Finished At Fifty

[South Lorne]

But the skills needed to keep someone in employment untill their late 60's would have been very different when the 60 year old left full time education a good investment back then in many cases is useless now.

...unless he/she kept up self development...some people think when they leave full time education that's it....sorry it isn't... ...and some companies e.g BMW and Mercedes are retaining their 60+s past retirement due to their skills and attitude ....the latter being as important as the former....

[miko]

I think it will be different in the future...its with the advent of the introduction of technology into the equation..There are a lot of those mature workers who don't know how a computer works, and many refuse or don't want to know...

What you have just posted shows the problem that the older workers face . Which is an ingrained , unproved, preconcived prejudice .

I know loads of mature workers who do know how a computer works and I would bet that the majority who do not given the chance to learn ( which does not take that long ) would learn and prove that they are capable of learning. However it is just eaiser to write them off and blame them by saying that they refuse or don't want to know.

[Nickolarge]

What about voluntary "work"? There are some who do work for free for the greater good...

The word "job" has more than one definition as does "work". If I volunteer to man a charity shop I will be working there and doing "a job" for the charity but it is not "my job". Not if they don't pay me for my time. I am not their employee.

[shipbuilder]

...unless he/she kept up self development...some people think when they leave full time education that's it....sorry it isn't... ...and some companies e.g BMW and Mercedes are retaining their 60+s past retirement due to their skills and attitude ....the latter being as important as the former....

Both German companies - we seem to have a much more superficial business culture, led by fads, Harvard MBA nonsense and the rest, along with our wider obsessions with money and youth, it does not make for a sustainable economy.

So countries with much more conservative economic attitudes such as Germany, respectful of experience and concerned with actually making things and investing in boring engineering and science, continue to wipe the floor with us.

Edited April 4, 2011 by shipbuilder

[OnionTerror]

What you have just posted shows the problem that the older workers face . Which is an ingrained , unproved, preconcived prejudice .

I know loads of mature workers who do know how a computer works and I would bet that the majority who do not given the chance to learn ( which does not take that long ) would learn and prove that they are capable of learning. However it is just eaiser to write them off and blame them by saying that they refuse or don't want to know.

I come from an IT background...and I have taught courses both in the voluntary sector and within the workplace...So I do have a vague knowledge of this..

[miko]

I come from an IT background...and I have taught courses both in the voluntary sector and within the workplace...So I do have a vague knowledge of this..

As you said most jobs use computers . But how much knowledge does the average person need for the average job that uses a computer Im not talking about being an IT expert but being computer literate .

The average office job that uses a computer which did not 20 years ago could be taught without to much effort , and how much are computers used because they are there so we find things to do with them which add no value i.e. reams and reams of graphs and charts just to show a simple message.

I was computer illiterate a few years ago and went on a course to learn the microsoft package . Good course easy to learn but most of it has never been needed , however people without this simple knowledge are barred form many jobs.

[OnionTerror]

As you said most jobs use computers . But how much knowledge does the average person need for the average job that uses a computer Im not talking about being an IT expert but being computer literate .

The average office job that uses a computer which did not 20 years ago could be taught without to much effort , and how much are computers used because they are there so we find things to do with them which add no value i.e. reams and reams of graphs and charts just to show a simple message.

I was computer illiterate a few years ago and went on a course to learn the microsoft package . Good course easy to learn but most of it has never been needed , however people without this simple knowledge are barred form many jobs.

I taught web authoring / CMS type courses, and I'm sad to say that the ones that did struggle the most were the mature workers... It was basically "If you could use Word, you can use these tools"..I co wrote one course with another trainer to make sure it wasn't overly technical..middle management especially needed help....they often palmed the work off to their secretaries, or I ended up doing it (this was a defence company, and these ppl weren't exactly stupid)... Yes they often did try, but many were completely disinterested...A lot of people are comfortable just knowing how Outlook and Internet Explorer work...

Edited April 4, 2011 by Dave Beans

[South Lorne]

As you said most jobs use computers . But how much knowledge does the average person need for the average job that uses a computer Im not talking about being an IT expert but being computer literate .

The average office job that uses a computer which did not 20 years ago could be taught without to much effort , and how much are computers used because they are there so we find things to do with them which add no value i.e. reams and reams of graphs and charts just to show a simple message.

I was computer illiterate a few years ago and went on a course to learn the microsoft package . Good course easy to learn but most of it has never been needed , however people without this simple knowledge are barred form many jobs.

...computer literacy is as basic as reading and writing were a few years ago....it's work, people and attitude skills which are needed plus the ability to learn and relearn on the run as technology and ideas change so fast and accept change is not only for ever but is accelerating ....bit like the universe....

Edited April 4, 2011 by South Lorne

[aa3]

An extended family member of mine is 53, worked for a cell phone company in technical help for probably 20 years. Unfortunately the downsizings eventually hit him about 7 months ago. He has tried to find a new job, but his chances seem remote.

In a world of surplus labour, a company would be wise to hire a young and smart and eager employee. Especially immigrants for whom £10 an hour with no benefits is big money.

[porca misèria]

If you are a graduate under 54 you can always emigrate to New Zealand - but that requires some get up and go.

Um, NZ has somewhat more onerous entry requirements than just a degree.

(My brother had some serious hoops to jump through to get out there for more than six months, and even when he got there it was many months before he got permission to work there. Under-30s have it easier).

[winkie]

All this talk of non jobs.

To me a job is a job if it has two things.

Someone willing to pay for my time and some task involved that takes up the time they are paying for.

Work without pay is not a job. Pay for doing no work is also not a job. The first is slavery and the second is a handout.

Whether or not some folk think the work is required or the pay too much does not change anything. Even if the sole purpose of the exercise is to just to keep me busy and provide me with a minimum income it's still a job to me and a legitimate one at that.

It seems preferable to just handing out dole cash for free. For a start, if you have to work anyway there is at least some incentive to find decent paying work and those who claim but are actually working would be unable to do both jobs at the same time.

OK, then why are there so many people/organisations now asking for people to do voluntary work....very good worthwhile work that many others get well paid doing similar work.....why should/do some get paid but others, if they choose to 'just keep busy' are NOT paid a minimum income, they are expected to do it for free.

[Saver]

I'm probably generalising, but aren't immigrants largely performing those jobs that UK nationals don't want to do? and I'm sure many of those in their 50's who are put "on the scrapheap" are the middle managers of this world?

no - my research group has more immigrants than brits. Of course it would not be world class if that was not the case - but there's no question every one of those jobs could easily be filled with a local (more than enough british people are trained up for research)

[Venger]

oh there are, saw a nice 60 year old, had a nice chat, shelving at sainsburys yesterday

it's just that if the said 50-somethings NEED a £37k+ salary to maintain their former non-job standard of living, then they're royally f00ked

Money and employment opportunities for people made redundant in their 50s people aside, the woman on last night's Panorama seemed more broken because of loss of job status. Had been a teacher, then had a Labour sounding job as Teacher Champion on The Excellence Oversight Reviewing Committee. When funding for that department was cut she was made redundant. A quivering wreck and crying herself to sleep because person she was no longer in the respected position she defined herself as a person in society with.

In my experience seeing house prices shoot upwards year on year under Labour's years in office, taking knocks from others for renting, makes you a little less shallow to how you define yourself as a person, over status of job and possessions. A lot tougher.

The tall man was genuinely worried about money and had concerns about losing the house. Admitted crying and showed some signs of depression. He was coming to terms with loss of status of his old job having agreed to go work in a picture framing factory. His wife, working for the council, did not sound particularly supportive when she said "he's not the person she married." Big looking house with a garden. All the gains of HPI and equity during the boom years. Couldn't they look to downsize? Has all their money gone? He had begun drawing on a pension it said.

Panorama said there will be many more people in this 50+ position made redundant with public sector cuts. They have to adapt if they need maintain a certain level of income to keep them in the lifestyle they have been used to. Well done to the ones who do. Others may have to selling their homes at lower market prices to downsize. Adjusting to changed market conditions. Just like people who didn't buy pre credit boom and refused to buy during the credit boom have had to adapt at seeing house prices become ever more ridiculously expensive. I see it as another HPC trigger and this age group benefited so much from house price inflation.

[Si1]

Money and employment opportunities for people made redundant in their 50s people aside, the woman on last night's Panorama seemed more broken because of loss of job status. Had been a teacher, then had a Labour sounding job as Teacher Champion on The Excellence Oversight Reviewing Committee. When funding for that department was cut she was made redundant. A quivering wreck and crying herself to sleep because person she was no longer in the respected position she defined herself as a person in society with.

In my experience seeing house prices shoot upwards year on year under Labour's years in office, taking knocks from others for renting, makes you a little less shallow to how you define yourself as a person, over status of job and possessions. A lot tougher.

the superficiality of the boom years grates me - I have seen productive reasonable people have their confidence destroyed in the mid 2000s by b*llsh*t tricksters with funny job titles, great public sector salaries, and an overbearing sense of superiority. This woman sounds like that kind of person. (edit - this happened in the private sector too - anything to do with property or consumer finance)

Now the tables are turning I feel little pitty, just because of the sh*t I (and others like me) took, and are still taking to some degree, in the first place,, and I hope I am stronger and define myself, as you say, in more grounded terms

Edited April 5, 2011 by Si1

[Si1]

But the skills needed to keep someone in employment untill their late 60's would have been very different when the 60 year old left full time education a good investment back then in many cases is useless now.

i am not so sure - I think the labour years de-skilled the population from hard quantitative useful skills to emphasise wishy washy middle management twaddle

[Si1]

Yes, that'll sort it. Everyone will be self employed.

pre-corporatist America, the golden age of the early 20th century, was dominated by SMEs, not corporatism like it is now, and saw much stronger economic growththan later years

Edited April 5, 2011 by Si1

[tahoma]

Money and employment opportunities for people made redundant in their 50s people aside, the woman on last night's Panorama seemed more broken because of loss of job status. Had been a teacher, then had a Labour sounding job as Teacher Champion on The Excellence Oversight Reviewing Committee. When funding for that department was cut she was made redundant. A quivering wreck and crying herself to sleep because person she was no longer in the respected position she defined herself as a person in society with.

She was pitiful, and the poster child of the Labour years of public sector largesse, particularly to the benefit of thin-skinned middle aged women. Thinks the sky has fallen in because her clipboard has been taken off her - just try explaining to her that her lofty position should never have existed in the first place.

She still has a trade, and was working as a supply teacher. Many are in a far worse position, but the entitlement will be hard to shake off.

[ken_ichikawa]

pre-sorporatist America, the golden age of the early 20th century, was dominated by SMEs, not corporatism like it is now, and saw spectacular economic growth

True but the business failure rate is incredible. Added to the problem that everything is absolutely and totally saturated or uncompetable then its somewhat grimmer than you think!

All the low barriers to entry stuff is already being done, an oft cited example here is window cleaning, except that this stuff is already filled to the brim with window cleaners. There are several on this street already. Adding a few more will just spread the already thin pie even thinner until itis unviable for somebody. Not to mention things which are low barrier to entry people can do themselves.

Heh I applied for a job at a fish and chips yesterday. I was asked if I had an NVQ2 in something or other.

[aa3]

Its a good point, we sometimes underestimate how much people get their sense of self worth and place in society based on their job title and or the size of their house.

We are like outsiders here, who have to study the behaviour of the herd in order to understand how their minds work.

For example I choose houses based on utilitarian or aesthetic lines. It doesn't even cross my mind that having a certain stone work might make my friends and family impressed with how successful I was. Or that I'd compete against them.

Edited April 5, 2011 by aa3

[Nickolarge]

OK, then why are there so many people/organisations now asking for people to do voluntary work....very good worthwhile work that many others get well paid doing similar work.....why should/do some get paid but others, if they choose to 'just keep busy' are NOT paid a minimum income, they are expected to do it for free.

If someone expects me to do something for free they will live on in unfulfilled expectation.

[Si1]

She was pitiful, and the poster child of the Labour years of public sector largesse, particularly to the benefit of thin-skinned middle aged women.

nice description - my experience of a NHS middle manager a few years ago was similar - she recieved a legitimate driving ticket, 6 points or so, for knocking a motorcyclist over, something most of us could do on a bad day and you take responsibility, take the slap on the wrist, and move on

but she couldn't handle the fact that she had been judged to have done something wrong, almost had a breakdown over it, (the motorcyclist was fine by the way, needed new leathers)

[Oliver Sutton]

the superficiality of the boom years grates me - I have seen productive reasonable people have their confidence destroyed in the mid 2000s by b*llsh*t tricksters with funny job titles, great public sector salaries, and an overbearing sense of superiority. This woman sounds like that kind of person. (edit - this happened in the private sector too - anything to do with property or consumer finance)

Now the tables are turning I feel little pitty, just because of the sh*t I (and others like me) took, and are still taking to some degree, in the first place,, and I hope I am stronger and define myself, as you say, in more grounded terms

Nice post. Sums up my view as well.

[Si1]

Its a good point, we sometimes underestimate how much people get their sense of self worth and place in society based on their job title and or the size of their house.

We are like outsiders here, who have to study the behaviour of the herd in order to understand how their minds work.

For example I choose houses based on utilitarian or aesthetic lines. It doesn't even cross my mind that having a certain stone work might make my friends and family impressed with how successful I was. Or that I'd compete against them.

indeed, we use our higher brains, but it has been recognised that superficial labels are severly mis-applied by society:

http://www.economist...ory_id=18483423

I've got you labelled

Clothes may make the man, but it is the label that really counts

DESIGNERS of fancy apparel would like their customers to believe that wearing their creations lends an air of wealth, sophistication and high status. And it does—but not, perhaps, for the reason those designers might like to believe, namely their inherent creative genius. A new piece of research confirms what many, not least in the marketing departments of fashion houses, will long have suspected: that it is not the design itself that counts, but the label.

...

This study confirms a wider phenomenon. A work of art's value, for example, can change radically, depending on who is believed to have created it, even though the artwork itself is unchanged. And people will willingly buy counterfeit goods, knowing they are knock-offs, if they bear the right label. What is interesting is that the label is so persuasive. In the case of the peacock, the tail works precisely because it cannot be faked. An unhealthy bird's feathers will never sparkle. But humans often fail to see beyond the superficial. For humans, then, the status-assessment mechanism is going wrong.

Presumably what is happening is that a mechanism which evolved to assess biology cannot easily cope with artefacts. If the only thing you have to assess is the quality of a tail, evolution will tend to make you quite good at it. Artefacts, though, are so variable that mental shortcuts are likely to be involved. If everyone agrees something has high status, then it does. But that agreement often transfers the status from the thing to the label. Maybe a further million years or so of evolution will eliminate this failing. In the meantime, marketers can open another bottle of champagne.

[winkie]

Its a good point, we sometimes underestimate how much people get their sense of self worth and place in society based on their job title and or the size of their house.

Very true......job status and how far up the ladder of society often means more to people than their rate of pay...'because they think they are worth it'.

....best to try not to put people or work on a pedestal.

[tahoma]

True but the business failure rate is incredible. Added to the problem that everything is absolutely and totally saturated or uncompetable then its somewhat grimmer than you think.

.

That's capitalism. Plus, if you think every market is static and saturated then you don't really have the mind for business anyway.

I mean, what was the point of starting Facebook when there was already MySpace? Fools!