As a millennial I have had the repeated experience of coming into a role, quickly being asked to take on more and more responsibilities, and hear from leadership how great my work is. Meanwhile I am making half of what my Boomer colleague who has maybe 1/3 of the work I do. Plus Boomer is grandfathered into a pension plan plus they are on a legacy pto accrual and grandfathered into higher 401k matching rates… It’s not lost on millennials when your company intranet page says “employees hired after 2009” on the benefits page.

These are my personal experiences which impact how I see the issue of not hiring a 55 yo worker with 15 years experience in one position over a younger person with 2 years for a role asking for 2-5 years.

I think a big part of the issue is that back when boomers entered the work force planning to be a career accountant and stay in one role at one company was not only viable but seen as a positive. Now the workforce sees this history as a sign of stagnation or settling. This is why Boomer managers who progressed their career don’t face the same issues. Almost all the VP and Presidents and Chief Officers at each org I have worked for are 55 and older. Clearly their is no she discrimination there.

Finally I always find these articles focus on entry level or part time work. If you have two employees with similar accomplishments even if they are the same age. If one has 5 years and the other has 10 years the company will always pick the 5 year. It’s not because the other person is older. It’s because it’s always preferred to hire someone near the bottom of the pay range all else being equal. The experiment cited in this article is a no brainier. Of course they hired the ones with fewer years in the industry all things equal.

If we actually want to put a stop to age discrimination, we’ll need to enact German employment law. Otherwise it will simply keep happening.