I've been told that to be taken seriously as a job applicant, I should drop years of relevant experience off my résumé, remove the year I got my degree, or both. Or not even bother applying, because no one wants to hire programmers older than them.1

Or that I should found a company, not because I want to, or because I have a product I care about, but because that way I can get a job if/when my company is acquired.

Or that I should focus more on management jobs (which I've successfully done in the past) because… well, they couldn't really explain this one, except the implication was that over a certain age you're a loser if you're still writing code. But I like writing code.

Have you seen this? Is this only a local (Northern California) issue?

If you've ever hired programmers:2


Of the résumés you've received, how old was the eldest applicant?
What was the age of the oldest person you've interviewed?
How old (when hired) was the oldest person you hired?


How old is "too old" to employed as a programmer?

1 I'm assuming all applicants have equivalent applicable experience. This isn't about someone with three decades of COBOL applying for a Java guru job.
2 Yes, I know that (at least in the US) you aren't supposed to ask how old an applicant is. In my experience, though, you can get a general idea from a résumé.

Having just got a new job at nearly 50 in the UK I can say that it's possible and you're never too old.

There are two approaches - both rely on your skills being relevant to the job.


Stick with what you know and become a guru. This is risky as the number of jobs requiring "old" technologies are becoming fewer and further between as each year passes. However, as people retire from such jobs there will be openings.
Keep refreshing your skills. I moved into Silverlight last year, which is what got me this job. That and my previous team leadership roles which my new employer saw as relevant.

