Hathor: I suspect you're in for a rather interesting ride once you obtain your degree. At a very basic level, firms probably will look first at the probable level of productivity you can offer. Then, they will look at your maturity and - perhaps - give you some economic credit for that.
In my world, recent graduates who bring considerable years of life experience to their first job in architecture always are very interesting and very challenging. On the one hand, they often bring economic expectations to the table that are difficult to address compared to what's happening with other recent graduates. However, on the other hand, they also bring a maturity, stability, work ethic and general awareness of what's required to hold a job and make a contribution that always makes me want to look harder for a way to bring that person to the firm.
What I have found is that it's really hard to offer mature graduates a significant premium to start -- but, in my experience, they do tend to progress faster and earn raises quicker than their younger counterparts.
Specifically that even though EEOC has a clause "Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967," the "Age Discrimination Act of 1975" states that the condition employment must depend on factors outside of age.
It is true that NOT hiring someone due to age, or gender, or sexuality or many other factors, would be a hate crime. However I was not saying that I wouldn't hire someone based on age or any other factor, (especially since I have been victim of such an action). What I was trying to saying is that "cool clothes" and "youthfulness" cannot be the sole reason why someone should get hired, a mature attitude towards work, and experience should matter and that "older" architects shouldn't have to worry that they are not getting hired due to THEIR age.
"a mature attitude towards work, and experience should matter"
The specific instance where you said "cool clothes" and "youthfulness" means you're already making a biased judgment by segregating individuals into an either/or group.
Other than the actual ability to do a specific job with a specific expectation giving a specific result...
Experience and maturity are not quantifiable. Maturity severely lesser a quantifiable quality than experience.
If someone has 10 years experience working, is there any sort of record within those 10 years experience that proved you performed?
In those 10 years, did you do the bare minimum necessary to not get fired? Do you have figures, charts and spreadsheets that show your an asset with a positive growth track record?
Does maturity simply mean you make the right choices? How do you quantify making a right choice? If by right choice, you mean not being incarcerated or dead... then most of us have made 'mature' choices.
If by maturity that you mesh well with people of a similar peer group because of shared cultural, ethical and social values...
I agree with you completely. The "youthfulness" and " cool clothing" was being pulled from a previous post, and as I was using those terms only to try and say that someone should not been deemed competent or be more successful purely on those aesthetics. Again I think you are trying to find "hate" in my responses where none is intended.
Hathor - the other day I was commenting in another thread where it was being discussed that "young" Architect's aren't taken seriously. (I use young in quotes because what the industry considers young is different from what the public perception is.)
My point is, regardless of years experience or abilities, being 40-something carries weight where being 20-something does not. The old guy/gal will more than likely carry more respect from clients and co-workers. I don't think this is exclusive to Architecture either.
While in college I spoke to the president of a large A/E firm and he said that many of their 20-something designers were "rock stars" but major corporate clients did not want to see their multi-million dollar projects being handled by "kids." This is where I think you have a pure advantage ~ and why that firm president told me to find a smaller firm to start out at.
Is that fair? No in my opinion, but there's lots of agism in our society and it's not always bad for someone who is older.
I'll start this by saying that I work in a pretty establishment part of the industry (vast big-brand-name AE firm with a reputation of innovation and research). Principals here are, with a very few exceptions in their 40s, 55+. As a rule, they are acknowledged leaders with int'l reputations in different aspects of design, planning and engineering, with teaching appointments at leading schools and books and accolades to their names, and with phenomenal relationships.
We will often work with young firms in some role (for ideas/initial concepts) so there is definitely a role from them, but if I told them that we were partnering with a firm of 25 year olds for documentation, I'd get laughed out of my go-no-go meeting.. and then fired.
Well. These young firms probably just cant afford you. The Partners probably take home less money than a 40yo project architect at a commercial firm.
I think there is still plenty of jobs for 40 yo architects if you are willing to move around. But just not in these young firms. The more established young firms like BIG are happy to hire more experienced people though. But that is because they have real projects where as most young firms dont
Architecture cut-off age
Hathor: I suspect you're in for a rather interesting ride once you obtain your degree. At a very basic level, firms probably will look first at the probable level of productivity you can offer. Then, they will look at your maturity and - perhaps - give you some economic credit for that.
In my world, recent graduates who bring considerable years of life experience to their first job in architecture always are very interesting and very challenging. On the one hand, they often bring economic expectations to the table that are difficult to address compared to what's happening with other recent graduates. However, on the other hand, they also bring a maturity, stability, work ethic and general awareness of what's required to hold a job and make a contribution that always makes me want to look harder for a way to bring that person to the firm.
What I have found is that it's really hard to offer mature graduates a significant premium to start -- but, in my experience, they do tend to progress faster and earn raises quicker than their younger counterparts.
Specifically that even though EEOC has a clause "Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967," the "Age Discrimination Act of 1975" states that the condition employment must depend on factors outside of age.
what's your point UG?
It is true that NOT hiring someone due to age, or gender, or sexuality or many other factors, would be a hate crime. However I was not saying that I wouldn't hire someone based on age or any other factor, (especially since I have been victim of such an action). What I was trying to saying is that "cool clothes" and "youthfulness" cannot be the sole reason why someone should get hired, a mature attitude towards work, and experience should matter and that "older" architects shouldn't have to worry that they are not getting hired due to THEIR age.
"a mature attitude towards work, and experience should matter"
The specific instance where you said "cool clothes" and "youthfulness" means you're already making a biased judgment by segregating individuals into an either/or group.
Other than the actual ability to do a specific job with a specific expectation giving a specific result...
Experience and maturity are not quantifiable. Maturity severely lesser a quantifiable quality than experience.
If someone has 10 years experience working, is there any sort of record within those 10 years experience that proved you performed?
In those 10 years, did you do the bare minimum necessary to not get fired? Do you have figures, charts and spreadsheets that show your an asset with a positive growth track record?
Does maturity simply mean you make the right choices? How do you quantify making a right choice? If by right choice, you mean not being incarcerated or dead... then most of us have made 'mature' choices.
If by maturity that you mesh well with people of a similar peer group because of shared cultural, ethical and social values...
Then you've creeped back into Hate Town.
I agree with you completely. The "youthfulness" and " cool clothing" was being pulled from a previous post, and as I was using those terms only to try and say that someone should not been deemed competent or be more successful purely on those aesthetics. Again I think you are trying to find "hate" in my responses where none is intended.
Oscar Ribeiro de Almeida Niemeyer Soares Filho, is 103 years old and last I heard is still practicing architecture.
death
Hathor - the other day I was commenting in another thread where it was being discussed that "young" Architect's aren't taken seriously. (I use young in quotes because what the industry considers young is different from what the public perception is.)
My point is, regardless of years experience or abilities, being 40-something carries weight where being 20-something does not. The old guy/gal will more than likely carry more respect from clients and co-workers. I don't think this is exclusive to Architecture either.
While in college I spoke to the president of a large A/E firm and he said that many of their 20-something designers were "rock stars" but major corporate clients did not want to see their multi-million dollar projects being handled by "kids." This is where I think you have a pure advantage ~ and why that firm president told me to find a smaller firm to start out at.
Is that fair? No in my opinion, but there's lots of agism in our society and it's not always bad for someone who is older.
I'll start this by saying that I work in a pretty establishment part of the industry (vast big-brand-name AE firm with a reputation of innovation and research). Principals here are, with a very few exceptions in their 40s, 55+. As a rule, they are acknowledged leaders with int'l reputations in different aspects of design, planning and engineering, with teaching appointments at leading schools and books and accolades to their names, and with phenomenal relationships.
We will often work with young firms in some role (for ideas/initial concepts) so there is definitely a role from them, but if I told them that we were partnering with a firm of 25 year olds for documentation, I'd get laughed out of my go-no-go meeting.. and then fired.
Well. These young firms probably just cant afford you. The Partners probably take home less money than a 40yo project architect at a commercial firm.
I think there is still plenty of jobs for 40 yo architects if you are willing to move around. But just not in these young firms. The more established young firms like BIG are happy to hire more experienced people though. But that is because they have real projects where as most young firms dont
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.