The problem isn't that young employees have qualities that make them more appealing. That's just the reality of the situation.
The problem is when a candidate who has better qualities gets passed over for a younger candidate based on prejudices based on the previous generalization.
Say you want a skilled programmer who is going to work for a certain wage and put in an amount of overtime, and you pitch it to a fresh college grad, and a 35 year old who just got downsized out of a job; when the interview concludes, it's obvious that they are both willing to take the wage you're offering, and the 35 year old is far more knowledgeable.
If you take the kid because you think the older guy might not be as willing as he claims to put in overtime, or because you think he might be too set in his ways, or because he might be too old to match the cultural fit... That's a problem.
People can hire young people because they're cheap. Especially startups, who maybe can't afford to pay for experience. Likewise, someone with a mortgage and kids might be less willing to look for a job with a risky business. So the average age might drop in those kinds of businesses and that's OK.
The problem is when you see the effect and invent the cause. "More young people are in successful startups, that means avoid old people if you want to be successful".
Instead it could be just "frugal startups are more likely to succeed, so don't spend too much on your labour" in which case given two candidates willing to take the same wage, the one with the better skills should win, regardless of age.
The problem is when a candidate who has better qualities gets passed over for a younger candidate based on prejudices based on the previous generalization.
Say you want a skilled programmer who is going to work for a certain wage and put in an amount of overtime, and you pitch it to a fresh college grad, and a 35 year old who just got downsized out of a job; when the interview concludes, it's obvious that they are both willing to take the wage you're offering, and the 35 year old is far more knowledgeable.
If you take the kid because you think the older guy might not be as willing as he claims to put in overtime, or because you think he might be too set in his ways, or because he might be too old to match the cultural fit... That's a problem.
People can hire young people because they're cheap. Especially startups, who maybe can't afford to pay for experience. Likewise, someone with a mortgage and kids might be less willing to look for a job with a risky business. So the average age might drop in those kinds of businesses and that's OK.
The problem is when you see the effect and invent the cause. "More young people are in successful startups, that means avoid old people if you want to be successful".
Instead it could be just "frugal startups are more likely to succeed, so don't spend too much on your labour" in which case given two candidates willing to take the same wage, the one with the better skills should win, regardless of age.