As I have been looking for jobs I have unfortunately come across a number of job listings which specify a desired age for their candidates, and I was sad to see one recently get posted on Archinect and presumably make it through whatever filters the site has against abusive content:
I do get your point, but "young" is not an age, is it? What bothers me most is they're looking for someone with experience putting together a drawing set and past experience through all phases of design, when looking for (and willing to pay for) someone with only 1-3 years experience...
Feb 2, 21 6:07 am ·
·
Non Sequitur
New grads should be able to put together drawing sets as they leave school. If not, then they wasted their time in school.
Feb 2, 21 7:26 am ·
·
thisisnotmyname
I totally agree, but are there any USA schools that prepare students in this way? We ones we have hired grads from sure as hell did not.
This is not the first time I've seen an ad seeking a magical unlicensed intern who can work as a project architect but get paid like a new grad. Good luck with that!
daer - When I went to school I learned how to become an architect that designs buildings. That included detailing, professional practice, and how to put together a drawing set.
Those students that only learned to design are now doing door details because that's all they're good for.
Daer, like I mentioned earlier, you're grossly misinformed. My academic background is exceptionally design heavy and was just as intensive as any other wanker here. The difference is I understood that architecture is not just design therefore I made changes that allowed me to develop useful skills parallel to design studios. Not my fault you've not done the same. I am an architect that can design and detail. Just sad that you have nothing to contribute.
Daer, CA is my specialty, yes. I get my designs built. Design is easy compared to organizing construction/clients/budgets. That is architecture. This is where my strengths are but I take all projects from SD to CA. You only exist here to follow my comments and clearly, by your comment history, you've had a bad education. Enjoy your very low career ceiling.
daer - lets see some of your built design work. You're a great designer so put up or shut up.
Feb 2, 21 10:16 am ·
·
Non Sequitur
Yawn... you're so far from the truth. I hope your parents didn't pay too much for such a shitty education choice. Oh my, what a disappointment you must be. Now go back under your rock. You've exhausted your distraction value. I do have this 100+million waterfront residential building to SD after all.
Chad, I think just the comments on this particular discussion were nuked. Click on the link above and you'll see the account name is still active. Not sure why the nuking was done, but it's likely related to that user's immature attempt to "insult" my career. There is quite the history, not sure why I did not have this person on ignore in the first place.
Job add says young in title and specifies junior role aka new(ish) grad. Nothing to be bothered about and definitively not abusive. It's not like they wrote 25-30 year old single females only.
Somewhere out there, there has to be some Sheldon Cooper genius kid who went into architecture instead of nuclear physics and got their license on their 18th birthday.
"Experience" doesn't indicate a specific age in the same explicit way, even if it effectively does. It's kind of like how a description of a "junior architect" or a "recent graduate" could technically be inclusive of a range of ages (even if those terms are correlated with younger people), since those terms pertain
to experience rather than age.
Feb 2, 21 2:41 pm ·
·
Bench
That's just a disingenuous splitting of hairs. Both describe abstractions of verbs indicating a general sense of time - you can't give a uniform numerical range for 'young' or 'experienced'. Just sounds like you're butt-hurt and need to validate it with a reason.
Not to mention no discrimination has occurred by just posting the job as listed. If you get selected for an interview and they say, "on paper you seem like a great candidate, but now that we've seen you, we were really hoping for someone younger. We won't be making you an offer," then you can come back to complain.
Surely the test of discrimination is whether the discriminating criteria is integral to the job. You wouldn't complain about a stadium designing firm seeking only those experienced in stadium design.
Feb 2, 21 9:14 am ·
·
Non Sequitur
that's too specific.
Seeking licensed architect in good standing - that discriminating against those without licenses and those with licenses but with disciplinary problems
Seeking junior designer with M.arch - that discriminating against those who study dentistry but want to work in an architecture office
Seeking human - that discriminating against puppies. Do you want to broadcast to the world that you hate puppies?
outsideofspace: I think you're taking the term, "young", too literal. It really just means fresh-grad with, as they mentioned, 1-3 years of experience. If you really want to read into it they're implying they want someone with energy and (naïve) passion, which they also state in their description; "naïve" is not to be understood as a bad thing. If I were to have any issue with this is that they obviously want someone who is willing and able to burn the midnight oil.
I personally disagree with Non or anyone on here on whether a fresh grad should know how to put a full drawing set together - honestly, what does that even mean in today's profession? Of course, it would be helpful for the firm, but it's something that can be learned on the job. Plus, this job isn't specifying that the employee has put together a full CD set, which is different than putting together a permit, SD or DD set.
Anyways, who cares. Just apply and get a feel for the job and office culture during the interview.
Actually, I'm going to agree with OP. I think given that we don't know who they are interviewing, and who the interviewers are - I don't - I think we cannot assume that this is benign. One can be "experienced" and still be "young" experience doesn't imply age, but young does. If they just stated in the headline Newly Graduated Please Apply, that doesn't mean young, I was 28 when I graduated, hardly "young", but definitely "inexperienced".
Abusive, no, bad form, off putting and setting them up for scrutiny, yes. There's no reason for them to do it. When I read it, it rubbed me wrong. Especially when you look at the skill set, and the need for some measure of experience beyond what a grad would have.
Feb 2, 21 8:51 pm ·
·
Non Sequitur
I want to see job adds that filter by sport team association. "Toronto Maple Leaf fans need not apply." Don't see a problem with that one.
I should say - I also think its a poorly-worded ad, and I personally would not have described it that way. But hearing someone complain about literal discrimination at the hands of those damn fresh grads is just mind numbing. The position isn't for you, move on.
It is absolutely inappropriate to be advertising jobs for "young" architects. Junior or recent grad, totally fine. Not young, which specifically refers to age. I can't believe so many of you are giving this a pass, wtf. Look at the contortions you're making to justify what they "actually" mean. Come on, they mean what they said. I saw this ad in passing too and it bothered me.
I worked for years in LA, there are offices there that specifically hire young (attractive) kids out of school. I know because I've worked at several of them (yes, it was stupid). When they say young, they mean young, not junior. They want people who will look good in the office photos and that lack the life experience to know when they are being exploited.
Feb 3, 21 11:47 am ·
·
randomised
But what age is considered young “specifically” though?
Feb 3, 21 1:09 pm ·
·
BabbleBeautiful
It's not about giving them a "pass". We're all essential giving them a pass by not acting on it and only lamenting about it online. It's about not giving two fucks. If you care so much send them an email telling them that you care. Or, when you have your own firm, don't use words that bother you.
Feb 3, 21 1:41 pm ·
·
spiketwig
come, don't be obtuse. we all know what they mean by young - appear youthful, no family obligations, keep up with trends.
Feb 3, 21 3:06 pm ·
·
spiketwig
furthermore, it's not about me personally calling out these douchebags. it's about we shouldn't be giving discriminatory postings more visibility on widely used websites like this one.
Feb 3, 21 3:08 pm ·
·
BabbleBeautiful
Refer to EA's post below.
Feb 3, 21 3:17 pm ·
·
BabbleBeautiful
You know, if this was a US-based firm I would probably have more issue with this as the firm should know better, but they're not so I'm not going to immediately subject them to or scrutinize them on western standards. Granted, they are posting on a US-based site and hiring for their US satellite office, but they first deserve a chance to understand US values and then make a decision.
Feb 3, 21 3:41 pm ·
·
randomised
I’ve met some very “old” 20 somethings and very young “40” somethings etc. though...it’s not about being obtuse, it’s about being precise.
My issue with basically all of the complaining here about discrimination is that if you were to take this into court, you'd be thrown out on standing. You're assuming intent to discriminate without having any proof of it, or proof that it has occurred. I can look at an overweight middle-aged white guy with a scowl on his face and assume he's racist, or misogynist, or whatever ... but I don't have any proof of it, just my assumption. I could go around accusing him of those things and some people might even agree with me. That doesn't mean he actually is whatever I've assumed.
Have I myself complained about job posts being written poorly and probably not communicating the employer's intent ... yes and yes. I could back up my complaints. I could write another post about how this job ad is poorly written too, but I wouldn't accuse them of discrimination. Can anyone complaining of discrimination here back up their complaints?
I was once told by an office manager that they didn't want to hire me because I'm a diabetic. I informed them that it's a protected disability and illegal to discriminate against me because of it. The office manager said that because they are a small firm they don't need to listen to that. I got up and walked out. Little did they know I already had a more promising offer but wanted to meet with them to see what they where about. I contacted the MN department of labor and the firm was fined $10,000.
The firm is a small one Duluth MN who's name has a z in it.
Being a type 1 diabetic is tough and requires a lot of dedication and hard work to maintain a normal life. That being said it's not a concern for employers other than going to the doctor more often and needing to eat snacks sometimes.
I have a coworker with Type 1 Diabetes and he's one of the most diligent PAs I've ever met. Not saying there's a correlation, but when you have to maintain a pretty rigid schedule of testing & eating to continue living I would imagine that sense of thoroughness carries over into other elements of life. Anyway sounds like that firm blew it by not hiring you and you dodged a bullet by not working for them.
Feb 3, 21 4:32 pm ·
·
SneakyPete
I have a dark, snarky comment but I don't want to offend Chad.
I continue to be blown away by the apologists in this entire thread. Most comments are conflating discriminatory language in job postings with some kind of actual legal violation or just creating weird strawman arguments. A legal violation and a discriminatory job posting are OBVIOUSLY not strictly the same thing nor are the implications the same. The point of pushing back on this type of language is that it keeps otherwise qualified people from applying to the positions, an invisible barrier. Kind of like that glass ceiling we've all heard of. I suppose if a firm wants to only hire 23 year olds, they can do that, but it's not going to serve them or the profession well.
And, once you have an office consisting entirely of 23 year olds, it's an environment ripe for exploitation - they won't have enough work experience to push back or know what's normal vs completely out of line. I know I didn't when I was in that situation. I don't think I'm so unusual.
We want to keep the talent IN the profession, not push it out. It is worth calling this type of thing out. If you're over 40, are you really OK with firms explicitly seeking candidates in their 20's? What makes you think you're never going to be in the position of being discriminated against based on age? We all get older, it's the one thing we all have in common...
I mostly agree with everything you've posted just now. My disagreements are as follows:
You're assuming ages when there is no indication of ages in the post. There was one word "young" which all of this is hanging on. It was a dumb use of the word, but you're giving it way too much room.
You assume that otherwise qualified candidates aren't applying because of one word (which is contradicted many times by other words like "experienced"). First rule about applying for jobs is that the job posting is not written in stone and if you are even remotely close to being qualified you should give it a shot. I have a friend who's a geologist and currently unemployed. She applied for a position as a finance manager and was given an interview. She doesn't even want the position. Bottom line, you apply anyway.
If you want to push back on this type of language do it. The forums is probably not the most effective place to do that. You could simply write the firm an email. They give their address in the posting. It will get read faster than anything you post here and will likely have an actual effect. Even tweeting at them would likely get their attention faster than this thread.
I think two things may be affecting this. Firm websites with everyone's picture and Zoom. I recently attended a Zoom conference on Zoom presence and make no mistake about it, how we appear to clients, consultants and other members in the firm is the new normal. Age discrimination can occur.
Feb 3, 21 4:08 pm ·
·
randomised
Ah, they always kept you out of the meeting room pre-COVID?
Age discrimination in job listings.
As I have been looking for jobs I have unfortunately come across a number of job listings which specify a desired age for their candidates, and I was sad to see one recently get posted on Archinect and presumably make it through whatever filters the site has against abusive content:
https://archinect.com/jobs/ent...
I don't know if there's anything else that can be said or done, but I am always grossed out to see that kind of content.
I do get your point, but "young" is not an age, is it? What bothers me most is they're looking for someone with experience putting together a drawing set and past experience through all phases of design, when looking for (and willing to pay for) someone with only 1-3 years experience...
New grads should be able to put together drawing sets as they leave school. If not, then they wasted their time in school.
I totally agree, but are there any USA schools that prepare students in this way? We ones we have hired grads from sure as hell did not.
This is not the first time I've seen an ad seeking a magical unlicensed intern who can work as a project architect but get paid like a new grad. Good luck with that!
Probably not. Just saying they should. Mine did but still so many students brushed it off. No time for that, gotta design...
that is grossly incorrect Daer. Enjoy your delusions.
daer - When I went to school I learned how to become an architect that designs buildings. That included detailing, professional practice, and how to put together a drawing set.
Those students that only learned to design are now doing door details because that's all they're good for.
daer - how long have you been practicing architecture?
Daer, like I mentioned earlier, you're grossly misinformed. My academic background is exceptionally design heavy and was just as intensive as any other wanker here. The difference is I understood that architecture is not just design therefore I made changes that allowed me to develop useful skills parallel to design studios. Not my fault you've not done the same. I am an architect that can design and detail. Just sad that you have nothing to contribute.
Chad, see here
Someone is definitively salty that they wasted money on their "education".
Daer, CA is my specialty, yes. I get my designs built. Design is easy compared to organizing construction/clients/budgets. That is architecture. This is where my strengths are but I take all projects from SD to CA. You only exist here to follow my comments and clearly, by your comment history, you've had a bad education. Enjoy your very low career ceiling.
daer - lets see some of your built design work. You're a great designer so put up or shut up.
Yawn... you're so far from the truth. I hope your parents didn't pay too much for such a shitty education choice. Oh my, what a disappointment you must be. Now go back under your rock. You've exhausted your distraction value. I do have this 100+million waterfront residential building to SD after all.
'why limit yourself to one building when you can design a whole city...architects are just art school dropouts with a tilty desk and a big ruler.'
daer - seriously post up your work. You talk big about your design skills but it's just that - talk.
Design school prepares one for a career in architecture in the way that a literature degree prepares one for a career in book binding.
It prepares you a lot better than an undergrad in mime theater.
Swear to god I'm not making this up but my wife majored in theater, actually was a mime & now is a landscape designer. Sooo...
Studied under Marcel Marceau, most likely.
tduds - that just means being a landscape architect is like being trapped in a metaphorical box . . .
Did daer get deleted?
Chad, I think just the comments on this particular discussion were nuked. Click on the link above and you'll see the account name is still active. Not sure why the nuking was done, but it's likely related to that user's immature attempt to "insult" my career. There is quite the history, not sure why I did not have this person on ignore in the first place.
How can someone be so inept? I still want daer to show us some of their design work. You know, to show us what a REAL architect does.
Chad it's more like being trapped outside a metaphorical box. We architects design the box, of course.
Job add says young in title and specifies junior role aka new(ish) grad. Nothing to be bothered about and definitively not abusive. It's not like they wrote 25-30 year old single females only.
.
Will you also be advocating to remove any job posting looking for "experienced" architects? That's equally discriminatory as well, no?
it should say "old talented architect"
Somewhere out there, there has to be some Sheldon Cooper genius kid who went into architecture instead of nuclear physics and got their license on their 18th birthday.
A Sheldon Cooper genius kid would know better.
"Experience" doesn't indicate a specific age in the same explicit way, even if it effectively does. It's kind of like how a description of a "junior architect" or a "recent graduate" could technically be inclusive of a range of ages (even if those terms are correlated with younger people), since those terms pertain to experience rather than age.
That's just a disingenuous splitting of hairs. Both describe abstractions of verbs indicating a general sense of time - you can't give a uniform numerical range for 'young' or 'experienced'. Just sounds like you're butt-hurt and need to validate it with a reason.
Not to mention no discrimination has occurred by just posting the job as listed. If you get selected for an interview and they say, "on paper you seem like a great candidate, but now that we've seen you, we were really hoping for someone younger. We won't be making you an offer," then you can come back to complain.
Surely the test of discrimination is whether the discriminating criteria is integral to the job. You wouldn't complain about a stadium designing firm seeking only those experienced in stadium design.
that's too specific.
Seeking licensed architect in good standing - that discriminating against those without licenses and those with licenses but with disciplinary problems
Seeking junior designer with M.arch - that discriminating against those who study dentistry but want to work in an architecture office
Seeking human - that discriminating against puppies. Do you want to broadcast to the world that you hate puppies?
and so on...
Considering some of the new grads I've worked with, puppies might be an improvement...
outsideofspace: I think you're taking the term, "young", too literal. It really just means fresh-grad with, as they mentioned, 1-3 years of experience. If you really want to read into it they're implying they want someone with energy and (naïve) passion, which they also state in their description; "naïve" is not to be understood as a bad thing. If I were to have any issue with this is that they obviously want someone who is willing and able to burn the midnight oil.
I personally disagree with Non or anyone on here on whether a fresh grad should know how to put a full drawing set together - honestly, what does that even mean in today's profession? Of course, it would be helpful for the firm, but it's something that can be learned on the job. Plus, this job isn't specifying that the employee has put together a full CD set, which is different than putting together a permit, SD or DD set.
Anyways, who cares. Just apply and get a feel for the job and office culture during the interview.
Actually, I'm going to agree with OP. I think given that we don't know who they are interviewing, and who the interviewers are - I don't - I think we cannot assume that this is benign. One can be "experienced" and still be "young" experience doesn't imply age, but young does. If they just stated in the headline Newly Graduated Please Apply, that doesn't mean young, I was 28 when I graduated, hardly "young", but definitely "inexperienced".
They should change the headline.
but is it abusive?
Abusive, no, bad form, off putting and setting them up for scrutiny, yes. There's no reason for them to do it. When I read it, it rubbed me wrong. Especially when you look at the skill set, and the need for some measure of experience beyond what a grad would have.
I want to see job adds that filter by sport team association. "Toronto Maple Leaf fans need not apply." Don't see a problem with that one.
I should say - I also think its a poorly-worded ad, and I personally would not have described it that way. But hearing someone complain about literal discrimination at the hands of those damn fresh grads is just mind numbing. The position isn't for you, move on.
It is absolutely inappropriate to be advertising jobs for "young" architects. Junior or recent grad, totally fine. Not young, which specifically refers to age. I can't believe so many of you are giving this a pass, wtf. Look at the contortions you're making to justify what they "actually" mean. Come on, they mean what they said. I saw this ad in passing too and it bothered me.
I worked for years in LA, there are offices there that specifically hire young (attractive) kids out of school. I know because I've worked at several of them (yes, it was stupid). When they say young, they mean young, not junior. They want people who will look good in the office photos and that lack the life experience to know when they are being exploited.
But what age is considered young “specifically” though?
It's not about giving them a "pass". We're all essential giving them a pass by not acting on it and only lamenting about it online. It's about not giving two fucks. If you care so much send them an email telling them that you care. Or, when you have your own firm, don't use words that bother you.
come, don't be obtuse. we all know what they mean by young - appear youthful, no family obligations, keep up with trends.
furthermore, it's not about me personally calling out these douchebags. it's about we shouldn't be giving discriminatory postings more visibility on widely used websites like this one.
Refer to EA's post below.
You know, if this was a US-based firm I would probably have more issue with this as the firm should know better, but they're not so I'm not going to immediately subject them to or scrutinize them on western standards. Granted, they are posting on a US-based site and hiring for their US satellite office, but they first deserve a chance to understand US values and then make a decision.
I’ve met some very “old” 20 somethings and very young “40” somethings etc. though...it’s not about being obtuse, it’s about being precise.
My issue with basically all of the complaining here about discrimination is that if you were to take this into court, you'd be thrown out on standing. You're assuming intent to discriminate without having any proof of it, or proof that it has occurred. I can look at an overweight middle-aged white guy with a scowl on his face and assume he's racist, or misogynist, or whatever ... but I don't have any proof of it, just my assumption. I could go around accusing him of those things and some people might even agree with me. That doesn't mean he actually is whatever I've assumed.
Have I myself complained about job posts being written poorly and probably not communicating the employer's intent ... yes and yes. I could back up my complaints. I could write another post about how this job ad is poorly written too, but I wouldn't accuse them of discrimination. Can anyone complaining of discrimination here back up their complaints?
I was once told by an office manager that they didn't want to hire me because I'm a diabetic. I informed them that it's a protected disability and illegal to discriminate against me because of it. The office manager said that because they are a small firm they don't need to listen to that. I got up and walked out. Little did they know I already had a more promising offer but wanted to meet with them to see what they where about. I contacted the MN department of labor and the firm was fined $10,000.
See what happens when you have proof ?
Chad, I would love to know that firm...
Genuinely curious: Why is being a diabetic even a concern for employers?
The firm is a small one Duluth MN who's name has a z in it.
Being a type 1 diabetic is tough and requires a lot of dedication and hard work to maintain a normal life. That being said it's not a concern for employers other than going to the doctor more often and needing to eat snacks sometimes.
At first I was gonna say NOOO NOT SALMELA, but then I saw the "z".
Oh no, David is a nice guy!
Good. I love his work.
Me too. Haven't seen much of it lately though.
I have a coworker with Type 1 Diabetes and he's one of the most diligent PAs I've ever met. Not saying there's a correlation, but when you have to maintain a pretty rigid schedule of testing & eating to continue living I would imagine that sense of thoroughness carries over into other elements of life. Anyway sounds like that firm blew it by not hiring you and you dodged a bullet by not working for them.
I have a dark, snarky comment but I don't want to offend Chad.
Say it . . .
You sure they didn't just have a design contract with C&H or Domino?
Cargill
:::giggles::::
I continue to be blown away by the apologists in this entire thread. Most comments are conflating discriminatory language in job postings with some kind of actual legal violation or just creating weird strawman arguments. A legal violation and a discriminatory job posting are OBVIOUSLY not strictly the same thing nor are the implications the same. The point of pushing back on this type of language is that it keeps otherwise qualified people from applying to the positions, an invisible barrier. Kind of like that glass ceiling we've all heard of. I suppose if a firm wants to only hire 23 year olds, they can do that, but it's not going to serve them or the profession well.
And, once you have an office consisting entirely of 23 year olds, it's an environment ripe for exploitation - they won't have enough work experience to push back or know what's normal vs completely out of line. I know I didn't when I was in that situation. I don't think I'm so unusual.
We want to keep the talent IN the profession, not push it out. It is worth calling this type of thing out. If you're over 40, are you really OK with firms explicitly seeking candidates in their 20's? What makes you think you're never going to be in the position of being discriminated against based on age? We all get older, it's the one thing we all have in common...
I mostly agree with everything you've posted just now. My disagreements are as follows:
I think two things may be affecting this. Firm websites with everyone's picture and Zoom. I recently attended a Zoom conference on Zoom presence and make no mistake about it, how we appear to clients, consultants and other members in the firm is the new normal. Age discrimination can occur.
Ah, they always kept you out of the meeting room pre-COVID?
How did you know? and my picture was never taken either. ....actually I was in the meetings
So, it doesn't really matter when clients see you in the meeting face to face or via a zoom meeting, don't get your point about this to be honest.
Many want to see energy from people, however that radiates. Not jaded response
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.