Is this true or not?

Many companies like to hire young people because they can pay them less and they believe that young people will put up with more shit.

Help us keep this site organized and clean. Thanks!
[ Report Post ]
Comments ( 27 ) Sort: best | oldest
  • Essentially true for both statements; although its not just about pay. It's about benefits. Vacation time and health cost go up with time in service and years. I had 6 weeks paid vacation when I was downsized. The person they hired to replace me starts with 1 week this year (after 6 months), then 2 weeks for the next 5 years. I've developed some modest health issues (most people start doing that after about age 40) which cost the company more health benefits as well.

    So by eliminating the older workers and replacing them with younger they:
    1)save on payroll
    2)get 2-4 weeks more productive time per year
    3)reduce health insurance cost
    4)get more compliant workers who won't question or challenge things.

    Now you may think that its age discrimination. It is; its just legal the way they do it (eliminate your position; then create a new one after you are gone).

    I've talked with a lot of the younger generation that tell me that with the exception of managers that there's not a single person over age 40 at their company (and these are companies that have been around for 50-100+ years). These same people then get upset when I then ask them why they think they will have job security past age 40 at the company; where did all the previous older employees go?

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • Where do they all go? Realistically hardly nobody can retire at 55. They have to be doing something for a living.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
        -
      • Look at who's working in McDonald's; which was once just for the young (a good place to start - and it was). Look at Lowes, Home Depot, Wallmart and many other places.

        A key is that most of the employees at these locations are part time (less than 32 hours per week) so that the companies do not have to provide health insurance and other benefits (and if they do you the "employee pay" portion of health insurance totally eats your paycheck.

        Look at Lyft/Uber, etc. The drivers are either young, or older. I've done this myself - and I can tell you while the cash flow is fair, the actual formal profit from Lyft/Uber, etc. is very low (I think I made about $3/hr last year after expenses for Lyft/Uber).

        Note that I personally believe that Lyft/Uber should be sued for false advertising: Make $500 - $1000 per week. Only that's just "gross revenue" and not real earnings.

        If a company signs a contract to build a building for $1 Million (or whatever); no one expects that the company makes $1 Million. No one expects that Lowe's or McDonald's makes what you pay. A good business may make 5-10% of that in profit. Lyft/Uber is actually much the same if you properly track your expenses.

        Trust me that the answer to where these people go in the USA is very revealing about our current American culture and lifestyle.

        Last year I started 2 different companies to see how that worked. I actually made $ on both of them (after all expenses and taxes). But, neither appear to have major profit potential. This year I'm starting another one that has a realistic potential of $100,000+ per year of profit after all expenses. It will likely take a few years to get there... but, very realistic. That's where the successful older people go... But, they likely will fail at several business attempts before they figure it out and become successful.

        Have a great day,

        Comment Hidden ( show )
  • If people rose up in droves against unfair work treatment, instead of accepting the shit job (because thats just the way the system is), maybe big corporations would have to treat their employees better.

    The system is rigged so that it’s every man for himself. If I pass on an opportunity because the work terms and conditions are unfair and unjust, the company wont loose sleep over it because someone else more eager and desperate will snatch up that job.

    Corporations prey on the desperation of an exploitable worker.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • They'll put up with more is the number one reason, I think... they haven't been jaded yet and are more naive about their rights.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • Probably. It often seems like “the most qualified candidate” is code for the most user friendly.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Young people can be molded better. They have less established ways about them. And they usually make less because they know less.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • That's kind of been the thing for 50+ years. Some places are more for young people and felons to work at. It's a first job to learn how to work. Not too many 40 year olds will be applying there unless something has gone wrong in their life.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • 100%. Otherwise there’d be no point, they’d just hire older more experienced people.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Depends on the company but really strange how you lump 30 into old age lol. 30 is young and 30 year olds are no different than 25 which is also young. You don't turn 30 and move slow or become old.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • Mark Zuckerberg said something similar when he was in his early 20’s.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
  • It depends on the skill needed for the job. I consider myself self-employed, I fix cars and various handyman jobs I can find. If I go to autozone it's just kids working there, they don't know anything about cars but since all they have to do is look a number up in a computer their job is really just to go pull a box off a shelf and hope it's the right one. If I go to the machine shop to get something fabricated or welded, the one guy working there is over 50 and the other guy is up in his 80s. Neither one of them would ever consider taking an apprentice because they don't want to lose buisiness to somebody who can do the job faster.

    That's why most old trades people don't want to train anyone new. They figure you can do it faster and easier because you're young and the only thing they have on you is knowledge and experience. Machinist and tool and die trades are dying out because there aren't any new people entering the industry more than a lack of demand. I'm 31 and I'm really good at fixing antique amf bowling pin setters. I'd never teach anyone anything I know about electromechanical machinery.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • I wouldn’t tell anyone the tricks of the trade either. Not until I’m ready to officially retire at least, then I would probably teach my kid.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Yes to paying less and yes to them putting up with more.
    I was paid £1.50/hour and worked 16 hour shifts at my first job. I was 16 and thought I'd hit the jackpot.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • Minimum is just that, MINIMUM! They shouldn’t pay anyone less than that.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Partially true. But only for some. It is more likely they want the young person because they can train them the way they want. Older people may have experience, but if you want to train and mold a person, get them young. And bonus, you don't have to pay them as much as an experienced person.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • I think you are right. And then they are often completely flabbergasted when the young person leaves for a better job in a year or so.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
  • They feel like there is always someone else that will do the job for less.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • True. Then they often complain that employees lack “company loyalty”.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
        -
      • When i was in North Dakota i went to work at United as a Mover. They had about 5 regular employees, and the rest they would need for the day they would get people from a temp agency. When i started i was pretty much the one with most experience. Every day these new temps would come in not having a damn clue what to do or how easy the job was not. Thats a hard damn job at times. So everyday they wanted me to train or attempt toteach them something. BUT they paying them the same they were paying me. The warehouse manager didnt know how to do things. I couldnt get out of there soon enough. It was windy as hell out there, the "safety" person didnt want to fix the door latches so when a big gust of wind come up 1 guy came about 8" from a door taking his head off.
        When people will do a job for less money they need to find out what shortcuts are being taken so the job gets done quicker, cheaper, or or less arguements from employees and why.
        Out there i worked for "AAction Movers". The road to the warehouse in Minot was about kike a battlefield. Rough, pot holes, and these guys would put peoples flat screen tv's flat face down on the deck in truck. Well they hit the road to warehouse and almost everyday they were fucking up peoples stuff. The owner didnt care, he was making his money.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
          -
        • I can’t stand when they pull the fast one of handing untrained people over to an employee to “train and get the job done” for the day. Then they don’t understand why the workload fell behind or things get fucked up. Hmmm.. a complete mystery there.

          Comment Hidden ( show )
  • In Britain you don’t get the full minimum wage until you are 25 so many restaurants and shops hire teenagers because they can pay them less

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • That is so wrong. I hope most teens don’t fall for it.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
        -
      • It's also factually accurate. As a Brit myself I can confirm this.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
          -
        • I meant that young people getting paid less than minimum wage is wrong. They are not sub human.

          Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Kinda,

    Comment Hidden ( show )
Add A Comment