Graduate Adverts been Ageist ?

gar32

Yes I know you can be a Graduate at any age but we all know what age most Graduate are when finished there studies.

Is this a legal way to leave out people with past studies or experience in the field of advertised job?

Are companies just looking to get people cheap at the start of their career that will do what their told and not stand up for their rights. I have heard of many Graduate who work lots of over time without extra pay and it's expected of them now.

I just don't like to see people taken advantaged of because of corporate greed.


What do people think?

Stheno

gar32 wrote: »

Yes I know you can be a Graduate at any age but we all know what age most Graduate are when finished there studies.

Is this a legal way to leave out people with past studies or experience in the field of advertised job?

Are companies just looking to get people cheap at the start of their career that will do what their told and not stand up for their rights. I have heard of many Graduate who work lots of over time without extra pay and it's expected of them now.

I just don't like to see people taken advantaged of because of corporate greed.


What do people think?

In my experience when companies are looking for someone at graduate level, they are looking for someone with a certain level of education but no experience. Companies are usually looking to invest in upskilling and training them so they get the experience needed

fullstop

gar32 wrote: »

Yes I know you can be a Graduate at any age but we all know what age most Graduate are when finished there studies.

Is this a legal way to leave out people with past studies or experience in the field of advertised job?

Are companies just looking to get people cheap at the start of their career that will do what their told and not stand up for their rights. I have heard of many Graduate who work lots of over time without extra pay and it's expected of them now.

I just don't like to see people taken advantaged of because of corporate greed.


What do people think?

Everyone in big corporations with graduate programmes are expected to work lots of overtime without remuneration, not just the graduates. I know a lot of companies pay them poorly but in the company I work for the graduates start on 30k + with up-skilling added into the bargain and the chance to progress quickly to management positions.
The reason companies take on grads is that thet can mould them into the way of working in that company and expose them to different departments and find the best fit, IMO.

gar32

I can see why a company would want to hire Graduates. Its good for them to shape them as the company needs but what about the people with a few years experience and the qualifications? They would like that chance in the big company but because they work a few years else where can not apply for a job they are well able to do?

Stheno

gar32 wrote: »

I can see why a company would want to hire Graduates. Its good for them to shape them as the company needs but what about the people with a few years experience and the qualifications? They would like that chance in the big company but because they work a few years else where can not apply for a job they are well able to do?

They are not graduates? So not suited to the role? And if they are, that surely indicates they haven't developed from being graduates?

What is your issue here? Graduates being overworked, or people being overlooked as they are not graduate level?

gar32

Ageism is my issue.

Just like if your 21 or under and unemployed you get less money. Old enough to vote, drink or join the army but old enough to get full unemployment pay out.

Some people never move on and stay in the same jobs all their lives. I just think everyone of all ages should be able to apply for any job. Age should not be a factor. Requesting Graduate only mean a job is open to a small amount of the population.

http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/download/9610061ec007.pdf?expires=1452049561&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=5FB9457A5F3AC51D1C9498BAB3A5F6BD

the_syco

gar32 wrote: »

Its good for them to shape them as the company needs but what about the people with a few years experience and the qualifications?

Are you saying you would you work for eff all, and not jump ship to a better paying role in 6 months down the line? Because this is why companies generally don't take "people with a few years experience and the qualifications" for the lower paid jobs.

Stheno

gar32 wrote: »

Ageism is my issue.

Just like if your 21 or under and unemployed you get less money. Old enough to vote, drink or join the army but old enough to get full unemployment pay out.

Some people never move on and stay in the same jobs all their lives. I just think everyone of all ages should be able to apply for any job. Age should not be a factor. Requesting Graduate only mean a job is open to a small amount of the population.

http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/download/9610061ec007.pdf?expires=1452049561&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=5FB9457A5F3AC51D1C9498BAB3A5F6BD

SO you believe that graduate roles are only for 21-25 year old just out of college?

That sounds like nonsense to me. A graduate is a graduate, I'm 42 and about to graduate this year.

Does that mean I can't apply for graduate roles?

gar32

the 1st sentence I wrote on this thread

"Yes I know you can be a Graduate at any age."

gar32

the_syco wrote: »

Are you saying you would you work for eff all, and not jump ship to a better paying role in 6 months down the line? Because this is why companies generally don't take "people with a few years experience and the qualifications" for the lower paid jobs.

Things in Ireland are better now but a few years ago the where not enough ships. I was one of the people who had to jump ship and now live in Germany.

Some times you need to take a step back so you can go in a different direction. Work it not all about money thankfully.

davo10

It can depend on the type of job and level of entry. Management or jobs with high responsibility often require experience, lower entry levels are often open to new graduates.

Op, have you an example of a job which advertised only for "only new graduates 25 and under need apply"?

From my own experience, new graduates are preferable in some instances as they are eager, ambitious, motivated and don't have the bad work practices and attitudes that often come with seasoned campaigners. It is easier to get a new graduate with no experience to adapt to the ways the company works than it is someone who has worked elsewhere in the same industry for 20 years.

Also bare in mind that the opposite is also true, we often advertise for positions that require previous experience, is this discriminating against young new graduates?

gar32

gar32 wrote: »

I can see why a company would want to hire Graduates. Its good for them to shape them as the company needs but what about the people with a few years experience and the qualifications? They would like that chance in the big company but because they work a few years else where can not apply for a job they are well able to do?

What? Those people should apply for experienced hire positions. You are making no sense.

Musicman2000

I think what the OP is getting at . A company gets 2 graduate CVS one from a 50 year old and the other form a 22 year old. What are the favoured odds? More than likely the 22 year old.

Creamy Goodness

Musicman2000 wrote: »

I think what the OP is getting at . A company gets 2 graduate CVS one from a 50 year old and the other form a 22 year old. What are the favoured odds? More than likely the 22 year old.

How will they tell the applicant's age from two CVs, unless people are actually putting their age on them? People aren't actually doing that are they?

yourpics

I understand where the OP is coming from. Take for example Public Sector Graduate jobs e.g. OPW. They often say graduated within the last 2 years, this excludes older graduates straight away! very discriminatory!

Mrs OBumble

yourpics wrote: »

I understand where the OP is coming from. Take for example Public Sector Graduate jobs e.g. OPW. They often say graduated within the last 2 years, this excludes older graduates straight away! very discriminatory!

No it doesn't.

It only excludes people who have more than two years work experience post graduation.

I work with a guy who entered a graduate programme at age 55.

gar32

gar32 wrote: »

I can see why a company would want to hire Graduates. Its good for them to shape them as the company needs but what about the people with a few years experience and the qualifications? They would like that chance in the big company but because they work a few years else where can not apply for a job they are well able to do?

There is nothing stopping people applying for graduate jobs. The employer might be reluctant to hire someone who has experience and qualifications though - the employee might expect a higher wage than is on offer, the might get bored of the entry level work they had moved on from, they might be less flexible about training or travel if they have other commitments, they might already have their way of doing things. Some of the above might be ageism but the company doesn't have to value your experience.

If you have experience and qualifications why are you looking at graduate jobs why aren't you looking for experienced opportunities?

As an example the big auditing firms do hire qualified people - lots of people who wanted big firm experience but who trained in smaller firms join at that point for a few years to add that to their CV.

yourpics

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

No it doesn't.

It only excludes people who have more than two years work experience post graduation.

I work with a guy who entered a graduate programme at age 55.

It does discriminate, a person who has more experience is not able to apply, someone with relatively little experience can apply, it is not so much an issue of age but it is an issue nonetheless

yourpics

yourpics wrote: »

It does discriminate, a person who has more experience is not able to apply, someone with relatively little experience can apply, it is not so much an issue of age but it is an issue nonetheless

That's not discrimination. That is picking someone the company think will be most suitable for the job.

Mrs OBumble

yourpics wrote: »

It does discriminate, a person who has more experience is not able to apply, someone with relatively little experience can apply, it is not so much an issue of age but it is an issue nonetheless

Discrimination on the basis of experience is allowed.

Just like on the basis of height, weight, ugliness, hair-colour, what college you went to, etc.

Some of these things could be a proxy for things you cannot discriminate on - and that's not allowed. But if you do it right (eg "no one from tier three colleges, no matter what country they're in") it's allowed.

Zipppy

Musicman2000 wrote:

I think what the OP is getting at . A company gets 2 graduate CVS one from a 50 year old and the other form a 22 year old. What are the favoured odds? More than likely the 22 year old.

I applied for a graduate role in public sector last year. .I graduated last in 2009...I got the role despite being late 40s...
Didn't take it in the end as I got promoted in current employer .. but I must say I would have been aprehensive about starting such a role at my age surrounded by 'young ones' and 'young lads'...

reallyrose

Disclaimer: Being an agency recruiter, I'm going on what clients tell me. The actual real world might be different.

The clients I have who look for graduates sometimes want grads because the jobs are kinda boring. If you have no experience, they're brilliant for learning how to code in the real world (or what ever) but someone with experience would just not be happy.
Grind work needs to be done by someone! You go in, get some experience, go off and get the next step up. I started this job by just sourcing CV's and then moved into a full recruitment role. (where I deal with clients, interviews, the whole bag). Staying just dealing with CV's only forever would be very boring.

They also like people who are willing to learn their way of doing things. Grads are a bit of a clean slate and are just out of a learning intensive environment so they'll pick up company technologies and systems.


Age isn't hugely a thing. I've put grads of all ages into jobs. Sometimes the person on their second career is exactly what someone wants. A 21 year old might leave after 6 months when they work out that QA is actually not what they want to do. The person on their second time around has thought things through!

seachto7

Zipppy wrote: »

I applied for a graduate role in public sector last year. .I graduated last in 2009...I got the role despite being late 40s...
Didn't take it in the end as I got promoted in current employer .. but I must say I would have been aprehensive about starting such a role at my age surrounded by 'young ones' and 'young lads'...

I'm in the same boat depending on what job I apply for. I'm late 30s. I suppose it depends on what you want to do.

I did a five month paid internship last year, and the other internee was 20 years younger than me.

I was apprehensive about doing it, but took a chance thinking it would lead to something else. It hasn't so far!

gar32

seachto7 wrote: »

I'm in the same boat depending on what job I apply for. I'm late 30s. I suppose it depends on what you want to do.

I did a five month paid internship last year, and the other internee was 20 years younger than me.

I was apprehensive about doing it, but took a chance thinking it would lead to something else. It hasn't so far!

Don't loss heart I am in my early 40's and facing a 30% reduction of people in my company. If let go the job hunt will have to start.

Key advice is keep trying for what you want to do. As soon as you give up you loss your chance of being happy in your job. I know too many people unhappy in their work.

If you want something you will find a way. If you don't you will find an excuse.

Good luck!!!