|
|
Post by oldtimer on Aug 7, 2003 15:29:36 GMT -5
I can understand why employers do not want older workers with the high cost of health insurance, but everyone gets old. Once you hit 50, it is hard to get a job with insurance and that was before the economy went south and health care cost took another soar.
Like those Pillotex people that lost their jobs. Many had chronic illnesses that require medication forever and now they have no insurance. It is one big mess when a pound of pills cost thousands of dollars and not only can you not afford it, it keeps you from getting a job in the first place.
It is all screwed up. I guess a person needs to get used to it, because it is not going to change anytime soon. It sure will not change while the treasonous scum sucking the treasury dry at the hands of the pill companies and the military-industrial complex have their way. And the oil companies too, of course.
|
|
|
|
Post by DamthatKitty on Aug 29, 2003 14:09:12 GMT -5
Personally, I think paying the health insurance for older people would prove more productive for a company. Generally, someone over 50 is going to be more reliable than someone 30 and younger. Once they hire and train a few people who quit their jobs ... they've already paid enough money to cover the insurance.
|
|
|
|
Post by Commonsense on Aug 29, 2003 15:34:30 GMT -5
There is no evidence that older people keep working at any given job longer than young people.
Companies are businesses, not charities. It is perfectly understandable that they don't want to hire people who have pre-existing medical conditions, and who are likely to develop more conditions as time goes on. To do so would cost them a lot of money, and their goal is to maximize profits.
Having said that, it would make more sense to hire older, more experienced people who can cope with just about anything life throws at them. If it weren't for the fact that they are at the end of their lives and are likely to become ill, I'm sure more companies would do that.
|
|
|
|
Post by DamThatKitty on Aug 31, 2003 0:03:29 GMT -5
You have a point there - CommonSense. Just because someone is older doesn't mean they are going to be more reliable. However, just because they are over 50 doesn't mean they have pre-existing medical conditions and are at the "end of the their life".
|
|
|
|
Post by Commonsense on Aug 31, 2003 7:13:36 GMT -5
By the age of 50, most people have some kind of pre-existing condition. And at 50 one is closer to the end than to the beginning.
|
|
|
|
Post by surfrgirl338 on Aug 31, 2003 10:43:30 GMT -5
Yes commonsense, you are right *we* are closer to the end than the beginning  however 1-we are no longer having children (parental leave with pay)  2-we no longer have to call in because - We can't get a baby sitter,  3- one of the kids is sick,  4-too much to drink last night and has a hangover  5-more experience, no training needed  6-more reliable  7-will more often come to work even if they feel bad  8-more loyal to their company ;D 9-less likely to be searching for a *better paying job* since they have climbed the *career* ladder and are more content on the lower rungs. I speak from experience. As to pre-existing conditions I know MANY who are sixty and over, that put young *whippersnappers* to shame in the health, vim and vigor department. They have more get up and go than many twenty somethings. So while *we* are closer to the end than the beginning I think those that are (more or less) at the beginning should learn some respect for their elders, learn to appreciate them instaed of denigrating them and learn something from them. This society by far dis honors, and abuses their elders so very badly. It is shameful  |
|
|
|
Post by Commonsense on Aug 31, 2003 11:36:00 GMT -5
You obviously feel very strongly about this subject. In point of fact, however, employers are unlikely to start hiring older people for any job which includes health insurance and life insurance. The risks - statistically, not emotionally - are just too great from a profit/loss standpoint.
On the other hand, part-time jobs at places like McDonald's and Wal-Mart, etc., are out there waiting for the older worker. As long as an employer doesn't have to pay for health care or life insurance, he's more than willing to give older workers a chance.
Other employers are not legally allowed to discriminate on the basis of age, so if you have better credentials than other applicants and if you're willing to stand up for your rights, you should still be able to get a job out there - assuming you are qualified.
You can go on moaning about how the older generation should be respected, etc. You might be right, but it hasn't happened yet on this planet and I wouldn't advise holding your breath until it does.
|
|
|
|
Post by surfrgirl338 on Aug 31, 2003 16:13:04 GMT -5
 I did not realize I was *moaning* about anything, and yes, you are right I would not hold my breath (since you seem to think I have so little of that left) waiting for this generation to show respect for any of their elders, since they have so little for them selves. I happen to be a licensed professional and I can go to work tomorrow if I so choose, which I am thinking about at this time, (it is boring being retired) as I said I have too much energy to just sit around. I think if attitudes like yours stopped and, employers tried to see the good that could come of hiring the *older* worker.....(I am not talking 80 and up) but older like 65. 70 that are still capable and able to work there would be benifits for all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Commonsense on Aug 31, 2003 19:30:28 GMT -5
Sorry, surfer. I didn't mean to be rude. I often come here from other, vicious message boards, where an accusation of "moaning" would be an almost friendly thing to say. I have to get used to this kinder, gentler message board. . .
Also, upon reflection I agree with you that there would be many benefits to employers and their customers from hiring older workers. I'm pretty sick of the young punks who man the cash registers and customer service desks. They can't even be bothered to make eye contact most of the time, because they're too busy talking to their coworkers about what happened last night. I doubt older workers would do that.
However, employers these days don't seem to care about the quality of their products or services, let alone the quality of customer service they provide. They only care about the bottom line. As long as this is true, their hiring decisions will be based on profit and loss.
|
|
|
|
Post by surfrgirl338 on Sept 1, 2003 10:52:50 GMT -5
I know what you mean about *the other boards*. But as this debate can testify, we have come to a mutual agreement with out all the name calling and bashing. I totally agree with your last post. That IS the way it is. Sorry to say.
|
|
however 
I did not realize I was *moaning* about anything, and yes, you are right I would not hold my breath (since you seem to think I have so little of that left) waiting for this generation to show respect for any of their elders, since they have so little for them selves.