next »

[anthroid]

The FBI hires applicants with accounting degrees to be law enforcement officers.  They are not being hired to be "run of the mill" accountants.  (Not to diss run of the mill accountants. Some of my best friends....)

OK, so what is your point?  Obviously I knew that; they recruited me and wined me and dined me because they thought I was younger than I really was.  So anyone over 37 is unqualified for law enforcement?  I bet you I could outperform the majority of the currently 37 year old FBI accountants in whatever kind of physical fitness test you could design.  And I am not senile, so ...?  What is the justification? 

Why are you asking us?  We aren't justifying this practice.  Ask them.  We know you are brilliant in every single way, you are an amazing physical specimen, and you are superior to every single one of us.  I'll bet if you go ask the FBI and point out all of your obvious attributes, they'll hire you in a flash, and then you can leave us alone.

[zharkov]

The FBI hires applicants with accounting degrees to be law enforcement officers.  They are not being hired to be "run of the mill" accountants.  (Not to diss run of the mill accountants. Some of my best friends....)

OK, so what is your point?  Obviously I knew that; they recruited me and wined me and dined me because they thought I was younger than I really was.  So anyone over 37 is unqualified for law enforcement?  I bet you I could outperform the majority of the currently 37 year old FBI accountants in whatever kind of physical fitness test you could design.  And I am not senile, so ...?  What is the justification? 

Age requirements are to be expected in law enforcement.  For example, the Mass State Police only accepts applications from those 21 to 35.  And they have a mandatory retire age of, I believe, 50 years old. 

I met a guy at a conference a few years back who worked in law enforcement in a federal agency investigating white collar crime.  Despite the assignment, he was still a buff, gun toting dude.

[georgia_guy]

The FBI hires applicants with accounting degrees to be law enforcement officers.  They are not being hired to be "run of the mill" accountants.  (Not to diss run of the mill accountants. Some of my best friends....)

OK, so what is your point?  Obviously I knew that; they recruited me and wined me and dined me because they thought I was younger than I really was.  So anyone over 37 is unqualified for law enforcement?  I bet you I could outperform the majority of the currently 37 year old FBI accountants in whatever kind of physical fitness test you could design.  And I am not senile, so ...?  What is the justification? 

Age requirements are to be expected in law enforcement.  For example, the Mass State Police only accepts applications from those 21 to 35.  And they have a mandatory retire age of, I believe, 50 years old. 

I met a guy at a conference a few years back who worked in law enforcement in a federal agency investigating white collar crime.  Despite the assignment, he was still a buff, gun toting dude.

The ADEA was amended in 1996 to allow age limits for law enforcement and firefighters. It is a relatively narrow exemption.

[anxiousone]

Thanks, Case.

The age issue is a concern for some of us, and we get conflicting advice on the "dates on the CV" issue.

Imagine this hypothetical situation: on one side of the room are 28-year old applicants, who are able to relocate, have no family obligations, and are able to stay late at the office every day if necessary.

On the other side of the room are 48-year old applicants, who may have geographical restrictions, spouses and mortgages, and may want to limit their work hours.

Age-wise, I should go and stand with the second group.  But on all the other attributes, I should stand with the first group.  On some attributes, I don't want to be perceived as being a member of the second group.

Vardahilwen

Has anyone considered the fact that it is illegal to discriminate against an applicant because of their age? As an older, disabled person who has lost years to chronic illness, I fully understand why an older applicant might not wish to disclose when they received their BA or MA. Search committees often get away with employment practices that are often unfair or illegal. This is not necessarily the result of conscious, blatant bigotry, but rather the elitist nature of the search process. An Ivy-league ABD, it seems, has much more to offer than a minority candidate. It seems that the dedication to diversity that many universities profess is little more than a fraud.

[angel]

 An Ivy-league ABD, it seems, has much more to offer than a minority candidate. 

Not to just throw this out there like it's self-evident or anything. Not to presume that the "minority candidate" isn't Ivy-league or anything.

[vardahilwen]

I think it's important to consider that studies of stigmatized groups have shown that "passing" is a common human behavior.  In other words, if you possess a particular trait that might stigmatize you with a particular group, you may feel compelled to hide that trait in order to "pass" as "normal."  It gives you a modicum of control and shifts the power balance.

People with illnesses don't always reveal their conditions publicly.  People with ethnic-sounding names sometimes change them to something that sounds more "American."  When in Rome, do what the Romans do. 

Age is stigmatized in our culture.  Youth is venerated, and older people are dismissed as being less valuable as they age.  Look at all the ads for hair color, anti-wrinkle cream, and the like - more evidence of people trying to "pass."

I'm glad that many of our fellow forumites don't practice this kind of discrimination.  But it's out there, and I think it's human nature for us older folks to try to manage the situation in our favor (as much as possible).  This isn't bad or wrong. 

Yes, there are crusaders in this world who don't care about "passing" and who will shout from the rooftops, "look at me, I'm different!"  But different doesn't always secure you a place in society, especially when competing for scarce resources. 

Vardahilwen

[thergum]

Sooo..... if it is wrong to not put down graduation dates in an attempt to not let the SC know how old you are, what about my situation?

I look 15 years younger than I am, people still think I am an undergrad when they first meet me.  I went straight through - BS to PhD and since no one puts down the year that they graduate from high school, there is nothing to indicate that I didn't start college until I was 35.  At what point do I need to inform the SC that I am actually over 45? 

[case_insensitive]

Sooo..... if it is wrong to not put down graduation dates in an attempt to not let the SC know how old you are, what about my situation?

I look 15 years younger than I am, people still think I am an undergrad when they first meet me.  I went straight through - BS to PhD and since no one puts down the year that they graduate from high school, there is nothing to indicate that I didn't start college until I was 35.  At what point do I need to inform the SC that I am actually over 45? 

Your age is irrelevant. Your degrees are not.

[thergum]

Sooo..... if it is wrong to not put down graduation dates in an attempt to not let the SC know how old you are, what about my situation?

I look 15 years younger than I am, people still think I am an undergrad when they first meet me.  I went straight through - BS to PhD and since no one puts down the year that they graduate from high school, there is nothing to indicate that I didn't start college until I was 35.  At what point do I need to inform the SC that I am actually over 45? 

Your age is irrelevant. Your degrees are not.

Not according to the first page of this thread:

Quote from: oldassocprof on June 20, 2007, 01:03:22 PM
Sorry, I've had good luck not listing the dates of my BA (1978) - age 33 and MA (1982) - age 37.  I DO list my PhD date (1996) - age 51.  The purpose of this is precisely to disguise my age and get me an interview, which it has a number of times. 


I'm glad it's worked for you. However, I feel that a candidate who is trying to hide things is... trying to hide things.  Makes me much less interested.  Though the PhD year is most relevant, the years of degrees along with the dates of employment give an idea of the applicant's working and intellectual development.  Big holes or unknowns are generally a red flag (applicants who know they have red flags, can, of course, combat that with more pertinent info).

[spork]

I've been working in my current job for the last year.  During that time period, I've been asked for a copy of my c.v. a half dozen times -- by people ranging from my department chair, department secretary, secretary to my dean, to various other people.  Because of these repetitive requests, I inserted an image of C. Montgomery Burns at the top of my c.v.

[rodentmind]

I have trouble with the teaching section of my c.v. I think at this point I've divided that section by school and then into instructor v. TA sections.

[case_insensitive]

Sooo..... if it is wrong to not put down graduation dates in an attempt to not let the SC know how old you are, what about my situation?

I look 15 years younger than I am, people still think I am an undergrad when they first meet me.  I went straight through - BS to PhD and since no one puts down the year that they graduate from high school, there is nothing to indicate that I didn't start college until I was 35.  At what point do I need to inform the SC that I am actually over 45? 

Your age is irrelevant. Your degrees are not.

Not according to the first page of this thread:

Quote from: oldassocprof on June 20, 2007, 01:03:22 PM
Sorry, I've had good luck not listing the dates of my BA (1978) - age 33 and MA (1982) - age 37.  I DO list my PhD date (1996) - age 51.  The purpose of this is precisely to disguise my age and get me an interview, which it has a number of times. 


I'm glad it's worked for you. However, I feel that a candidate who is trying to hide things is... trying to hide things.  Makes me much less interested.  Though the PhD year is most relevant, the years of degrees along with the dates of employment give an idea of the applicant's working and intellectual development.  Big holes or unknowns are generally a red flag (applicants who know they have red flags, can, of course, combat that with more pertinent info).

Your age is irrelevant. Your degrees are not.

You said,"At what point do I need to inform the SC that I am actually over 45?"
Never.

[rodentmind]

Stupid c.v. trick: listing job talks on the c.v. (under a category something like "Invited Lectures").

[iomhaigh]

Field specific: listing class scenework as productions.

[castafiore]

I've been working in my current job for the last year.  During that time period, I've been asked for a copy of my c.v. a half dozen times -- by people ranging from my department chair, department secretary, secretary to my dean, to various other people.  Because of these repetitive requests, I inserted an image of C. Montgomery Burns at the top of my c.v.

That's awesome!