Why people should (and shouldn't) hire older software developers

Seven years ago, I wrote this post on my 40th birthday. Today, as I turn 47 in a few days, here are some more thoughts.

On my website, I described myself as "an aging software developer". Some people have told me that this could reflect negatively on me. They're mistaken, but I forgive them - they aren't from the tech sector and don't know better. You see, when I say the word "aging", this is not me being humble. This is me flexing the fuck out.

Just showin' off.

But please, hear me out. I swear, I'm not going to pull out lazy clichés like "older programmers are more experienced, more mature, have more gravitas, etc" not just because they're lazy clichés, but also because they're not true. And if I have to explain why they're not true, perhaps this is not a conversation you're ready for.

And because I enjoy being contrary even against myself, I will follow that up by explaining why older devs aren't necessarily the best choice. In the same spirit, I will avoid the stereotypes of being inflexible, slow and outdated. Again, those are lazy clichés and we should rise above them.

Why older devs are nothing to sniff at

You see, software technology is an industry which demands constant reinvention. As a result, past a certain number of years in the business, older devs tend to go "fuck this constant re-learning. I'm gonna go drive a cab or something".

In short, it's an industry where you find few old folks. And you know what they say about being wary of old men in a trade where men die young. Well, programmers aren't dying per se, but they're certainly quitting once they hit a certain age, because, if one was just doing it for the money to begin with, at that point it's just not rewarding anymore.

And because software technology is an industry which demands constant reinvention, it almost goes without saying that anyone who's had to stick around for that long, has gone through quite a bit of that. Me personally, I went from desktop support to web portals, to commercial websites, to web and mobile applications, to having to shoulder the duties of an entire infocomm department all by my lonesome. Sure, one could say people who have survived that long in the industry are merely lucky, but very few people are that lucky.

Adaptability is key.

So, if you needed someone highly adaptable that could adapt to the constant change that defines this industry, who would you choose?

An enthusiastic youth with lots of potential to learn and grow and evolve and theoretically should be able to adapt? Or an older programmer who's actually evolved over and over through the years and survived to tell the tale?

The conventional wisdom, of course, is to go for the proven product rather than the one that has potential -in theory. Yes, some of us older folks can be rigid and stuck in our ways, but the nature of this industry weeds such people out fairly quickly. You're left with the people who are adaptable enough to survive this industry (because we have!), and in this day and age, that's no small thing.

Again, no argument would be complete without presenting the other side. And there are plenty of compelling reasons why the modern employer might not want an older developer.

Why you should avoid older devs

Older software developers, unless they totally mismanaged their wealth, tend to have money. The industry pays well, and even a mediocre dev like myself might be earning more than Middle Management at an SME. As such, you're not going to get one for cheap. We more than likely don't need the peanuts you're reserving for code monkeys.

Peanuts, anyone?

Manipulation. No matter how noble a person an employer thinks they are, this is an organization and as such, there's always something of that sort going on, to one degree or another. Against manipulation, many older devs have developed, if not outright immunity, at least a discomforting degree of resistance to it.

Past a certain age, most older devs already have whatever we ever wanted out of life. We're there. We're comfortable. We're not hungry and desperate as the younger ones probably are. We're not going to kill ourselves for "exposure". Or submit to opportunistic lowballing (c'mon, we all know it happens) just to add to our resume. And that is an absolute negative because cold as it may sound, it makes us less open to manipulation.

Older devs do come with experience, and part of that experience is security. We're generally zen about the fact that we'll probably die and be forgotten. We've come to terms with the realization that if we were really destined to do anything truly exceptional, statistically we would have done it decades ago. Most of us are too tired, or probably done too much, to feel that we need to prove a damn thing. And if you're the sort of employer who likes to make your staff jump through flaming hoops to prove themselves, again, that kind of security and self-assuredness makes us untenable as employees.

All in all, older developers aren't cheap, and we're not desperate or hungry enough to run through walls at your command. And I can't in good conscience paint that as a positive for employers.

In a nutshell

For the right kind of employer, older software developers are an exceptional resource.

Also, consider this - with the news that Artificial Intelligence is going to make programmers obsolete, whether it's true or not, this is going to impact the number of young developers available on the market. Because if younger programmers think that this career path is no longer viable, they're just going to leave, and who could blame them?

Us older programmers? We're dug in, and we have little to lose. Chew on that!

Old but gold,
T___T