1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Minimum age for Network administrator position

Discussion in 'Employment & Jobs' started by fatp, Mar 14, 2009.

  1. fatp

    fatp Byte Poster

    196
    7
    44
    I had this debate with another friend who is also in the I.T industry.

    He said that most network administrators, typically, are in their late twenties at the earliest due to the nature of:

    (1) Having the necessary X years support experience to backup their skills (have climbed the ladder)(2) The maturity to handle complex problems and troubleshoot server issues and (heads screwed on)
    (3) Older candidates will always be prefered over such younger candidates (due to maturity).

    Isnt there some form of age discrimination in the way he put his point across?

    What do u guys think?

    FatP :)
     
    Certifications: Comp Sci BSc, NVQ 2 & 3 IT Professional
    WIP: Comptia A+, Network+
  2. zebulebu

    zebulebu Terabyte Poster

    3,748
    330
    187
    Most Network Admins are early thirties or older. If I was hiring a network admin the most relevant thing I would look at on their CV would be their experience. If the prospective applicant had come straight of school at 16 and worked their way up with eight solid years' experience and applied with four other candidates of equal experience (but five years older) I'd STILL look at the older candidates in preference to the younger one because - like it or not - experience isn't just technical - its 'life' experience too.

    You don't just learn how to deal with situations just from technical experience - you learn it from interacting with people, bonding with them and 'understanding' them. Most 25 year olds I know can't deal with people in their mid-fifties, for whom computers are still alien machines. In addition, most 25 year olds spend large parts of their lives pissed out of their nuts - whereas most 35 year olds have grown up a bit and... don't.

    As far as I'm concerned, 'age discrimination' is a misnomer for young people in the workplace. Its the older worker who regularly gets shafted - for instance, we just made a woman redundant who has been with the company I work for - in various roles - for 26 years. She's in her early fifties, and now has precious little chance of finding another job. THAT sucks.
     
    Certifications: A few
    WIP: None - f*** 'em
  3. Crito

    Crito Banned

    505
    14
    0
    For admins that's true but in the programming world it's the exact opposite. A .NET programmer with two years experience is a much more prized asset than, say, a FORTRAN or COBOL programmer with two decade's worth.
     
    Certifications: A few
    WIP: none
  4. Evilwheato

    Evilwheato Kilobyte Poster

    414
    4
    20
    As long as there is a valid reason for hiring someone older compared to someone younger, I don't think there is any discrimination. I wouldn't like to say that a valid reason for a job would be "life experience" because *I think* you would then have to show how that would improve their capability to do the job vs. the younger applicant.

    One of the points made I think is valid-older people are generally more likely to have the required experience, technical knowledge (through cert's or otherwise). As for maturity, that could be debated ;)
    As pointed out however, age discrimination can happen both ways; older people could be replaced by younger people to "get more out of them" so to speak.
     
  5. dmarsh

    dmarsh Terabyte Poster

    3,782
    302
    184
    Younger people get taken on because they are cheap and will work hard.

    Theres a 'sweet spot' in the middle where eventually employers decided you are worth a few cents.

    Then you get branded over the hill and irrelevant and can't get a job for love nor money.

    That pretty much seems to sum it up to me.

    Couple that with recruiters and employers current 'pigeonhole recruitment method' for tech skills and you have a truly disfunctional system.
     
    Certifications: CITP, BSc, HND, SCJP, SCJD, SCWCD, SCBCD, SCEA, N+, Sec+, Proj+, Server+, Linux+, MCTS, MCPD, MCSA, MCITP, CCDH
  6. Sparky
    Highly Decorated Member Award

    Sparky Zettabyte Poster Moderator

    10,191
    299
    319
    There are some exceptions to the rule, I was running my own network when I was 23 but in saying that the pay was lousy and I was only doing it to get the hands on experience. There is no way I would do the same job again for that kinda cash however I’m sure there are many other people that would.

    Looking back it was probably a big gamble on the part of my employer to make me the network admin (I only had 9 months experience at the time) but I took the added responsibility very seriously and ended up putting in loads of unpaid overtime as I had to migrate the whole network from NT to 2003.

    So on the whole you will find that *most* network admins age is late 20’s and if the admin keeps up to speed with the latest technologies then there is no reason why they should be branded as ‘over the hill’ later on in their career.
     
    Certifications: MSc MCSE MCSA:M MCSA:S MCITP:EA MCTS(x5) Security+ Network+ A+
    WIP: Exchange 2007\2010
  7. Theprof

    Theprof Petabyte Poster Forum Leader

    4,570
    68
    196
    I am still very young. I only have around 2 and a half years of experience as a desktop support guy. Non the less I still do some network stuff here and there. Where I work the network admin is 30.... however he became an admin after 9 months at the age of 25. Although the cirumstances were different then, I still see why age plays a role in the field of Network administration as usually those who qualify tend to have a lot more experience than the younger guys and I guess are much more serious than others.

    I am 22 and even though I am a very serious person when it comes to issue we have with our network and certain tasks that have asap labled on them, I still goof around sometimes. But I can definitely see why the employers would want to higher older candidates.
     
    Certifications: A+ | CCA | CCAA | Network+ | MCDST | MCSA | MCP (270, 271, 272, 290, 291) | MCTS (70-662, 70-663) | MCITP:EMA | VCA-DCV/Cloud/WM | VTSP | VCP5-DT | VCP5-DCV
    WIP: VCAP5-DCA/DCD | EMCCA
  8. BosonMichael
    Highly Decorated Member Award

    BosonMichael Yottabyte Poster

    19,136
    462
    374
    I think it's incredibly illogical. By that same illogic, a 16-year old should be able to just jump right in and become a brain surgeon without first going to medical school and becoming an intern.
     
    Certifications: CISSP, MCSE+I, MCSE: Security, MCSE: Messaging, MCDST, MCDBA, MCTS, OCP, CCNP, CCDP, CCNA Security, CCNA Voice, CNE, SCSA, Security+, Linux+, Server+, Network+, A+
    WIP: Just about everything!
  9. BosonMichael
    Highly Decorated Member Award

    BosonMichael Yottabyte Poster

    19,136
    462
    374
    ...but a FORTRAN or COBOL programmer of two decades who has programmed efficiently in .NET for the past two years would be much more prized than a .NET programmer with two years of experience. It's just like network administration: you're as obsolete as the technology you know how to support. I dare say that someone who administers mainframes, but hasn't upgraded his skillset so that he can also administer Windows NT, 2000, 2003, and 2008, will find himself in a similar situation to the FORTRAN or COBOL programmer who hasn't updated his skillset.
     
    Certifications: CISSP, MCSE+I, MCSE: Security, MCSE: Messaging, MCDST, MCDBA, MCTS, OCP, CCNP, CCDP, CCNA Security, CCNA Voice, CNE, SCSA, Security+, Linux+, Server+, Network+, A+
    WIP: Just about everything!
  10. Jay_7

    Jay_7 Nibble Poster

    81
    4
    22
    I'm only 22 and I'm running the network at my place of work. I admit my employer probably did take a huge risk when they gave me the job just over a year ago! Not exactly a network admin wage either but I can't complain.
     
    Certifications: A+, N+, MCP
    WIP: CCNA 200-120
  11. dmarsh

    dmarsh Terabyte Poster

    3,782
    302
    184
    You would think so wouldn't you ? Unfortunately most companies have a harder time evaluating developers than they do IT infrastructure guys. Add to this a poorly defined career path, also add in all the marketing hype and poorly informed recruiters and it can and does happen.

    I've seen recruiters often demand more experience than is possible in reality when new hot products come out. In many respects new grads can have an advantage here because they can take low paid roles and get skilled up in new technologies, while older people need to maintain their wage and get stuck on still relevant but less marketable tech.

    Tech trends change so quickly that taking a pay cut every two years to have the latest tech on your CV is not really a viable strategy. A skilled programmer will have no problem picking up a new language or library, unfortunately all the marketing hype and certs and the attitudes of recruiters mean that general ability is not really taken into account any more.

    I've met the COBOL mainframe programmers who didn't upskill, they didn't know what a machine word or a pointer or a file handle was. I agree theres no excuse for not updating skills, but its not that simple. There is also very real CV screening effect that kicks in when people get older.
     
    Certifications: CITP, BSc, HND, SCJP, SCJD, SCWCD, SCBCD, SCEA, N+, Sec+, Proj+, Server+, Linux+, MCTS, MCPD, MCSA, MCITP, CCDH
  12. BosonMichael
    Highly Decorated Member Award

    BosonMichael Yottabyte Poster

    19,136
    462
    374
    Why would you have to take a pay cut every two years to have the latest tech on your CV?
     
    Certifications: CISSP, MCSE+I, MCSE: Security, MCSE: Messaging, MCDST, MCDBA, MCTS, OCP, CCNP, CCDP, CCNA Security, CCNA Voice, CNE, SCSA, Security+, Linux+, Server+, Network+, A+
    WIP: Just about everything!

Share This Page

Loading...