xamples mentioned here, one ageism stereotype is missing—that of ENERGY LEVEL. Many employers and their recruiters are concerned about the effect of age on a candidate’s ability to effectively meet the physical and psychological demands of the job and the work environment. Some jobs and places of employment are more challenging than others.
My suggestion to older job candidates is to include mention of athletic involvements. These can be entered under the heading of: “Personal Interests” on one’s resume. And if they actually have no athletic involvements—if they can, I highly suggest they engage in some. They will experience the benefits therein.
As an over 60 year old professional recruitment consultant, I proudly mention my activity and accomplishments in Track & Field competitions even to this day. A mention of “All American” standing will dispel any concerns that I would have any problems adjusting to a physically demanding job. And the mention of being a “competitive athlete” suggests what all employers want to hear—that you care about results.…
Women”. Is it coming soon? Because this portion simply makes the case for women being their own worst enemy in accepting lesser roles and therefore deserving lesser pay. And taking time off for family reasons and so lost their place in line for earning monetary rewards.
Where is the mention of those who did not lose their place in line, but are still in the line for fair pay? Or those who excelled in traditional and non-traditional job only to be overlooked and passed over come promotion time? And where is the mention of the Glass Ceiling all polished and still present? It’s not even implied much less mentioned as a contributing factor to the discrepancies between men and women in the work place, chief among them -- lesser pay, fewer opportunities, and stagnation due to detours and barriers positioned to block women from keeping pace with their male counterparts, peers and contemporaries.
I particularly missed the mention of Walmart, the largest employer on the plant, now in front of the Supreme Court, being made to answer for thwarting, denying and holding women down in lower paying roles. Are those subjects worth mentioning? And Jason, your attempt to not be condescending, by stating, “Don’t give up hope women of the working world!” With an exclamation point no less, is a little condescending don’t you think—it’s a little like saying, “In spite of your short comings and lowered expectations based on your career decisions—“Don’t give up hope…”, because there is at least that--hope that some of you will prevail.
Do you not realize that the emergent majority of new entrants into the working world happen to be women? That their shear numbers now in business, education, the arts, entertainment and sports, to mention a few places of visibility—is magnified by their performance. And your take that men are better negotiators than women is a stretch. When is the last time you browbeat a women—a fellow professional—peer, subordinate or superior into their supposed place? In fact, when was the last time you browbeat your wife, your mother, your sister, and don’t even mention your daughter (if you relate to any of these formidable females) into their supposed place?