growing and the standard of living increased.


Your theory is the pink unicorns and rainbows perpetual motion theory of automation and innovation. Its a nice fantasy, but then reality has a way of slapping you in the face and waking you up. Yes, innovation and automation can be wonderful things. They can also be nightmares.

The reality is that the innovation of the cotton gin and the automation of the clothing industry led to millions of slaves being exploited in the most inhumane fashion. It wasn't that the industry couldn't afford to hire people to pick the cotton but, rather, it was simply cheaper to use slaves and the profits were outrageous. To ignore such simple facts and that even labor markets have long term ups and downs that can last centuries in favor of pink unicorns and rainbows is classic denial and avoidance.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
No shit. I got hurt at work at age 50...I retrained, yet still no job. Employers take one look at my resume, 30 years working construction as a crane operator...a few years off for the injury and school, I walk with a cane nowadays...and the resume goes right in the trash. Occasionally, I'll get an interview...but as soon as I walk in...I know someone else will get the job. It's in their eyes and attitude during the interview.
It doesn't matter that I was in the top 5% of all my classes, or that I graduated with a 3.94 GPA, or that in my years of construction, I was one of the top crane operators in the area, someone you called when you had a difficult job that had to be done well...all that matters is that I'm over 50 and injured.

For us folks who are over 50, retraining is a joke...and most of the time, a waste of time and money.

The Republican answer is you either leave the country or off yourself.

Which are you going to do?
 
Oct 16, 1999
10,490
4
0
Didn't want to clutter the board with another thread since this so closely related, but it's a good article and addresses specifically a lot of the comments in this thread.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/23/long-term-unemployment_n_864873.html

'I Played By The Rules' -- 'The Rules Have Changed'

On July 17, 2009, Terry Harris of Jonesville, S.C., lost her job as an executive assistant at a promotional products company. The company, she says, went belly up.

"My boss actually cried when I was let go," she says. "I have an excellent letter of recommendation from him."

In other words, Harris says, "It was purely an economic thing." She lost her job through no fault of her own.

What she doesn't understand is why she's still unemployed and why her husband's been bounced from one wretched low-paying job to another. Why, she asks, if they both finished high school, got some secondary education, have solid work histories and held off on having kids, is it such a struggle to pay for things like getting the car fixed and visiting the dentist?

"I think the thing that keeps me going is knowing that we are really lucky, even in spite of the challenges that we are facing," says Harris in an email. "I can't help but feel badly for those that I know are worse off than we are. And I am truly grateful. And knowing that we are not alone helps a great deal, too. But it seems to be getting harder. Harder not to worry, not to cry, not to give up hope. We did everything right, I thought."

She's right: It is getting harder.

President Obama, in his 2011 State of the Union address, talked about how most people could remember the good old days, when getting a job meant showing up at a factory after finishing high school. "If you worked hard, chances are you’d have a job for life, with a decent paycheck and good benefits and the occasional promotion," the president said, adding that he understood "the frustrations of Americans who’ve seen their paychecks dwindle or their jobs disappear -- proud men and women who feel like the rules have been changed in the middle of the game."

"They’re right," Obama continued. "The rules have changed."

Indeed they have. And for many who have been out of work for a long time and are willing to share their thoughts with a reporter, the new rules are merciless.

"Good, decent people who worked hard, did everything right, believed in the American Dream have been destroyed," writes a Californian who said her brother killed himself after job loss collapsed his financial situation.

"On the eve of my 60th birthday and without marketable skills I have no chance of ever finding a job again in the traditional economy," writes a North Carolinian who's been out of work nearly two years. "I am determined to survive this horror show. But my survival will not be determined by our broken economy. It’s 'think outside the box' time. Traditional methods obviously won’t work for people like me."

“I did everything right, I played by the rules, I got skills, I excelled in my job, all to no avail," writes a New Jerseyan who said he lost his job in 2010. "I don’t know what I’m going to do. All the years of both parties talking about free trade agreements and how we will retrain America was just a bunch of BS; it was easy to say all that when times were good."

And so on. By the way: Just what the hell are the new rules? What follows is a brief handbook.

Don’t Be Old


Harris suspects age discrimination is a big reason why she can't find work. She's not even 40, but she's keenly aware of her years. She says she and her husband didn't have children because they wanted to wait till they had a more secure financial situation. Under the old rules, after all, age brought economic security for decent people.

"We wanted to wait till we could afford it, and now look -- I’m 39 last month."

And when she applied online for a job at Bojangles Famous Chicken 'n Biscuits earlier this year, the application form required her to disclose her date of birth. Several big companies, including Target, Kroger and Home Depot, do the same thing. It's illegal to discriminate by age and to specify an age preference in a job ad, but it's not illegal to ask about age, though employment law experts say doing so does bear a whiff of discrimination.

Workers older than 55 are less likely to lose their jobs, but the average jobless spell for older workers lasts longer than a year, compared with an average layoff of 39.5 weeks for workers younger than 55.

Age discrimination is unbearably obvious to anyone over 50 who's been in the job market for more than a short time, but it's impossible to prove. You can't beat it. That's why it's a rule.


Don't Be Unemployed

Employers openly discriminate against the unemployed in job postings on sites like craigslist and Monster every day. A May 16 craigslist posting for a restaurant manager in Salisbury, Md., for instance, specifies that applicants "must be currently employed or recently unemployed." Last year, after reporters asked, global phone manufacturer Sony Ericsson claimed its ad that said "NO UNEMPLOYED CANDIDATES WILL BE CONSIDERED AT ALL" was a mistake.

It's not illegal to have such a rule, but in response to stories about the phenomenon on The Huffington Post, state and federal lawmakers in the past year have tried to ban overt discrimination against the unemployed.


Don't Pin Your Hopes On College

The unemployment rate for college grads is 4.5 percent, and it never got much higher than that during the Great Recession. For high school dropouts, it's 14.6 percent. So finishing college pays.

But this old rule's been bent. New college grads these days face a huge pile of debt and an unemployment rate near 10 percent. And among people who've been out of work 99 weeks or longer, a college degree doesn't mean anything. High school dropouts and grads were equally represented among the 1.4 million people out of work that long as of last October, according to the Congressional Research Service.


Don't Expect To Make More Money At Your Next Job

Sure, the private sector's been adding jobs, but they're crappy jobs. The National Employment Law Project, a worker advocacy group, reported in February that low-wage industries like retail and administrative support via temp agencies account for 49 percent of job growth in the past year. The same sector only accounts for 23 percent of the jobs lost in the same time period. By contrast, higher-paying industries constituted 40 percent of job losses over the last year, but just 14 percent of growth.

Bob Poropatich of Pittsburgh has been working part-time as a barista since he lost his job as a manager for a major clothing retailer in 2008. He says he'd been with the company for six years and had 30 years of experience. He has a master's degree. He'd been making $65,000 a year; now, he says, he makes about $180 a week.

Did he do something wrong in his life, or is he falling backward by chance?

"This is random and pointless," Poropatich says. "I didn’t choose to age. I didn’t choose to be 59. I didn’t choose to be laid off. Every decision was made by a higher power and an HR director."

Poropatich says that in the five job interviews he's had, he has tried to get around the rule against being old by promising his hiring won't raise a company's insurance premiums. It hasn't worked.

"I said, 'By the way, I won’t be applying for health benefits and things like that since I already have my own coverage.' They say, 'Okay, thank you.' Nobody is impressed by it. I would think that’s the biggest thing."

He says the worst moment was when his former employer came to his coffeeshop.

"My ex boss, the one who laid me off, came in and ordered a venti mocha," Poropatich says. "It didn’t faze him at all. I felt like I was two inches tall. I wanted to say, 'Excuse me,' and run into the bathroom."
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
No one wants to hire people of this age group. There's a surplus of younger people who can be worked to death. Why buy an old mule when you can have a young one?
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
No one wants to hire people of this age group. There's a surplus of younger people who can be worked to death. Why buy an old mule when you can have a young one?
This. Sucks to be unemployed and over 50, no doubt. That's when you may well have to figure out how to be self-employed.

Our country increasingly imports the wealth it consumes. As the wealth-producing jobs disappear, more and more people must take the lower-paying service industry jobs. As times get hard, even relatively well paid jobs like truck driver and manager are being squeezed, with fewer jobs and lower pay. At the moment, we're hit with both of those things. And on top of that, we're importing millions of people willing to work harder for lower wages, people who cannot safely report on-the-job injuries or infractions of labor laws. Two of these things were conscious decisions by those in power - and thus, by us all.
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,018
37
91
The answer is to let more illegal invaders in, oh, and grant more visas. Don't worry, the Guilters say it's not a problem....
 

IndyColtsFan

Lifer
Sep 22, 2007
33,655
688
126
Didn't want to clutter the board with another thread since this so closely related, but it's a good article and addresses specifically a lot of the comments in this thread.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/23/long-term-unemployment_n_864873.html

I admit that people over 50 are going to have a very tough time and I feel bad about it and am concerned because 50 isn't that far off for me, but I had to laugh at a couple of the comments:

"On the eve of my 60th birthday and without marketable skills I have no chance of ever finding a job again in the traditional economy," writes a North Carolinian who's been out of work nearly two years. "I am determined to survive this horror show. But my survival will not be determined by our broken economy. It’s 'think outside the box' time. Traditional methods obviously won’t work for people like me."

What does this person expect exactly? A $100K/yr job? Is this kind of comment supposed to elicit sympathy?

Harris suspects age discrimination is a big reason why she can't find work. She's not even 40, but she's keenly aware of her years. She says she and her husband didn't have children because they wanted to wait till they had a more secure financial situation. Under the old rules, after all, age brought economic security for decent people.

Seriously? This article has some ridiculous examples.

I know a guy who is nearly 60 and is losing his contract position in July. He has not been able to find a replacement job yet. He is a great guy, but if you look at his career history, he has been through layoff after layoff after layoff. At the company where we worked at together, they consolidated our department and of the 5 of us, they gave new jobs to 4 of us and he was the one laid off. Do you see the pattern here? If you talk to him or his wife, he was "always the one that got the job done and then they let him go when it was done." If you talk to his coworkers (like me), you'd get a different story -- he was a great guy to talk to and was smart and knew his stuff, but he was generally lazy and avoided work.

My point is that there are 2 sides of every story and these guys portraying themselves as victims might be leaving out some important details.
 

StinkyPinky

Diamond Member
Jul 6, 2002
6,977
1,276
126
http://www.overfiftyandoutofwork.com/100-stories/

This has got to be the most depressing site on the internet.



Some of these people needed to adapt and didn't do it.

Like me. I work in IT, but I know that I need to diversify so I've recently done ITIL and am taking management papers. IMO, you need to have a bail out option because technology changes so fast you can quickly find yourself obsolete in no time. You should never finish studying and that's something I sometimes need to tell myself.
 
Oct 16, 1999
10,490
4
0
Some of these people needed to adapt and didn't do it.

Like me. I work in IT, but I know that I need to diversify so I've recently done ITIL and am taking management papers. IMO, you need to have a bail out option because technology changes so fast you can quickly find yourself obsolete in no time.

The current status quo of ever evolving technology and obsolescence is a relatively new development, especially for folks who already had the bulk of their employment under their belt prior to the technological revolution. Adapting now, at 50 years old, with all your prior experience in something that's now obsolete, that is the problem.
 

Svnla

Lifer
Nov 10, 2003
17,986
1,388
126
No one wants to hire people of this age group. There's a surplus of younger people who can be worked to death. Why buy an old mule when you can have a young one?

Also there are other benefits for younger mule(s):

Cheaper salary
Cheaper healthcare
Lesser chance of sick leave
Higher chance of staying with the company longer (years to go before retirement)
Higher chance of adaptation to newer technologies
Lesser chance of "when I was your age, that was how we do it"

and much more but you get the points.
 

highland145

Lifer
Oct 12, 2009
43,973
6,338
136
Also there are other benefits for younger mule(s):

Cheaper salary
Cheaper healthcare
Lesser chance of sick leave
Higher chance of staying with the company longer (years to go before retirement)
Higher chance of adaptation to newer technologies
Lesser chance of "when I was your age, that was how we do it"

and much more but you get the points.
This. We have a government facility next door that has been providing $$$$ to our economy for nearly 60 years. Bankruptcy lawyer friend says half his clients are 50+ that have taken a package, expecting to rehire as a contractor or somewhere else in the country. They have have knowledge/experience but they're aren't worker mules hence unemployable.

Loan sharking:there's always a market.

FTW?
 

nobodyknows

Diamond Member
Sep 28, 2008
5,474
0
0
This. We have a government facility next door that has been providing $$$$ to our economy for nearly 60 years. Bankruptcy lawyer friend says half his clients are 50+ that have taken a package, expecting to rehire as a contractor or somewhere else in the country. They have have knowledge/experience but they're aren't worker mules hence unemployable.

Loan sharking:there's always a market.

FTW?

Robbing banks seems like a more honest way to make a living to me??
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Also there are other benefits for younger mule(s):

Cheaper salary
Cheaper healthcare
Lesser chance of sick leave
Higher chance of staying with the company longer (years to go before retirement)
Higher chance of adaptation to newer technologies
Lesser chance of "when I was your age, that was how we do it"

and much more but you get the points.

Yeah but you don't get wisdom. I personally hate this idea of tossing old people in the garbage. Just another symptom of our rat eat rat moral decline and Asia is the future where they still respect elders, teachers and family.

Beyond morals, out of self interest it makes sense to treat elders well because you won't be young forever.
 
Last edited:

Doppel

Lifer
Feb 5, 2011
13,306
3
0
I think those people who are over-leveraged, living in a house they can not afford and spending down their pensions are making a big mistake. They would be better off just walking away from their loan and keeping their retirement money. A house is just a giant money pit.
Agree. You will never get a chance to make that back. You HAVE to have it, even if you lose your house.

BTW this thread is fvcking depressing.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,685
136
The current status quo of ever evolving technology and obsolescence is a relatively new development, especially for folks who already had the bulk of their employment under their belt prior to the technological revolution. Adapting now, at 50 years old, with all your prior experience in something that's now obsolete, that is the problem.

That sounds peachy & all, until we realize that many people currently out of work have managerial & organizational skills, sales skills- things that never really are obsolete.

The fact that it's often older workers has very problematical social consequences, as well, given that younger people are living at home longer because their prospects are dim, as well. They depend on their parents longer, with multi generational families under one roof becoming more common all the time. Lots of recent college grads would be in the lurch if it weren't for their parents' paychecks.

Not long ago, my brother and his wife supported her father, their two adult daughters and one grand daughter under their roof. Her father drew SS, their one daughter is severely autistic, and the other daughter worked full time, but neither her father nor their working daughter brought home enough to live independently...

Had either my brother or his wife lost their incomes, things would have been very rough for more people than just the two of them...

The whole idea that this is happening because of a lack of skills on the part of unemployed people is just obfuscation for the fact that the trickledown global capitalism model so adored on the Right is slowly falling on its face, at least for the middle class.

Capitalists as "Job Creators"? Gimme a break. They're reaping near record profits while unemployment hovers at 9%, with even more dismal workforce participation. They're not creating anything in this country other than bigger piles of cash for themselves ATM.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Heh - If we used 1980 UE stats we'd be at 21% but pols keep manipulating way it's calculated to fool people into complacency while the great grift continues. They do same with inflation. (see shadowstats)
 

Svnla

Lifer
Nov 10, 2003
17,986
1,388
126
Yeah but you don't get wisdom. I personally hate this idea of tossing old people in the garbage. Just another symptom of our rat eat rat moral decline and Asia is the future where they still respect elders, teachers and family.

Beyond morals, out of self interest it makes sense to treat elders well because you won't be young forever.

I don't mean to sound cruel or mean but it is what it is. Older workers are fighting an uphill battle to get hire.
 
Oct 30, 2004
11,442
32
91
Your theory is the pink unicorns and rainbows perpetual motion theory of automation and innovation. Its a nice fantasy, but then reality has a way of slapping you in the face and waking you up. Yes, innovation and automation can be wonderful things. They can also be nightmares.

The reality is that the innovation of the cotton gin and the automation of the clothing industry led to millions of slaves being exploited in the most inhumane fashion. It wasn't that the industry couldn't afford to hire people to pick the cotton but, rather, it was simply cheaper to use slaves and the profits were outrageous. To ignore such simple facts and that even labor markets have long term ups and downs that can last centuries in favor of pink unicorns and rainbows is classic denial and avoidance.

What does slavery have to do with any of this?

If what you're saying is true, why didn't the U.S. economy collapse with the advent of the assembly line, automobiles, and light bulbs? Since we have much more automation and technological advance than we did hundreds of years ago, according to your theory, shouldn't people's wages and standard of living now be lower than what they were hundreds of years ago?

There's always work and potential wealth creation that can be done. The issue is whether or not the wealth produced is distributed in such a way and whether or not economic policies are such as to maximize wealth creation.
 
Oct 16, 1999
10,490
4
0
That sounds peachy & all, until we realize that many people currently out of work have managerial & organizational skills, sales skills- things that never really are obsolete.

The fact that it's often older workers has very problematical social consequences, as well, given that younger people are living at home longer because their prospects are dim, as well. They depend on their parents longer, with multi generational families under one roof becoming more common all the time. Lots of recent college grads would be in the lurch if it weren't for their parents' paychecks.

Not long ago, my brother and his wife supported her father, their two adult daughters and one grand daughter under their roof. Her father drew SS, their one daughter is severely autistic, and the other daughter worked full time, but neither her father nor their working daughter brought home enough to live independently...

Had either my brother or his wife lost their incomes, things would have been very rough for more people than just the two of them...

The whole idea that this is happening because of a lack of skills on the part of unemployed people is just obfuscation for the fact that the trickledown global capitalism model so adored on the Right is slowly falling on its face, at least for the middle class.

Capitalists as "Job Creators"? Gimme a break. They're reaping near record profits while unemployment hovers at 9%, with even more dismal workforce participation. They're not creating anything in this country other than bigger piles of cash for themselves ATM.

Obsolete, redundant, in any event those skills are not in demand in the current job market compared to historical levels. And I agree that not having much to adapt to that is in demand is the bulk of the problem. "Economic efficiency" is another term I've seen tossed around a bit lately, but the folks using it won't admit that it's just a euphemism for higher unemployment and lower wages.
 
Oct 16, 1999
10,490
4
0
What does slavery have to do with any of this?

If what you're saying is true, why didn't the U.S. economy collapse with the advent of the assembly line, automobiles, and light bulbs? Since we have much more automation and technological advance than we did hundreds of years ago, according to your theory, shouldn't people's wages and standard of living now be lower than what they were hundreds of years ago?

There's always work and potential wealth creation that can be done. The issue is whether or not the wealth produced is distributed in such a way and whether or not economic policies are such as to maximize wealth creation.

Up until now we've increased consumption to offset the increases in production efficiencies to keep the economy going. But here we are, in the midst of the technological revolution, increasing production efficiency exponentially more, and consumers are already maxed out from just keeping up with the production levels of before. Our economy continues to evolve into one that increasingly only needs people for the consumption side of the cycle, while largely automation, technology, and few actual people take care of the production side. This cuts off the majority of people from employment and wealth creation. So, slave labor? Or no labor?
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,685
136
Obsolete, redundant, in any event those skills are not in demand in the current job market compared to historical levels. And I agree that not having much to adapt to that is in demand is the bulk of the problem. "Economic efficiency" is another term I've seen tossed around a bit lately, but the folks using it won't admit that it's just a euphemism for higher unemployment and lower wages.

Well, yeh, of course. In a capitalist system, greater "economic efficiency" just means more money at the top, always has.

There's no "down" in "trickledown economics", only "up", something that's been papered over with massive debt acquisition at every level. At a time when greater income redistribution was necessary for the long term well being of the middle class, we were convinced that less would serve us just as well, which was a lie all along.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
I don't mean to sound cruel or mean but it is what it is. Older workers are fighting an uphill battle to get hire.

It's is what it is is biggest cop out ever. Resignation or quitters mentality. I prefer it's whatever we want to be and work to achieve that. Starting with full employment and respecting elders. After all I'll be one someday.
 

Svnla

Lifer
Nov 10, 2003
17,986
1,388
126
It's is what it is is biggest cop out ever. Resignation or quitters mentality. I prefer it's whatever we want to be and work to achieve that. Starting with full employment and respecting elders. After all I'll be one someday.

Cop out? Nope, it is reality, the real world. Yes, it sucks but that is life. You can say anything you want but were what I said true or not?

Full employment? Sure, we can wishy washy all we want to but it won't happen anytime soon. Do you personally open any new businesses and hire older (50 to 60 something or older) folks over the young mules? Yup, just what we thought.

I don't remember anything I said so far were disrespectful to anyone but the truth.
 

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,577
432
126
Yeah but you don't get wisdom. I personally hate this idea of tossing old people in the garbage. Just another symptom of our rat eat rat moral decline and Asia is the future where they still respect elders, teachers and family.

Beyond morals, out of self interest it makes sense to treat elders well because you won't be young forever.

Whose rat eat rate moral decline? Senior poverty rates here in Canada are near an all-time low. If anything we should be focusing more on youth poverty issues.

incomeNEW_1046901a.jpg