First published on LinkedIn, Oct 26, 2022
Ageism is real.
I am focusing on ageism that affects people over the age of forty, not kids. Yes, young people have difficulty getting their foot in the door too, I certainly did when I started out in my career, but it's not the same thing, not even close. This lazy equivalency is simply a convenient means for someone to play Devil's Advocate and cut off conversation.
Nearly every job posting I’ve read over the past year includes a disclaimer in the legalese at the bottom of the post explaining that company XYZ doesn’t discriminate based on, among other things, age. Yet, one look through the cast of characters on the “About Us” page on nine out of ten tech, advertising, or design agency websites will reveal where they register on the bullshit meter. I’m well aware that there are certain realities within the industry—The most pervasive is the baseless notion that “young” people possess a greater sense of “now” than older people. This belief has always been a major factor in the hiring practices within advertising, design, and tech as if market research is automatically invalidated by your age. The simple, ugly truth is that young talent is cheaper and easier to manipulate.
My immediate job market is Seattle, best described as a target rich environment for young guns looking to pad their resumes with the names of Fortune 500 companies. Local behemoths like Amazon, Microsoft, Adobe, Expedia, and Starbucks choose job applicants from the top echelons of the most prestigious schools in the country and when they can’t find what they’re looking for locally they broaden their search for candidates overseas. The talent spigot is always turned on full blast. Unsurprisingly, starting salaries are generally low and the expectation is that employees will only stay with the company long enough to gain the experience they need to level up their resume, then move on to the next opportunity at another well known brand, and start the cycle all over again. Locally, this is called the “churn”, which describes the perpetual revolving door of hiring, layoffs, and job-hopping in the job market that was all but invented and perfected by Microsoft. The operating mentality being that having a perpetually flushing pool of inexperienced talent who have supposedly “fresh” ideas is more valuable than professionals with loads of experience, refined skill sets, and a practiced ability to solve problems.
Employer loyalty no longer exists because employers created a system that nurtures and sustains a lack of employee loyalty.
What does this mean for older creative professionals? Generally, if you are over the age of forty, you’re already priced out of the market. If you’re over the age of fifty, you’ve been summarily retired whether or not your bank account is ready for you to enjoy your twilight years. It sounds dramatic and, perhaps, even a bit ridiculous, but my local friends who have been in this job market for decades all support this generally accepted truth. In fact, I learned about the Seattle “churn” from them long before I ever found myself experiencing the phenomena first-hand. Make no mistake, the churn has become commonplace in every localized job market. The expectation that an employer's goal is to hire talent to nurture and grow with an organization over the long haul died with my father’s generation.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics estimate for employee tenure in 2022 is 4.3 years for men and 3.8 years for women. Why then do employers routinely argue that they aren’t willing to risk investing in an older worker because “older workers aren’t likely to stay with the company for long"? The implication inherent in this rationale is that older workers may decide to retire or die at an inconvenient time. When was the last time you heard of a designer who was financially independent enough to retire on his/her career earnings? Worst case scenario, a fifty-year old creative professional has fifteen to twenty perfectly productive years to look forward to and given the financial obligations we accumulate as we age … Who again is more likely to leave a good job: an older professional or someone building a resume?
The problem with the issue of ageism is that it relies almost entirely on anecdotal evidence. Proof of ageism is nearly impossible to uncover. To wit, there isn’t a single company anywhere that will admit to hiring young, green talent because they are cheap labor and “fit” in an organization that will exploit their inexperience. No company will admit to including specific language in their job postings designed to discourage older workers from applying to open positions that, for example, offer a “fast-paced environment." These very real tactics can be easily shrugged off by employers and anyone who dares question their actions is labeled "disgruntled." The question isn’t whether or not the problem of ageism exists, it’s when the shear number of people experiencing a similar barrier becomes so overwhelming that the merely anecdotal becomes a reality that can no longer be laughed off as exaggeration or folly.
Personally, when I read the words “fast-paced”, I interpret it as “disorganized” and “we'll need you to work this weekend.” When employers are looking for the right “fit” that’s simply coded language for “someone we can take advantage of.” Because, let’s be honest, “fitting” anywhere in the creative industry is all about learning how to deal with a panoply of egos and emotions. You won’t survive for very long, let alone for twenty or thirty years, if you haven’t figured out how to navigate working with different personalities and systems. And for most people, that takes a lifetime of experience to learn to do well.
I’ve run across more than a few job postings offering “entry level” positions for designers with a starting salary based on an hourly rate of $18.00 to $21.00 an hour. Do the math. I’ve also noted that “senior” level positions typically only require three years of experience! Can you think of another industry where three years of experience elevates you to a senior level role?
It takes roughly ten years for an apprentice plumber to become a master plumber.
After a medical student has completed schooling, he or she must complete a residency lasting three to eight years to become licensed as a doctor, and anywhere from five to fifteen additional years to become a specialist.
What do you really know after your first three years of working professionally, especially if you've been working as a designer in-house where your responsibilities are siloed?
As revealing as this is, it’s also a clear indictment of an industry that does not value its own creative professionals. Designers are the last to be hired and the first to be laid off (after recruiters.) There should be no wondering why the design industry is engaged in a perpetual cosmic battle to sell our value to clients.
How can we sell value to our clients if the companies we work for don’t value our roles or our experience?
No matter how many creative “thought leaders” describe design as being the sun around which every other business service revolves, designers are still looked upon as a commodity by employers. They’re a great addition to the team when cash reserves are flush, but easy to let go when money is tight. Why bother paying for a veteran who possesses a well-rounded quiver of hard and soft skills when a fresh face with zero experience will do the trick? Anyone can be "creative," right? If only, it were that simple.
Ageism is a very real and prevalent issue in the creative industry. Not only are older professionals routinely and immediately passed over for opportunities because we don’t “fit” (for whatever nonsensical reason), we can’t even pry open a door for a job we are interested in even if we are willing to accept compensation that does not reflect our experience.
Older professionals are far more capable and far more creative than we are given credit for by the very industry we have given our talents, passions, and energies to for decades. We can add tremendous value to an organization from the word “go” and I think it’s safe to say that most professionals over the age of forty have long since stopped caring about padding our resumes, we are simply looking to contribute to an organization we believe in and who believes in us.
For companies who are looking to fill positions requiring a skill set only an experienced professional could possibly possess and claim to not discriminate based on age, walk the walk and consider adding a touch of grey to your rainbow. I think I can safely speak for every person over the age of forty (and, especially, fifty) who has a long, established track record in the creative industry when I say, “I haven't survived this long because I'm a risk. I've survived this long because I've constantly striven to raise the bar for myself and my clients … And I’m far less likely to jump ship at the slightest glimmer of a better offer.”
Besides, you can probably use help shepherding your younger talent.
#ageism #design #jobsearch