BuckWallace
Junior Member
Hello, I have a concern that I may be being indirectly discriminated against based on my age. This may be a long story, but I think it is necessary to provide a background.
The company I work for assigns salary grades to positions, each with a specified range of possible salaries. At the age of 25, I applied for a position at a salary grade 10 (I understand these numbers are arbitrary, but they will provide a frame of reference). This was substantially higher than my previous salary. I ended up being offered the position, but at a grade 9 (one grade lower) due to the fact that I didn't possess experience listed in the job posting. I completely understood this and accepted the position at the lower grade.
Six months into the position, I was given a substantial raise due to excellent performance, which of course I was happy about. However, after discussions with my peers, I found out that I was still underpaid compared to them. I will also add that another person was hired on at the same time as me. He was in his 50s and was brought in at a grade 14, with the exact same job responsibilities. I was even told by my manger that my performance was better than his.
After my first year and subsequent annual review, I received an excellent review and another substantial raise. There were no areas of attention that were brought up as far as me "getting up to speed" on the experience which prohibited me from receiving a higher grade. My manager gave high praises and insisted that she was "trying to get me to where I needed to be" as far as salary was concerned. I was told I required less "managing" and performed better than my peers in the main areas of the job, while even contributing additional work that my peers weren't responsible for. I greatly appreciated the praises and feedback, but began to wonder what "where I needed to be" was, and why I wasn't getting it already if I was performing equal to or better than my higher-paid peers.
After approximately 2 1/2 years (now age 28) and another excellent annual review, I found myself at a grade 12. I then applied for a recently-vacated position within my same group/job area, which was posted at a grade 15. The person who left the position had 40+ years of experience and was making very good money. I didn't expect to receive the same salary or grade, and was eventually offered the position at a grade 13 (two grades lower than posted, but one grade higher than my current grade).
Now, to be clear, I am not questioning the decision to offer me the position at a lower grade and I was very grateful for the advancement opportunity as I knew it would create the potential for higher earnings, as well as an immediate raise.
Here is where I have a concern: as I mentioned earlier, I knew I was making less than my peers and contributing as much as or more, as was supported by my documented annual reviews and praises from upper management. The shocker came when my old position was posted at a grade 14, which was two grades higher than the grade I held in the position, one grade higher than my new position, four grades higher than the original posting 2 1/2 years ago when I accepted it, and five grades higher than what I was brought in at. The real kicker is that the requirements are exactly the same, barring a confusing "5-7 years of experience requirement", which was proven by me to be completely unnecessary for the position.
The requirements for the job actually DO NOT require that experience, and I feel as if that is added to indirectly disqualify younger candidates from being eligible for the higher salary grade even though the actual job does not rely on that experience, as was evidenced by me performing as well as or better than my peers. They even told me that I would be greatly missed and "impossible to replace", yet they are replacing me with a much higher salary grade for the exact same work.
No additional responsibilities are being added, and I think they realize they won't be able to hire any qualified candidates for what I was being paid, unless of course they find another young candidate without the "required experience" so they can low-ball them. Another former peer even expressed confusion as to why the posted grade on my old position was so high.
Basically, is there any merit to my concern based on the fact that the arbitrary "years of experience" requirement has no bearing at all on the job itself? Why would they be willing to hire a candidate as young as myself without the experience and be fine with giving them the same responsibilities. I can see if the younger "inexperienced" candidate was given adjusted responsibilities, but if they're given the same job to do and are exceeding at doing so, how can that experience requirement be justified? I know Federal law only protects older workers (over 40) from being discriminated against, but Oregon law (my state) prohibits discrimination based on age if you're 18 or older.
Thank you, and any advice would be much appreciated!
The company I work for assigns salary grades to positions, each with a specified range of possible salaries. At the age of 25, I applied for a position at a salary grade 10 (I understand these numbers are arbitrary, but they will provide a frame of reference). This was substantially higher than my previous salary. I ended up being offered the position, but at a grade 9 (one grade lower) due to the fact that I didn't possess experience listed in the job posting. I completely understood this and accepted the position at the lower grade.
Six months into the position, I was given a substantial raise due to excellent performance, which of course I was happy about. However, after discussions with my peers, I found out that I was still underpaid compared to them. I will also add that another person was hired on at the same time as me. He was in his 50s and was brought in at a grade 14, with the exact same job responsibilities. I was even told by my manger that my performance was better than his.
After my first year and subsequent annual review, I received an excellent review and another substantial raise. There were no areas of attention that were brought up as far as me "getting up to speed" on the experience which prohibited me from receiving a higher grade. My manager gave high praises and insisted that she was "trying to get me to where I needed to be" as far as salary was concerned. I was told I required less "managing" and performed better than my peers in the main areas of the job, while even contributing additional work that my peers weren't responsible for. I greatly appreciated the praises and feedback, but began to wonder what "where I needed to be" was, and why I wasn't getting it already if I was performing equal to or better than my higher-paid peers.
After approximately 2 1/2 years (now age 28) and another excellent annual review, I found myself at a grade 12. I then applied for a recently-vacated position within my same group/job area, which was posted at a grade 15. The person who left the position had 40+ years of experience and was making very good money. I didn't expect to receive the same salary or grade, and was eventually offered the position at a grade 13 (two grades lower than posted, but one grade higher than my current grade).
Now, to be clear, I am not questioning the decision to offer me the position at a lower grade and I was very grateful for the advancement opportunity as I knew it would create the potential for higher earnings, as well as an immediate raise.
Here is where I have a concern: as I mentioned earlier, I knew I was making less than my peers and contributing as much as or more, as was supported by my documented annual reviews and praises from upper management. The shocker came when my old position was posted at a grade 14, which was two grades higher than the grade I held in the position, one grade higher than my new position, four grades higher than the original posting 2 1/2 years ago when I accepted it, and five grades higher than what I was brought in at. The real kicker is that the requirements are exactly the same, barring a confusing "5-7 years of experience requirement", which was proven by me to be completely unnecessary for the position.
The requirements for the job actually DO NOT require that experience, and I feel as if that is added to indirectly disqualify younger candidates from being eligible for the higher salary grade even though the actual job does not rely on that experience, as was evidenced by me performing as well as or better than my peers. They even told me that I would be greatly missed and "impossible to replace", yet they are replacing me with a much higher salary grade for the exact same work.
No additional responsibilities are being added, and I think they realize they won't be able to hire any qualified candidates for what I was being paid, unless of course they find another young candidate without the "required experience" so they can low-ball them. Another former peer even expressed confusion as to why the posted grade on my old position was so high.
Basically, is there any merit to my concern based on the fact that the arbitrary "years of experience" requirement has no bearing at all on the job itself? Why would they be willing to hire a candidate as young as myself without the experience and be fine with giving them the same responsibilities. I can see if the younger "inexperienced" candidate was given adjusted responsibilities, but if they're given the same job to do and are exceeding at doing so, how can that experience requirement be justified? I know Federal law only protects older workers (over 40) from being discriminated against, but Oregon law (my state) prohibits discrimination based on age if you're 18 or older.
Thank you, and any advice would be much appreciated!
Last edited: