Is it discriminatory to put “bonus” video game skills in a job advertisement?











up vote
14
down vote

favorite












My employer (a small company) is hiring an IT person. The person hiring and writing the job ad loves SNES video games and grew up around that time.



The job ad for the IT person has a section for "bonus skills" that includes sentences about the person's skill level about specific SNES video games. I challenged this person and said it could easily be interpreted as age or "geek" discrimination (especially considering that the ad is for an IT person). They say it's meant to be humor fun/wink and I'm overreacting but they've also told me the exact person that they'd hire if we ever had the money (and this person fits this "culture" description exactly).



The rest of the job ad is very normal and what you'd expect. I think these couple of lines taint an otherwise well written job ad.



Am I wrong in thinking this is unnecessary and could be perceived as discriminatory?










share|improve this question









New contributor




user95595 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 31




    Do you have a working SNES in the office?
    – Stefano Palazzo
    4 hours ago






  • 5




    I'm not sure why all the downvotes - this seems like a perfectly reasonable question.
    – David K
    4 hours ago






  • 1




    @StefanoPalazzo if there is not, how can the applicant prove they have the SNES skills
    – SaggingRufus
    4 hours ago















up vote
14
down vote

favorite












My employer (a small company) is hiring an IT person. The person hiring and writing the job ad loves SNES video games and grew up around that time.



The job ad for the IT person has a section for "bonus skills" that includes sentences about the person's skill level about specific SNES video games. I challenged this person and said it could easily be interpreted as age or "geek" discrimination (especially considering that the ad is for an IT person). They say it's meant to be humor fun/wink and I'm overreacting but they've also told me the exact person that they'd hire if we ever had the money (and this person fits this "culture" description exactly).



The rest of the job ad is very normal and what you'd expect. I think these couple of lines taint an otherwise well written job ad.



Am I wrong in thinking this is unnecessary and could be perceived as discriminatory?










share|improve this question









New contributor




user95595 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 31




    Do you have a working SNES in the office?
    – Stefano Palazzo
    4 hours ago






  • 5




    I'm not sure why all the downvotes - this seems like a perfectly reasonable question.
    – David K
    4 hours ago






  • 1




    @StefanoPalazzo if there is not, how can the applicant prove they have the SNES skills
    – SaggingRufus
    4 hours ago













up vote
14
down vote

favorite









up vote
14
down vote

favorite











My employer (a small company) is hiring an IT person. The person hiring and writing the job ad loves SNES video games and grew up around that time.



The job ad for the IT person has a section for "bonus skills" that includes sentences about the person's skill level about specific SNES video games. I challenged this person and said it could easily be interpreted as age or "geek" discrimination (especially considering that the ad is for an IT person). They say it's meant to be humor fun/wink and I'm overreacting but they've also told me the exact person that they'd hire if we ever had the money (and this person fits this "culture" description exactly).



The rest of the job ad is very normal and what you'd expect. I think these couple of lines taint an otherwise well written job ad.



Am I wrong in thinking this is unnecessary and could be perceived as discriminatory?










share|improve this question









New contributor




user95595 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











My employer (a small company) is hiring an IT person. The person hiring and writing the job ad loves SNES video games and grew up around that time.



The job ad for the IT person has a section for "bonus skills" that includes sentences about the person's skill level about specific SNES video games. I challenged this person and said it could easily be interpreted as age or "geek" discrimination (especially considering that the ad is for an IT person). They say it's meant to be humor fun/wink and I'm overreacting but they've also told me the exact person that they'd hire if we ever had the money (and this person fits this "culture" description exactly).



The rest of the job ad is very normal and what you'd expect. I think these couple of lines taint an otherwise well written job ad.



Am I wrong in thinking this is unnecessary and could be perceived as discriminatory?







recruitment job-description discrimination






share|improve this question









New contributor




user95595 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question









New contributor




user95595 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 4 hours ago









David K

23k1481118




23k1481118






New contributor




user95595 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 5 hours ago









user95595

8913




8913




New contributor




user95595 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





user95595 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






user95595 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.








  • 31




    Do you have a working SNES in the office?
    – Stefano Palazzo
    4 hours ago






  • 5




    I'm not sure why all the downvotes - this seems like a perfectly reasonable question.
    – David K
    4 hours ago






  • 1




    @StefanoPalazzo if there is not, how can the applicant prove they have the SNES skills
    – SaggingRufus
    4 hours ago














  • 31




    Do you have a working SNES in the office?
    – Stefano Palazzo
    4 hours ago






  • 5




    I'm not sure why all the downvotes - this seems like a perfectly reasonable question.
    – David K
    4 hours ago






  • 1




    @StefanoPalazzo if there is not, how can the applicant prove they have the SNES skills
    – SaggingRufus
    4 hours ago








31




31




Do you have a working SNES in the office?
– Stefano Palazzo
4 hours ago




Do you have a working SNES in the office?
– Stefano Palazzo
4 hours ago




5




5




I'm not sure why all the downvotes - this seems like a perfectly reasonable question.
– David K
4 hours ago




I'm not sure why all the downvotes - this seems like a perfectly reasonable question.
– David K
4 hours ago




1




1




@StefanoPalazzo if there is not, how can the applicant prove they have the SNES skills
– SaggingRufus
4 hours ago




@StefanoPalazzo if there is not, how can the applicant prove they have the SNES skills
– SaggingRufus
4 hours ago










8 Answers
8






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
35
down vote













Is this discriminatory? No, probably not. Is it inappropriate to put in a job ad? Yes, most definitely.



First, I'm going to assume that your colleague just wants to include the "bonus" section for flavor and doesn't actually want to judge hiring based on SNES skills, because to do so would just be moronic.



Second, unless you are hiring a video game tester, having a section on video game skills just doesn't make any sense and will only confuse your potential candidates. Most people looking at the ad will spend a minute or two trying to figure out how serious that section is. And if they determine it's not serious, then they'll have to figure out if there's any other parts of the advertisement that weren't meant to be serious. It makes it difficult to figure out what you really want from a candidate, which also makes it hard for recruiters to figure out who to send your way.



Third, it looks unprofessional. If I saw that in a job ad I'd figure the company was a startup made by some college buddies and not someplace I'd really want to depend on a paycheck from. But maybe you have a really laid-back culture like that and you want to put that out there from the beginning. Just know that you'll eliminate a lot of prospects because of it.



Back to your original question though, I wouldn't worry about discrimination. There's no such thing as "geek discrimination," and this wouldn't qualify as age discrimination since someone of any age can be a fan of SNES games.






share|improve this answer



















  • 2




    In the US (at a federal level, anyways) it is not illegal to discriminate against young people.
    – stannius
    3 hours ago










  • There's no such thing as "geek discrimination"? Do you mean there's no law against geek discrimination?
    – Comintern
    2 hours ago






  • 3




    @Comintern Probably. When people talk about a certain kind of discrimination "not existing", they generally mean that it's not illegal to discriminate based on that particular factor. Either that, or they're using a different definition of "discrimination" (which is reasonable, depending on their field of study; jargon is a pain like that)
    – Nic Hartley
    2 hours ago






  • 4




    @DavidK: I'd expand the second point, from "video game tester" to "for working on a video game". I could see value in e.g. a small retro game studio using a classic game as inspiration, and familiarity with specific games being valuable to speed up the on-boarding process: e.g. if it was a game studio making a "Metroidvania" genre game, it may be worthwhile to look for someone with familiarity with Metroid and Castlevania games which defined (and named) that genre, regardless of whether they will be a tester, developer or designer. "Skill" is then being looked at as a proxy for "familiarity".
    – sharur
    2 hours ago






  • 1




    If you define "discrimination" broadly enough, then all job ads are discriminatory, since they discriminate against people who don't want or are unsuitable for the job.
    – BenM
    1 hour ago


















up vote
8
down vote













No discrimination.

Yes, you're overreacting.



...and you diminish a very important protection mechanism with banal nonsense !



In fact employers are free to chose their employees' suitable qualifications and personalities as they please and they deem fitting into their company.



Discrimination is to reject because of race, gender, religion, age etc.



Check antidiscrimination laws in your country, you won't find video games in the list...




I do agree though, it is not the smartest decision to include that.

It's not even required for the job, just for the one hiring to have someone like minded to hang out with.
One could argue however it is to build a certain company climate, which is fine to do nonetheless.



EDIT:
I don't see the post age discriminatory either.



A) growing up around the times of SNES is just a BONUS
B) hiring someone for example in a senior capacity with X years experience, thus excluding a certain age group (young), is perfectly legal and not discrimination at all.



Age discrimination would be if a young and old person fit the job description criteria and they hire the young person, "because young".







Please check the following U.S. law for further details:
https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/discrimination/agedisc



Big thanks to Richard U for providing the link!



§623. Prohibition of age discrimination
(a) Employer practices
It shall be unlawful for an employer—

(1) to fail or refuse to hire [...]
any individual[...]because of such individual's age;

(f) Lawful practices; age an occupational qualification;
other reasonable factors; laws of foreign workplace;
seniority system; employee benefit plans;
discharge or discipline for good cause
It shall not be unlawful [...]

(1) to take any action otherwise prohibited[...]
where age is a bona fide occupational qualification
reasonably necessary to the normal operation[...]
or where the differentiation is based on
reasonable factors other than age[...]
or where such practices involve an employee
in a workplace in a foreign country, and compliance
[...]would cause[...]to violate the
laws of the country in which such workplace is located;


Keep in mind, other countries will have different laws...






share|improve this answer























  • @JoeStrazzere could requiring ten years of full-time employment be construed as age discrimination, as it rules out anyone under the age of 28 in most states?
    – Richard U
    3 hours ago






  • 1




    @RichardU - no, such job requirements wouldn't be age discrimination.
    – Joe Strazzere
    3 hours ago










  • @JoeStrazzere while I was answering you, a similar thought crossed my mind as well. It probably could be argued like that, potentially even won.However a good judge would(should) also consider the INTENT of the law.As a lay person I assume the law is to create equal opportunities and to prevent arbitrary and for the job in question irrelevant discrimination.
    – DigitalBlade969
    3 hours ago






  • 1




    @DigitalBlade969 - well, the intent of the age discrimination laws is to protect discrimination against older workers.
    – Joe Strazzere
    3 hours ago












  • @JoeStrazzere in the context of them being disadvantaged SOLELY due to their age, despite having all other qualifications / experience for the work required.If they know Cobol but not java it's the qualification. If they know both and they're still not getting hired just because they're old, it's age discrimination.
    – DigitalBlade969
    3 hours ago


















up vote
7
down vote














Am I wrong in thinking this is unnecessary and could be perceived as
discriminatory?




Anything can be perceived as discriminatory. But only a lawsuit would determine if it is actually discriminatory or not and that's unlikely to happen.



It is completely unnecessary. Not a smart way to advertise for help, IMHO.



It's clear you have a reasonable worry, since ads which are designed to deter older people from applying might be deemed discriminatory: https://www.bizfilings.com/toolkit/research-topics/office-hr/case-studies-of-age-discrimination-in-job-ads



But, practically speaking, it's extremely unlikely to ever get that far. Try not to worry.



Unless you are this person's boss, or unless you are the hiring manager, there's not much you can do. There are a lot of stupid job ads out there. Maybe after a few interviews, they will realize that the ad isn't attracting the right kind of candidate. Maybe not. They may well get a "personality" out of this ad. Hopefully, you get a good worker too.






share|improve this answer























  • Thanks. How do I convince this person to exclude it since they're dead set on looking for a "personality"?
    – user95595
    4 hours ago






  • 1




    @user95595 let them do it. No one looking for a serious job will apply. That person can waste their time interviewing people. After that, maybe they will see the light
    – SaggingRufus
    4 hours ago


















up vote
3
down vote













No, this is not discrimination, and confronting someone over what amounts to nothing more than an impish rider to a job ad is not going to be well received.



As someone with disabilities who has suffered actual discrimination, I find such trivializing of a real problem in the workplace highly irritating. If I were at your company I would ask people to seriously reconsider what your future with the company would be from that point, and have HR flag you as a potential troublemaker.



I say this not to berate you, but to show you how badly an overreaction could harm YOUR career by triggering a backlash.



Right now, there are articles in the news every single day about someone doing something as an overreaction. The principal disciplined for banning candy canes, among others comes to mind. An accusation of discrimination can ruin someone's career, and as such, the blowback from a false one can have a similar effect.



In short, never confront someone about discrimination unless you're sure, and you've got proof, or it could end badly for you.



That said:



The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA) protects certain applicants and employees 40 years of age and older from discrimination on the basis of age in hiring, promotion, discharge, compensation, or terms, conditions or privileges of employment. The ADEA is enforced by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).



So, no, not by any legal definition is it age discrimination.



For reference:



https://www.bizfilings.com/toolkit/research-topics/office-hr/case-studies-of-age-discrimination-in-job-ads



Thanks to Joe Strazzere for providing that link.






share|improve this answer



















  • 2




    "...and have HR flag you as a potential troublemaker" really? You talk about overreacting, but I don't get how me asking my colleague "could be perceived as discriminatory?" is being a troublemaker. It served no purpose to the job ad. I wasn't trying to trivialize discrimination, I just want my company to not post an inappropriate job ad. I was not accusing this person of discrimination.
    – user95595
    3 hours ago










  • @user95595 from your post " I challenged this person and said it could easily be interpreted as age or "geek" discrimination " That's an accusation. You didn't say you asked, you said you challenged.
    – Richard U
    3 hours ago












  • Ads which are " designed to deter older persons from applying" may also be discriminatory. See: bizfilings.com/toolkit/research-topics/office-hr/…
    – Joe Strazzere
    3 hours ago










  • @JoeStrazzere thanks, I'll add that to my answer.
    – Richard U
    3 hours ago










  • @user95595 - don't worry. You wouldn't be considered a troublemaker by any reasonable employer.
    – Joe Strazzere
    3 hours ago


















up vote
3
down vote













Suppose the hiring manager was a woman and she announced that she thought the ideal candidate for the IT role was someone who had worked needlepoint as a hobby. Oh, and scrapbooked. It would fit the "corporate culture" she was trying to create. And she'd done those things herself as a younger person and felt that they contribute greatly to the person she is, and the workplace skills she has.



Discriminatory? She assures you she'd be happy to hire a man who had done these things!



But of course it's discriminatory. Any selection criteria which is not in-and-of itself a bona fide job requirement but which correlates with gender, age or culture is systemically discriminatory.



So if you're hiring a programmer, or accountant, or truck driver, you can't say you want someone who's played college football any more than you can prefer a former cheerleader.



Corporate culture can't be an excuse for discrimination. It can be a form of discrimination, if the the corporate culture is inherently discriminatory--if it can't work with women, or people of different cultures, or different religions.



Your hiring manager has confused a place of employment with a private club. He's welcome to start an SNES society that meets in his man cave at home, but as an employer he's got to play by the rules. Your company needs to do itself a big favour and retain the services of a good HR consultant to vet their hiring process.






share|improve this answer





















  • I've been struggling to come up with an counter example all day and I think the example you gave is great. Thanks!
    – user95595
    55 secs ago


















up vote
1
down vote













1) "Bonus" qualifications are just that, "bonus". If you have those qualifications, then you are looked on as a better candidate. It's like "We want a Java developer, bonus if you also know Angular".



2) Not being familiar with SNES games is not any more age discriminatory than not being familiar with COBOL or FORTRAN or BASIC. Replace SNES with COBOL on the JD and see if it still feels discriminatory. If not, then it's not discriminatory (in the "can I be sued for this" sense, although it may be discriminatory in other ways). IANAL but I feel sufficiently confident saying this.



3) It might not be appropriate to have on a JD though, because it makes the company feel a bit unprofessional. Like, "if I work for this company, am I going to have my salary capped based on how good I am at Mortal Kombat?" It might be something to come up in the interview, if such a conversation can easily be raised without feeling awkward.



tl;dr: You are not wrong in thinking it is unnecessary. You are wrong in thinking it would be perceived as discriminatory by a reasonable applicant (although this is somewhat opinion). If I was the HR manager, I would not want to hire someone who would perceive such a thing as discriminatory; such a person would not be a good culture fit at a company I was in charge of.






share|improve this answer

















  • 1




    Not being familiar with SNES games is not any more age discriminatory : especially since they now re-edited the good ol' NES and SNES and that I know some millenials having fun with it ;)
    – OldPadawan
    4 hours ago










  • "We want a Java developer, bonus if you also know Angular" Additional bonus points if you can explain in the interview what the two have to do with each other?
    – a CVn
    2 hours ago










  • I haven't seen COBOL listed on a job ad unless it was going to be used in the job. (And I never learned COBOL, nobody saw me, and you can't prove anything.)
    – David Thornley
    37 mins ago


















up vote
0
down vote













It is quite obviously discrimination. It is also quite obviously not illegal discrimination. On the third hand, you will be losing out on some good candidates.



You may reject a candidate who hasn't grown up playing these games (but may be willing to accept candidates who refused to grow up while playing these games). And candidates of all ages will think that your advert is rather childish and ignore you.






share|improve this answer





















  • Your answer made something click for me. When I was saying "discrimination", I think that I misused the word (or didn't qualify it) correctly. I was feeling that the post was being exclusive rather than inclusive and was not necessarily implying an illegality. Simply put, I felt as though it was going out of it's way to say "it's only a bonus to like the things that we like" which isn't fair.
    – user95595
    2 hours ago










  • @user95595 you want to be exclusive. Specifically, you want to exclude anyone who would not fit the corporate or team culture.
    – Richard U
    2 hours ago






  • 1




    @RichardU "culture is not a foosball table" or in my case video games...
    – user95595
    2 hours ago






  • 1




    @user95595 yeah, it is, and far more than you think.
    – Richard U
    2 hours ago


















up vote
-1
down vote














The person hiring and writing the job ad loves SNES video games and grew up around that time.




It's hard to tell if this same person is also running your team. From what I gather this person's job is to interview and hire talent.



With that said, can you bring it up to your team's lead? Also, in your day to day job, are you or coworkers playing SNES games? So it's misleading if no one except this person is playing or into SNES.



If the person doing the job ad is also your team's lead, I would bring up that this could lead to potential conflict especially if he's friendly on the ground that the person is into SNES games. I had coworkers in the past who got friendly with the boss by playing online games for hours. Things went south when the boss and coworker had a conflict and discipline had to be done. It caused a fallout.






share|improve this answer





















    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "423"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: false,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });






    user95595 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworkplace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f124482%2fis-it-discriminatory-to-put-bonus-video-game-skills-in-a-job-advertisement%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown




















    StackExchange.ready(function () {
    $("#show-editor-button input, #show-editor-button button").click(function () {
    var showEditor = function() {
    $("#show-editor-button").hide();
    $("#post-form").removeClass("dno");
    StackExchange.editor.finallyInit();
    };

    var useFancy = $(this).data('confirm-use-fancy');
    if(useFancy == 'True') {
    var popupTitle = $(this).data('confirm-fancy-title');
    var popupBody = $(this).data('confirm-fancy-body');
    var popupAccept = $(this).data('confirm-fancy-accept-button');

    $(this).loadPopup({
    url: '/post/self-answer-popup',
    loaded: function(popup) {
    var pTitle = $(popup).find('h2');
    var pBody = $(popup).find('.popup-body');
    var pSubmit = $(popup).find('.popup-submit');

    pTitle.text(popupTitle);
    pBody.html(popupBody);
    pSubmit.val(popupAccept).click(showEditor);
    }
    })
    } else{
    var confirmText = $(this).data('confirm-text');
    if (confirmText ? confirm(confirmText) : true) {
    showEditor();
    }
    }
    });
    });






    8 Answers
    8






    active

    oldest

    votes








    8 Answers
    8






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes








    up vote
    35
    down vote













    Is this discriminatory? No, probably not. Is it inappropriate to put in a job ad? Yes, most definitely.



    First, I'm going to assume that your colleague just wants to include the "bonus" section for flavor and doesn't actually want to judge hiring based on SNES skills, because to do so would just be moronic.



    Second, unless you are hiring a video game tester, having a section on video game skills just doesn't make any sense and will only confuse your potential candidates. Most people looking at the ad will spend a minute or two trying to figure out how serious that section is. And if they determine it's not serious, then they'll have to figure out if there's any other parts of the advertisement that weren't meant to be serious. It makes it difficult to figure out what you really want from a candidate, which also makes it hard for recruiters to figure out who to send your way.



    Third, it looks unprofessional. If I saw that in a job ad I'd figure the company was a startup made by some college buddies and not someplace I'd really want to depend on a paycheck from. But maybe you have a really laid-back culture like that and you want to put that out there from the beginning. Just know that you'll eliminate a lot of prospects because of it.



    Back to your original question though, I wouldn't worry about discrimination. There's no such thing as "geek discrimination," and this wouldn't qualify as age discrimination since someone of any age can be a fan of SNES games.






    share|improve this answer



















    • 2




      In the US (at a federal level, anyways) it is not illegal to discriminate against young people.
      – stannius
      3 hours ago










    • There's no such thing as "geek discrimination"? Do you mean there's no law against geek discrimination?
      – Comintern
      2 hours ago






    • 3




      @Comintern Probably. When people talk about a certain kind of discrimination "not existing", they generally mean that it's not illegal to discriminate based on that particular factor. Either that, or they're using a different definition of "discrimination" (which is reasonable, depending on their field of study; jargon is a pain like that)
      – Nic Hartley
      2 hours ago






    • 4




      @DavidK: I'd expand the second point, from "video game tester" to "for working on a video game". I could see value in e.g. a small retro game studio using a classic game as inspiration, and familiarity with specific games being valuable to speed up the on-boarding process: e.g. if it was a game studio making a "Metroidvania" genre game, it may be worthwhile to look for someone with familiarity with Metroid and Castlevania games which defined (and named) that genre, regardless of whether they will be a tester, developer or designer. "Skill" is then being looked at as a proxy for "familiarity".
      – sharur
      2 hours ago






    • 1




      If you define "discrimination" broadly enough, then all job ads are discriminatory, since they discriminate against people who don't want or are unsuitable for the job.
      – BenM
      1 hour ago















    up vote
    35
    down vote













    Is this discriminatory? No, probably not. Is it inappropriate to put in a job ad? Yes, most definitely.



    First, I'm going to assume that your colleague just wants to include the "bonus" section for flavor and doesn't actually want to judge hiring based on SNES skills, because to do so would just be moronic.



    Second, unless you are hiring a video game tester, having a section on video game skills just doesn't make any sense and will only confuse your potential candidates. Most people looking at the ad will spend a minute or two trying to figure out how serious that section is. And if they determine it's not serious, then they'll have to figure out if there's any other parts of the advertisement that weren't meant to be serious. It makes it difficult to figure out what you really want from a candidate, which also makes it hard for recruiters to figure out who to send your way.



    Third, it looks unprofessional. If I saw that in a job ad I'd figure the company was a startup made by some college buddies and not someplace I'd really want to depend on a paycheck from. But maybe you have a really laid-back culture like that and you want to put that out there from the beginning. Just know that you'll eliminate a lot of prospects because of it.



    Back to your original question though, I wouldn't worry about discrimination. There's no such thing as "geek discrimination," and this wouldn't qualify as age discrimination since someone of any age can be a fan of SNES games.






    share|improve this answer



















    • 2




      In the US (at a federal level, anyways) it is not illegal to discriminate against young people.
      – stannius
      3 hours ago










    • There's no such thing as "geek discrimination"? Do you mean there's no law against geek discrimination?
      – Comintern
      2 hours ago






    • 3




      @Comintern Probably. When people talk about a certain kind of discrimination "not existing", they generally mean that it's not illegal to discriminate based on that particular factor. Either that, or they're using a different definition of "discrimination" (which is reasonable, depending on their field of study; jargon is a pain like that)
      – Nic Hartley
      2 hours ago






    • 4




      @DavidK: I'd expand the second point, from "video game tester" to "for working on a video game". I could see value in e.g. a small retro game studio using a classic game as inspiration, and familiarity with specific games being valuable to speed up the on-boarding process: e.g. if it was a game studio making a "Metroidvania" genre game, it may be worthwhile to look for someone with familiarity with Metroid and Castlevania games which defined (and named) that genre, regardless of whether they will be a tester, developer or designer. "Skill" is then being looked at as a proxy for "familiarity".
      – sharur
      2 hours ago






    • 1




      If you define "discrimination" broadly enough, then all job ads are discriminatory, since they discriminate against people who don't want or are unsuitable for the job.
      – BenM
      1 hour ago













    up vote
    35
    down vote










    up vote
    35
    down vote









    Is this discriminatory? No, probably not. Is it inappropriate to put in a job ad? Yes, most definitely.



    First, I'm going to assume that your colleague just wants to include the "bonus" section for flavor and doesn't actually want to judge hiring based on SNES skills, because to do so would just be moronic.



    Second, unless you are hiring a video game tester, having a section on video game skills just doesn't make any sense and will only confuse your potential candidates. Most people looking at the ad will spend a minute or two trying to figure out how serious that section is. And if they determine it's not serious, then they'll have to figure out if there's any other parts of the advertisement that weren't meant to be serious. It makes it difficult to figure out what you really want from a candidate, which also makes it hard for recruiters to figure out who to send your way.



    Third, it looks unprofessional. If I saw that in a job ad I'd figure the company was a startup made by some college buddies and not someplace I'd really want to depend on a paycheck from. But maybe you have a really laid-back culture like that and you want to put that out there from the beginning. Just know that you'll eliminate a lot of prospects because of it.



    Back to your original question though, I wouldn't worry about discrimination. There's no such thing as "geek discrimination," and this wouldn't qualify as age discrimination since someone of any age can be a fan of SNES games.






    share|improve this answer














    Is this discriminatory? No, probably not. Is it inappropriate to put in a job ad? Yes, most definitely.



    First, I'm going to assume that your colleague just wants to include the "bonus" section for flavor and doesn't actually want to judge hiring based on SNES skills, because to do so would just be moronic.



    Second, unless you are hiring a video game tester, having a section on video game skills just doesn't make any sense and will only confuse your potential candidates. Most people looking at the ad will spend a minute or two trying to figure out how serious that section is. And if they determine it's not serious, then they'll have to figure out if there's any other parts of the advertisement that weren't meant to be serious. It makes it difficult to figure out what you really want from a candidate, which also makes it hard for recruiters to figure out who to send your way.



    Third, it looks unprofessional. If I saw that in a job ad I'd figure the company was a startup made by some college buddies and not someplace I'd really want to depend on a paycheck from. But maybe you have a really laid-back culture like that and you want to put that out there from the beginning. Just know that you'll eliminate a lot of prospects because of it.



    Back to your original question though, I wouldn't worry about discrimination. There's no such thing as "geek discrimination," and this wouldn't qualify as age discrimination since someone of any age can be a fan of SNES games.







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited 4 hours ago

























    answered 4 hours ago









    David K

    23k1481118




    23k1481118








    • 2




      In the US (at a federal level, anyways) it is not illegal to discriminate against young people.
      – stannius
      3 hours ago










    • There's no such thing as "geek discrimination"? Do you mean there's no law against geek discrimination?
      – Comintern
      2 hours ago






    • 3




      @Comintern Probably. When people talk about a certain kind of discrimination "not existing", they generally mean that it's not illegal to discriminate based on that particular factor. Either that, or they're using a different definition of "discrimination" (which is reasonable, depending on their field of study; jargon is a pain like that)
      – Nic Hartley
      2 hours ago






    • 4




      @DavidK: I'd expand the second point, from "video game tester" to "for working on a video game". I could see value in e.g. a small retro game studio using a classic game as inspiration, and familiarity with specific games being valuable to speed up the on-boarding process: e.g. if it was a game studio making a "Metroidvania" genre game, it may be worthwhile to look for someone with familiarity with Metroid and Castlevania games which defined (and named) that genre, regardless of whether they will be a tester, developer or designer. "Skill" is then being looked at as a proxy for "familiarity".
      – sharur
      2 hours ago






    • 1




      If you define "discrimination" broadly enough, then all job ads are discriminatory, since they discriminate against people who don't want or are unsuitable for the job.
      – BenM
      1 hour ago














    • 2




      In the US (at a federal level, anyways) it is not illegal to discriminate against young people.
      – stannius
      3 hours ago










    • There's no such thing as "geek discrimination"? Do you mean there's no law against geek discrimination?
      – Comintern
      2 hours ago






    • 3




      @Comintern Probably. When people talk about a certain kind of discrimination "not existing", they generally mean that it's not illegal to discriminate based on that particular factor. Either that, or they're using a different definition of "discrimination" (which is reasonable, depending on their field of study; jargon is a pain like that)
      – Nic Hartley
      2 hours ago






    • 4




      @DavidK: I'd expand the second point, from "video game tester" to "for working on a video game". I could see value in e.g. a small retro game studio using a classic game as inspiration, and familiarity with specific games being valuable to speed up the on-boarding process: e.g. if it was a game studio making a "Metroidvania" genre game, it may be worthwhile to look for someone with familiarity with Metroid and Castlevania games which defined (and named) that genre, regardless of whether they will be a tester, developer or designer. "Skill" is then being looked at as a proxy for "familiarity".
      – sharur
      2 hours ago






    • 1




      If you define "discrimination" broadly enough, then all job ads are discriminatory, since they discriminate against people who don't want or are unsuitable for the job.
      – BenM
      1 hour ago








    2




    2




    In the US (at a federal level, anyways) it is not illegal to discriminate against young people.
    – stannius
    3 hours ago




    In the US (at a federal level, anyways) it is not illegal to discriminate against young people.
    – stannius
    3 hours ago












    There's no such thing as "geek discrimination"? Do you mean there's no law against geek discrimination?
    – Comintern
    2 hours ago




    There's no such thing as "geek discrimination"? Do you mean there's no law against geek discrimination?
    – Comintern
    2 hours ago




    3




    3




    @Comintern Probably. When people talk about a certain kind of discrimination "not existing", they generally mean that it's not illegal to discriminate based on that particular factor. Either that, or they're using a different definition of "discrimination" (which is reasonable, depending on their field of study; jargon is a pain like that)
    – Nic Hartley
    2 hours ago




    @Comintern Probably. When people talk about a certain kind of discrimination "not existing", they generally mean that it's not illegal to discriminate based on that particular factor. Either that, or they're using a different definition of "discrimination" (which is reasonable, depending on their field of study; jargon is a pain like that)
    – Nic Hartley
    2 hours ago




    4




    4




    @DavidK: I'd expand the second point, from "video game tester" to "for working on a video game". I could see value in e.g. a small retro game studio using a classic game as inspiration, and familiarity with specific games being valuable to speed up the on-boarding process: e.g. if it was a game studio making a "Metroidvania" genre game, it may be worthwhile to look for someone with familiarity with Metroid and Castlevania games which defined (and named) that genre, regardless of whether they will be a tester, developer or designer. "Skill" is then being looked at as a proxy for "familiarity".
    – sharur
    2 hours ago




    @DavidK: I'd expand the second point, from "video game tester" to "for working on a video game". I could see value in e.g. a small retro game studio using a classic game as inspiration, and familiarity with specific games being valuable to speed up the on-boarding process: e.g. if it was a game studio making a "Metroidvania" genre game, it may be worthwhile to look for someone with familiarity with Metroid and Castlevania games which defined (and named) that genre, regardless of whether they will be a tester, developer or designer. "Skill" is then being looked at as a proxy for "familiarity".
    – sharur
    2 hours ago




    1




    1




    If you define "discrimination" broadly enough, then all job ads are discriminatory, since they discriminate against people who don't want or are unsuitable for the job.
    – BenM
    1 hour ago




    If you define "discrimination" broadly enough, then all job ads are discriminatory, since they discriminate against people who don't want or are unsuitable for the job.
    – BenM
    1 hour ago












    up vote
    8
    down vote













    No discrimination.

    Yes, you're overreacting.



    ...and you diminish a very important protection mechanism with banal nonsense !



    In fact employers are free to chose their employees' suitable qualifications and personalities as they please and they deem fitting into their company.



    Discrimination is to reject because of race, gender, religion, age etc.



    Check antidiscrimination laws in your country, you won't find video games in the list...




    I do agree though, it is not the smartest decision to include that.

    It's not even required for the job, just for the one hiring to have someone like minded to hang out with.
    One could argue however it is to build a certain company climate, which is fine to do nonetheless.



    EDIT:
    I don't see the post age discriminatory either.



    A) growing up around the times of SNES is just a BONUS
    B) hiring someone for example in a senior capacity with X years experience, thus excluding a certain age group (young), is perfectly legal and not discrimination at all.



    Age discrimination would be if a young and old person fit the job description criteria and they hire the young person, "because young".







    Please check the following U.S. law for further details:
    https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/discrimination/agedisc



    Big thanks to Richard U for providing the link!



    §623. Prohibition of age discrimination
    (a) Employer practices
    It shall be unlawful for an employer—

    (1) to fail or refuse to hire [...]
    any individual[...]because of such individual's age;

    (f) Lawful practices; age an occupational qualification;
    other reasonable factors; laws of foreign workplace;
    seniority system; employee benefit plans;
    discharge or discipline for good cause
    It shall not be unlawful [...]

    (1) to take any action otherwise prohibited[...]
    where age is a bona fide occupational qualification
    reasonably necessary to the normal operation[...]
    or where the differentiation is based on
    reasonable factors other than age[...]
    or where such practices involve an employee
    in a workplace in a foreign country, and compliance
    [...]would cause[...]to violate the
    laws of the country in which such workplace is located;


    Keep in mind, other countries will have different laws...






    share|improve this answer























    • @JoeStrazzere could requiring ten years of full-time employment be construed as age discrimination, as it rules out anyone under the age of 28 in most states?
      – Richard U
      3 hours ago






    • 1




      @RichardU - no, such job requirements wouldn't be age discrimination.
      – Joe Strazzere
      3 hours ago










    • @JoeStrazzere while I was answering you, a similar thought crossed my mind as well. It probably could be argued like that, potentially even won.However a good judge would(should) also consider the INTENT of the law.As a lay person I assume the law is to create equal opportunities and to prevent arbitrary and for the job in question irrelevant discrimination.
      – DigitalBlade969
      3 hours ago






    • 1




      @DigitalBlade969 - well, the intent of the age discrimination laws is to protect discrimination against older workers.
      – Joe Strazzere
      3 hours ago












    • @JoeStrazzere in the context of them being disadvantaged SOLELY due to their age, despite having all other qualifications / experience for the work required.If they know Cobol but not java it's the qualification. If they know both and they're still not getting hired just because they're old, it's age discrimination.
      – DigitalBlade969
      3 hours ago















    up vote
    8
    down vote













    No discrimination.

    Yes, you're overreacting.



    ...and you diminish a very important protection mechanism with banal nonsense !



    In fact employers are free to chose their employees' suitable qualifications and personalities as they please and they deem fitting into their company.



    Discrimination is to reject because of race, gender, religion, age etc.



    Check antidiscrimination laws in your country, you won't find video games in the list...




    I do agree though, it is not the smartest decision to include that.

    It's not even required for the job, just for the one hiring to have someone like minded to hang out with.
    One could argue however it is to build a certain company climate, which is fine to do nonetheless.



    EDIT:
    I don't see the post age discriminatory either.



    A) growing up around the times of SNES is just a BONUS
    B) hiring someone for example in a senior capacity with X years experience, thus excluding a certain age group (young), is perfectly legal and not discrimination at all.



    Age discrimination would be if a young and old person fit the job description criteria and they hire the young person, "because young".







    Please check the following U.S. law for further details:
    https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/discrimination/agedisc



    Big thanks to Richard U for providing the link!



    §623. Prohibition of age discrimination
    (a) Employer practices
    It shall be unlawful for an employer—

    (1) to fail or refuse to hire [...]
    any individual[...]because of such individual's age;

    (f) Lawful practices; age an occupational qualification;
    other reasonable factors; laws of foreign workplace;
    seniority system; employee benefit plans;
    discharge or discipline for good cause
    It shall not be unlawful [...]

    (1) to take any action otherwise prohibited[...]
    where age is a bona fide occupational qualification
    reasonably necessary to the normal operation[...]
    or where the differentiation is based on
    reasonable factors other than age[...]
    or where such practices involve an employee
    in a workplace in a foreign country, and compliance
    [...]would cause[...]to violate the
    laws of the country in which such workplace is located;


    Keep in mind, other countries will have different laws...






    share|improve this answer























    • @JoeStrazzere could requiring ten years of full-time employment be construed as age discrimination, as it rules out anyone under the age of 28 in most states?
      – Richard U
      3 hours ago






    • 1




      @RichardU - no, such job requirements wouldn't be age discrimination.
      – Joe Strazzere
      3 hours ago










    • @JoeStrazzere while I was answering you, a similar thought crossed my mind as well. It probably could be argued like that, potentially even won.However a good judge would(should) also consider the INTENT of the law.As a lay person I assume the law is to create equal opportunities and to prevent arbitrary and for the job in question irrelevant discrimination.
      – DigitalBlade969
      3 hours ago






    • 1




      @DigitalBlade969 - well, the intent of the age discrimination laws is to protect discrimination against older workers.
      – Joe Strazzere
      3 hours ago












    • @JoeStrazzere in the context of them being disadvantaged SOLELY due to their age, despite having all other qualifications / experience for the work required.If they know Cobol but not java it's the qualification. If they know both and they're still not getting hired just because they're old, it's age discrimination.
      – DigitalBlade969
      3 hours ago













    up vote
    8
    down vote










    up vote
    8
    down vote









    No discrimination.

    Yes, you're overreacting.



    ...and you diminish a very important protection mechanism with banal nonsense !



    In fact employers are free to chose their employees' suitable qualifications and personalities as they please and they deem fitting into their company.



    Discrimination is to reject because of race, gender, religion, age etc.



    Check antidiscrimination laws in your country, you won't find video games in the list...




    I do agree though, it is not the smartest decision to include that.

    It's not even required for the job, just for the one hiring to have someone like minded to hang out with.
    One could argue however it is to build a certain company climate, which is fine to do nonetheless.



    EDIT:
    I don't see the post age discriminatory either.



    A) growing up around the times of SNES is just a BONUS
    B) hiring someone for example in a senior capacity with X years experience, thus excluding a certain age group (young), is perfectly legal and not discrimination at all.



    Age discrimination would be if a young and old person fit the job description criteria and they hire the young person, "because young".







    Please check the following U.S. law for further details:
    https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/discrimination/agedisc



    Big thanks to Richard U for providing the link!



    §623. Prohibition of age discrimination
    (a) Employer practices
    It shall be unlawful for an employer—

    (1) to fail or refuse to hire [...]
    any individual[...]because of such individual's age;

    (f) Lawful practices; age an occupational qualification;
    other reasonable factors; laws of foreign workplace;
    seniority system; employee benefit plans;
    discharge or discipline for good cause
    It shall not be unlawful [...]

    (1) to take any action otherwise prohibited[...]
    where age is a bona fide occupational qualification
    reasonably necessary to the normal operation[...]
    or where the differentiation is based on
    reasonable factors other than age[...]
    or where such practices involve an employee
    in a workplace in a foreign country, and compliance
    [...]would cause[...]to violate the
    laws of the country in which such workplace is located;


    Keep in mind, other countries will have different laws...






    share|improve this answer














    No discrimination.

    Yes, you're overreacting.



    ...and you diminish a very important protection mechanism with banal nonsense !



    In fact employers are free to chose their employees' suitable qualifications and personalities as they please and they deem fitting into their company.



    Discrimination is to reject because of race, gender, religion, age etc.



    Check antidiscrimination laws in your country, you won't find video games in the list...




    I do agree though, it is not the smartest decision to include that.

    It's not even required for the job, just for the one hiring to have someone like minded to hang out with.
    One could argue however it is to build a certain company climate, which is fine to do nonetheless.



    EDIT:
    I don't see the post age discriminatory either.



    A) growing up around the times of SNES is just a BONUS
    B) hiring someone for example in a senior capacity with X years experience, thus excluding a certain age group (young), is perfectly legal and not discrimination at all.



    Age discrimination would be if a young and old person fit the job description criteria and they hire the young person, "because young".







    Please check the following U.S. law for further details:
    https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/discrimination/agedisc



    Big thanks to Richard U for providing the link!



    §623. Prohibition of age discrimination
    (a) Employer practices
    It shall be unlawful for an employer—

    (1) to fail or refuse to hire [...]
    any individual[...]because of such individual's age;

    (f) Lawful practices; age an occupational qualification;
    other reasonable factors; laws of foreign workplace;
    seniority system; employee benefit plans;
    discharge or discipline for good cause
    It shall not be unlawful [...]

    (1) to take any action otherwise prohibited[...]
    where age is a bona fide occupational qualification
    reasonably necessary to the normal operation[...]
    or where the differentiation is based on
    reasonable factors other than age[...]
    or where such practices involve an employee
    in a workplace in a foreign country, and compliance
    [...]would cause[...]to violate the
    laws of the country in which such workplace is located;


    Keep in mind, other countries will have different laws...







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited 1 hour ago

























    answered 4 hours ago









    DigitalBlade969

    3,3601315




    3,3601315












    • @JoeStrazzere could requiring ten years of full-time employment be construed as age discrimination, as it rules out anyone under the age of 28 in most states?
      – Richard U
      3 hours ago






    • 1




      @RichardU - no, such job requirements wouldn't be age discrimination.
      – Joe Strazzere
      3 hours ago










    • @JoeStrazzere while I was answering you, a similar thought crossed my mind as well. It probably could be argued like that, potentially even won.However a good judge would(should) also consider the INTENT of the law.As a lay person I assume the law is to create equal opportunities and to prevent arbitrary and for the job in question irrelevant discrimination.
      – DigitalBlade969
      3 hours ago






    • 1




      @DigitalBlade969 - well, the intent of the age discrimination laws is to protect discrimination against older workers.
      – Joe Strazzere
      3 hours ago












    • @JoeStrazzere in the context of them being disadvantaged SOLELY due to their age, despite having all other qualifications / experience for the work required.If they know Cobol but not java it's the qualification. If they know both and they're still not getting hired just because they're old, it's age discrimination.
      – DigitalBlade969
      3 hours ago


















    • @JoeStrazzere could requiring ten years of full-time employment be construed as age discrimination, as it rules out anyone under the age of 28 in most states?
      – Richard U
      3 hours ago






    • 1




      @RichardU - no, such job requirements wouldn't be age discrimination.
      – Joe Strazzere
      3 hours ago










    • @JoeStrazzere while I was answering you, a similar thought crossed my mind as well. It probably could be argued like that, potentially even won.However a good judge would(should) also consider the INTENT of the law.As a lay person I assume the law is to create equal opportunities and to prevent arbitrary and for the job in question irrelevant discrimination.
      – DigitalBlade969
      3 hours ago






    • 1




      @DigitalBlade969 - well, the intent of the age discrimination laws is to protect discrimination against older workers.
      – Joe Strazzere
      3 hours ago












    • @JoeStrazzere in the context of them being disadvantaged SOLELY due to their age, despite having all other qualifications / experience for the work required.If they know Cobol but not java it's the qualification. If they know both and they're still not getting hired just because they're old, it's age discrimination.
      – DigitalBlade969
      3 hours ago
















    @JoeStrazzere could requiring ten years of full-time employment be construed as age discrimination, as it rules out anyone under the age of 28 in most states?
    – Richard U
    3 hours ago




    @JoeStrazzere could requiring ten years of full-time employment be construed as age discrimination, as it rules out anyone under the age of 28 in most states?
    – Richard U
    3 hours ago




    1




    1




    @RichardU - no, such job requirements wouldn't be age discrimination.
    – Joe Strazzere
    3 hours ago




    @RichardU - no, such job requirements wouldn't be age discrimination.
    – Joe Strazzere
    3 hours ago












    @JoeStrazzere while I was answering you, a similar thought crossed my mind as well. It probably could be argued like that, potentially even won.However a good judge would(should) also consider the INTENT of the law.As a lay person I assume the law is to create equal opportunities and to prevent arbitrary and for the job in question irrelevant discrimination.
    – DigitalBlade969
    3 hours ago




    @JoeStrazzere while I was answering you, a similar thought crossed my mind as well. It probably could be argued like that, potentially even won.However a good judge would(should) also consider the INTENT of the law.As a lay person I assume the law is to create equal opportunities and to prevent arbitrary and for the job in question irrelevant discrimination.
    – DigitalBlade969
    3 hours ago




    1




    1




    @DigitalBlade969 - well, the intent of the age discrimination laws is to protect discrimination against older workers.
    – Joe Strazzere
    3 hours ago






    @DigitalBlade969 - well, the intent of the age discrimination laws is to protect discrimination against older workers.
    – Joe Strazzere
    3 hours ago














    @JoeStrazzere in the context of them being disadvantaged SOLELY due to their age, despite having all other qualifications / experience for the work required.If they know Cobol but not java it's the qualification. If they know both and they're still not getting hired just because they're old, it's age discrimination.
    – DigitalBlade969
    3 hours ago




    @JoeStrazzere in the context of them being disadvantaged SOLELY due to their age, despite having all other qualifications / experience for the work required.If they know Cobol but not java it's the qualification. If they know both and they're still not getting hired just because they're old, it's age discrimination.
    – DigitalBlade969
    3 hours ago










    up vote
    7
    down vote














    Am I wrong in thinking this is unnecessary and could be perceived as
    discriminatory?




    Anything can be perceived as discriminatory. But only a lawsuit would determine if it is actually discriminatory or not and that's unlikely to happen.



    It is completely unnecessary. Not a smart way to advertise for help, IMHO.



    It's clear you have a reasonable worry, since ads which are designed to deter older people from applying might be deemed discriminatory: https://www.bizfilings.com/toolkit/research-topics/office-hr/case-studies-of-age-discrimination-in-job-ads



    But, practically speaking, it's extremely unlikely to ever get that far. Try not to worry.



    Unless you are this person's boss, or unless you are the hiring manager, there's not much you can do. There are a lot of stupid job ads out there. Maybe after a few interviews, they will realize that the ad isn't attracting the right kind of candidate. Maybe not. They may well get a "personality" out of this ad. Hopefully, you get a good worker too.






    share|improve this answer























    • Thanks. How do I convince this person to exclude it since they're dead set on looking for a "personality"?
      – user95595
      4 hours ago






    • 1




      @user95595 let them do it. No one looking for a serious job will apply. That person can waste their time interviewing people. After that, maybe they will see the light
      – SaggingRufus
      4 hours ago















    up vote
    7
    down vote














    Am I wrong in thinking this is unnecessary and could be perceived as
    discriminatory?




    Anything can be perceived as discriminatory. But only a lawsuit would determine if it is actually discriminatory or not and that's unlikely to happen.



    It is completely unnecessary. Not a smart way to advertise for help, IMHO.



    It's clear you have a reasonable worry, since ads which are designed to deter older people from applying might be deemed discriminatory: https://www.bizfilings.com/toolkit/research-topics/office-hr/case-studies-of-age-discrimination-in-job-ads



    But, practically speaking, it's extremely unlikely to ever get that far. Try not to worry.



    Unless you are this person's boss, or unless you are the hiring manager, there's not much you can do. There are a lot of stupid job ads out there. Maybe after a few interviews, they will realize that the ad isn't attracting the right kind of candidate. Maybe not. They may well get a "personality" out of this ad. Hopefully, you get a good worker too.






    share|improve this answer























    • Thanks. How do I convince this person to exclude it since they're dead set on looking for a "personality"?
      – user95595
      4 hours ago






    • 1




      @user95595 let them do it. No one looking for a serious job will apply. That person can waste their time interviewing people. After that, maybe they will see the light
      – SaggingRufus
      4 hours ago













    up vote
    7
    down vote










    up vote
    7
    down vote










    Am I wrong in thinking this is unnecessary and could be perceived as
    discriminatory?




    Anything can be perceived as discriminatory. But only a lawsuit would determine if it is actually discriminatory or not and that's unlikely to happen.



    It is completely unnecessary. Not a smart way to advertise for help, IMHO.



    It's clear you have a reasonable worry, since ads which are designed to deter older people from applying might be deemed discriminatory: https://www.bizfilings.com/toolkit/research-topics/office-hr/case-studies-of-age-discrimination-in-job-ads



    But, practically speaking, it's extremely unlikely to ever get that far. Try not to worry.



    Unless you are this person's boss, or unless you are the hiring manager, there's not much you can do. There are a lot of stupid job ads out there. Maybe after a few interviews, they will realize that the ad isn't attracting the right kind of candidate. Maybe not. They may well get a "personality" out of this ad. Hopefully, you get a good worker too.






    share|improve this answer















    Am I wrong in thinking this is unnecessary and could be perceived as
    discriminatory?




    Anything can be perceived as discriminatory. But only a lawsuit would determine if it is actually discriminatory or not and that's unlikely to happen.



    It is completely unnecessary. Not a smart way to advertise for help, IMHO.



    It's clear you have a reasonable worry, since ads which are designed to deter older people from applying might be deemed discriminatory: https://www.bizfilings.com/toolkit/research-topics/office-hr/case-studies-of-age-discrimination-in-job-ads



    But, practically speaking, it's extremely unlikely to ever get that far. Try not to worry.



    Unless you are this person's boss, or unless you are the hiring manager, there's not much you can do. There are a lot of stupid job ads out there. Maybe after a few interviews, they will realize that the ad isn't attracting the right kind of candidate. Maybe not. They may well get a "personality" out of this ad. Hopefully, you get a good worker too.







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited 3 hours ago

























    answered 4 hours ago









    Joe Strazzere

    239k116697994




    239k116697994












    • Thanks. How do I convince this person to exclude it since they're dead set on looking for a "personality"?
      – user95595
      4 hours ago






    • 1




      @user95595 let them do it. No one looking for a serious job will apply. That person can waste their time interviewing people. After that, maybe they will see the light
      – SaggingRufus
      4 hours ago


















    • Thanks. How do I convince this person to exclude it since they're dead set on looking for a "personality"?
      – user95595
      4 hours ago






    • 1




      @user95595 let them do it. No one looking for a serious job will apply. That person can waste their time interviewing people. After that, maybe they will see the light
      – SaggingRufus
      4 hours ago
















    Thanks. How do I convince this person to exclude it since they're dead set on looking for a "personality"?
    – user95595
    4 hours ago




    Thanks. How do I convince this person to exclude it since they're dead set on looking for a "personality"?
    – user95595
    4 hours ago




    1




    1




    @user95595 let them do it. No one looking for a serious job will apply. That person can waste their time interviewing people. After that, maybe they will see the light
    – SaggingRufus
    4 hours ago




    @user95595 let them do it. No one looking for a serious job will apply. That person can waste their time interviewing people. After that, maybe they will see the light
    – SaggingRufus
    4 hours ago










    up vote
    3
    down vote













    No, this is not discrimination, and confronting someone over what amounts to nothing more than an impish rider to a job ad is not going to be well received.



    As someone with disabilities who has suffered actual discrimination, I find such trivializing of a real problem in the workplace highly irritating. If I were at your company I would ask people to seriously reconsider what your future with the company would be from that point, and have HR flag you as a potential troublemaker.



    I say this not to berate you, but to show you how badly an overreaction could harm YOUR career by triggering a backlash.



    Right now, there are articles in the news every single day about someone doing something as an overreaction. The principal disciplined for banning candy canes, among others comes to mind. An accusation of discrimination can ruin someone's career, and as such, the blowback from a false one can have a similar effect.



    In short, never confront someone about discrimination unless you're sure, and you've got proof, or it could end badly for you.



    That said:



    The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA) protects certain applicants and employees 40 years of age and older from discrimination on the basis of age in hiring, promotion, discharge, compensation, or terms, conditions or privileges of employment. The ADEA is enforced by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).



    So, no, not by any legal definition is it age discrimination.



    For reference:



    https://www.bizfilings.com/toolkit/research-topics/office-hr/case-studies-of-age-discrimination-in-job-ads



    Thanks to Joe Strazzere for providing that link.






    share|improve this answer



















    • 2




      "...and have HR flag you as a potential troublemaker" really? You talk about overreacting, but I don't get how me asking my colleague "could be perceived as discriminatory?" is being a troublemaker. It served no purpose to the job ad. I wasn't trying to trivialize discrimination, I just want my company to not post an inappropriate job ad. I was not accusing this person of discrimination.
      – user95595
      3 hours ago










    • @user95595 from your post " I challenged this person and said it could easily be interpreted as age or "geek" discrimination " That's an accusation. You didn't say you asked, you said you challenged.
      – Richard U
      3 hours ago












    • Ads which are " designed to deter older persons from applying" may also be discriminatory. See: bizfilings.com/toolkit/research-topics/office-hr/…
      – Joe Strazzere
      3 hours ago










    • @JoeStrazzere thanks, I'll add that to my answer.
      – Richard U
      3 hours ago










    • @user95595 - don't worry. You wouldn't be considered a troublemaker by any reasonable employer.
      – Joe Strazzere
      3 hours ago















    up vote
    3
    down vote













    No, this is not discrimination, and confronting someone over what amounts to nothing more than an impish rider to a job ad is not going to be well received.



    As someone with disabilities who has suffered actual discrimination, I find such trivializing of a real problem in the workplace highly irritating. If I were at your company I would ask people to seriously reconsider what your future with the company would be from that point, and have HR flag you as a potential troublemaker.



    I say this not to berate you, but to show you how badly an overreaction could harm YOUR career by triggering a backlash.



    Right now, there are articles in the news every single day about someone doing something as an overreaction. The principal disciplined for banning candy canes, among others comes to mind. An accusation of discrimination can ruin someone's career, and as such, the blowback from a false one can have a similar effect.



    In short, never confront someone about discrimination unless you're sure, and you've got proof, or it could end badly for you.



    That said:



    The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA) protects certain applicants and employees 40 years of age and older from discrimination on the basis of age in hiring, promotion, discharge, compensation, or terms, conditions or privileges of employment. The ADEA is enforced by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).



    So, no, not by any legal definition is it age discrimination.



    For reference:



    https://www.bizfilings.com/toolkit/research-topics/office-hr/case-studies-of-age-discrimination-in-job-ads



    Thanks to Joe Strazzere for providing that link.






    share|improve this answer



















    • 2




      "...and have HR flag you as a potential troublemaker" really? You talk about overreacting, but I don't get how me asking my colleague "could be perceived as discriminatory?" is being a troublemaker. It served no purpose to the job ad. I wasn't trying to trivialize discrimination, I just want my company to not post an inappropriate job ad. I was not accusing this person of discrimination.
      – user95595
      3 hours ago










    • @user95595 from your post " I challenged this person and said it could easily be interpreted as age or "geek" discrimination " That's an accusation. You didn't say you asked, you said you challenged.
      – Richard U
      3 hours ago












    • Ads which are " designed to deter older persons from applying" may also be discriminatory. See: bizfilings.com/toolkit/research-topics/office-hr/…
      – Joe Strazzere
      3 hours ago










    • @JoeStrazzere thanks, I'll add that to my answer.
      – Richard U
      3 hours ago










    • @user95595 - don't worry. You wouldn't be considered a troublemaker by any reasonable employer.
      – Joe Strazzere
      3 hours ago













    up vote
    3
    down vote










    up vote
    3
    down vote









    No, this is not discrimination, and confronting someone over what amounts to nothing more than an impish rider to a job ad is not going to be well received.



    As someone with disabilities who has suffered actual discrimination, I find such trivializing of a real problem in the workplace highly irritating. If I were at your company I would ask people to seriously reconsider what your future with the company would be from that point, and have HR flag you as a potential troublemaker.



    I say this not to berate you, but to show you how badly an overreaction could harm YOUR career by triggering a backlash.



    Right now, there are articles in the news every single day about someone doing something as an overreaction. The principal disciplined for banning candy canes, among others comes to mind. An accusation of discrimination can ruin someone's career, and as such, the blowback from a false one can have a similar effect.



    In short, never confront someone about discrimination unless you're sure, and you've got proof, or it could end badly for you.



    That said:



    The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA) protects certain applicants and employees 40 years of age and older from discrimination on the basis of age in hiring, promotion, discharge, compensation, or terms, conditions or privileges of employment. The ADEA is enforced by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).



    So, no, not by any legal definition is it age discrimination.



    For reference:



    https://www.bizfilings.com/toolkit/research-topics/office-hr/case-studies-of-age-discrimination-in-job-ads



    Thanks to Joe Strazzere for providing that link.






    share|improve this answer














    No, this is not discrimination, and confronting someone over what amounts to nothing more than an impish rider to a job ad is not going to be well received.



    As someone with disabilities who has suffered actual discrimination, I find such trivializing of a real problem in the workplace highly irritating. If I were at your company I would ask people to seriously reconsider what your future with the company would be from that point, and have HR flag you as a potential troublemaker.



    I say this not to berate you, but to show you how badly an overreaction could harm YOUR career by triggering a backlash.



    Right now, there are articles in the news every single day about someone doing something as an overreaction. The principal disciplined for banning candy canes, among others comes to mind. An accusation of discrimination can ruin someone's career, and as such, the blowback from a false one can have a similar effect.



    In short, never confront someone about discrimination unless you're sure, and you've got proof, or it could end badly for you.



    That said:



    The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA) protects certain applicants and employees 40 years of age and older from discrimination on the basis of age in hiring, promotion, discharge, compensation, or terms, conditions or privileges of employment. The ADEA is enforced by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).



    So, no, not by any legal definition is it age discrimination.



    For reference:



    https://www.bizfilings.com/toolkit/research-topics/office-hr/case-studies-of-age-discrimination-in-job-ads



    Thanks to Joe Strazzere for providing that link.







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited 3 hours ago

























    answered 3 hours ago









    Richard U

    84k62217331




    84k62217331








    • 2




      "...and have HR flag you as a potential troublemaker" really? You talk about overreacting, but I don't get how me asking my colleague "could be perceived as discriminatory?" is being a troublemaker. It served no purpose to the job ad. I wasn't trying to trivialize discrimination, I just want my company to not post an inappropriate job ad. I was not accusing this person of discrimination.
      – user95595
      3 hours ago










    • @user95595 from your post " I challenged this person and said it could easily be interpreted as age or "geek" discrimination " That's an accusation. You didn't say you asked, you said you challenged.
      – Richard U
      3 hours ago












    • Ads which are " designed to deter older persons from applying" may also be discriminatory. See: bizfilings.com/toolkit/research-topics/office-hr/…
      – Joe Strazzere
      3 hours ago










    • @JoeStrazzere thanks, I'll add that to my answer.
      – Richard U
      3 hours ago










    • @user95595 - don't worry. You wouldn't be considered a troublemaker by any reasonable employer.
      – Joe Strazzere
      3 hours ago














    • 2




      "...and have HR flag you as a potential troublemaker" really? You talk about overreacting, but I don't get how me asking my colleague "could be perceived as discriminatory?" is being a troublemaker. It served no purpose to the job ad. I wasn't trying to trivialize discrimination, I just want my company to not post an inappropriate job ad. I was not accusing this person of discrimination.
      – user95595
      3 hours ago










    • @user95595 from your post " I challenged this person and said it could easily be interpreted as age or "geek" discrimination " That's an accusation. You didn't say you asked, you said you challenged.
      – Richard U
      3 hours ago












    • Ads which are " designed to deter older persons from applying" may also be discriminatory. See: bizfilings.com/toolkit/research-topics/office-hr/…
      – Joe Strazzere
      3 hours ago










    • @JoeStrazzere thanks, I'll add that to my answer.
      – Richard U
      3 hours ago










    • @user95595 - don't worry. You wouldn't be considered a troublemaker by any reasonable employer.
      – Joe Strazzere
      3 hours ago








    2




    2




    "...and have HR flag you as a potential troublemaker" really? You talk about overreacting, but I don't get how me asking my colleague "could be perceived as discriminatory?" is being a troublemaker. It served no purpose to the job ad. I wasn't trying to trivialize discrimination, I just want my company to not post an inappropriate job ad. I was not accusing this person of discrimination.
    – user95595
    3 hours ago




    "...and have HR flag you as a potential troublemaker" really? You talk about overreacting, but I don't get how me asking my colleague "could be perceived as discriminatory?" is being a troublemaker. It served no purpose to the job ad. I wasn't trying to trivialize discrimination, I just want my company to not post an inappropriate job ad. I was not accusing this person of discrimination.
    – user95595
    3 hours ago












    @user95595 from your post " I challenged this person and said it could easily be interpreted as age or "geek" discrimination " That's an accusation. You didn't say you asked, you said you challenged.
    – Richard U
    3 hours ago






    @user95595 from your post " I challenged this person and said it could easily be interpreted as age or "geek" discrimination " That's an accusation. You didn't say you asked, you said you challenged.
    – Richard U
    3 hours ago














    Ads which are " designed to deter older persons from applying" may also be discriminatory. See: bizfilings.com/toolkit/research-topics/office-hr/…
    – Joe Strazzere
    3 hours ago




    Ads which are " designed to deter older persons from applying" may also be discriminatory. See: bizfilings.com/toolkit/research-topics/office-hr/…
    – Joe Strazzere
    3 hours ago












    @JoeStrazzere thanks, I'll add that to my answer.
    – Richard U
    3 hours ago




    @JoeStrazzere thanks, I'll add that to my answer.
    – Richard U
    3 hours ago












    @user95595 - don't worry. You wouldn't be considered a troublemaker by any reasonable employer.
    – Joe Strazzere
    3 hours ago




    @user95595 - don't worry. You wouldn't be considered a troublemaker by any reasonable employer.
    – Joe Strazzere
    3 hours ago










    up vote
    3
    down vote













    Suppose the hiring manager was a woman and she announced that she thought the ideal candidate for the IT role was someone who had worked needlepoint as a hobby. Oh, and scrapbooked. It would fit the "corporate culture" she was trying to create. And she'd done those things herself as a younger person and felt that they contribute greatly to the person she is, and the workplace skills she has.



    Discriminatory? She assures you she'd be happy to hire a man who had done these things!



    But of course it's discriminatory. Any selection criteria which is not in-and-of itself a bona fide job requirement but which correlates with gender, age or culture is systemically discriminatory.



    So if you're hiring a programmer, or accountant, or truck driver, you can't say you want someone who's played college football any more than you can prefer a former cheerleader.



    Corporate culture can't be an excuse for discrimination. It can be a form of discrimination, if the the corporate culture is inherently discriminatory--if it can't work with women, or people of different cultures, or different religions.



    Your hiring manager has confused a place of employment with a private club. He's welcome to start an SNES society that meets in his man cave at home, but as an employer he's got to play by the rules. Your company needs to do itself a big favour and retain the services of a good HR consultant to vet their hiring process.






    share|improve this answer





















    • I've been struggling to come up with an counter example all day and I think the example you gave is great. Thanks!
      – user95595
      55 secs ago















    up vote
    3
    down vote













    Suppose the hiring manager was a woman and she announced that she thought the ideal candidate for the IT role was someone who had worked needlepoint as a hobby. Oh, and scrapbooked. It would fit the "corporate culture" she was trying to create. And she'd done those things herself as a younger person and felt that they contribute greatly to the person she is, and the workplace skills she has.



    Discriminatory? She assures you she'd be happy to hire a man who had done these things!



    But of course it's discriminatory. Any selection criteria which is not in-and-of itself a bona fide job requirement but which correlates with gender, age or culture is systemically discriminatory.



    So if you're hiring a programmer, or accountant, or truck driver, you can't say you want someone who's played college football any more than you can prefer a former cheerleader.



    Corporate culture can't be an excuse for discrimination. It can be a form of discrimination, if the the corporate culture is inherently discriminatory--if it can't work with women, or people of different cultures, or different religions.



    Your hiring manager has confused a place of employment with a private club. He's welcome to start an SNES society that meets in his man cave at home, but as an employer he's got to play by the rules. Your company needs to do itself a big favour and retain the services of a good HR consultant to vet their hiring process.






    share|improve this answer





















    • I've been struggling to come up with an counter example all day and I think the example you gave is great. Thanks!
      – user95595
      55 secs ago













    up vote
    3
    down vote










    up vote
    3
    down vote









    Suppose the hiring manager was a woman and she announced that she thought the ideal candidate for the IT role was someone who had worked needlepoint as a hobby. Oh, and scrapbooked. It would fit the "corporate culture" she was trying to create. And she'd done those things herself as a younger person and felt that they contribute greatly to the person she is, and the workplace skills she has.



    Discriminatory? She assures you she'd be happy to hire a man who had done these things!



    But of course it's discriminatory. Any selection criteria which is not in-and-of itself a bona fide job requirement but which correlates with gender, age or culture is systemically discriminatory.



    So if you're hiring a programmer, or accountant, or truck driver, you can't say you want someone who's played college football any more than you can prefer a former cheerleader.



    Corporate culture can't be an excuse for discrimination. It can be a form of discrimination, if the the corporate culture is inherently discriminatory--if it can't work with women, or people of different cultures, or different religions.



    Your hiring manager has confused a place of employment with a private club. He's welcome to start an SNES society that meets in his man cave at home, but as an employer he's got to play by the rules. Your company needs to do itself a big favour and retain the services of a good HR consultant to vet their hiring process.






    share|improve this answer












    Suppose the hiring manager was a woman and she announced that she thought the ideal candidate for the IT role was someone who had worked needlepoint as a hobby. Oh, and scrapbooked. It would fit the "corporate culture" she was trying to create. And she'd done those things herself as a younger person and felt that they contribute greatly to the person she is, and the workplace skills she has.



    Discriminatory? She assures you she'd be happy to hire a man who had done these things!



    But of course it's discriminatory. Any selection criteria which is not in-and-of itself a bona fide job requirement but which correlates with gender, age or culture is systemically discriminatory.



    So if you're hiring a programmer, or accountant, or truck driver, you can't say you want someone who's played college football any more than you can prefer a former cheerleader.



    Corporate culture can't be an excuse for discrimination. It can be a form of discrimination, if the the corporate culture is inherently discriminatory--if it can't work with women, or people of different cultures, or different religions.



    Your hiring manager has confused a place of employment with a private club. He's welcome to start an SNES society that meets in his man cave at home, but as an employer he's got to play by the rules. Your company needs to do itself a big favour and retain the services of a good HR consultant to vet their hiring process.







    share|improve this answer












    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer










    answered 50 mins ago









    CCTO

    1,30637




    1,30637












    • I've been struggling to come up with an counter example all day and I think the example you gave is great. Thanks!
      – user95595
      55 secs ago


















    • I've been struggling to come up with an counter example all day and I think the example you gave is great. Thanks!
      – user95595
      55 secs ago
















    I've been struggling to come up with an counter example all day and I think the example you gave is great. Thanks!
    – user95595
    55 secs ago




    I've been struggling to come up with an counter example all day and I think the example you gave is great. Thanks!
    – user95595
    55 secs ago










    up vote
    1
    down vote













    1) "Bonus" qualifications are just that, "bonus". If you have those qualifications, then you are looked on as a better candidate. It's like "We want a Java developer, bonus if you also know Angular".



    2) Not being familiar with SNES games is not any more age discriminatory than not being familiar with COBOL or FORTRAN or BASIC. Replace SNES with COBOL on the JD and see if it still feels discriminatory. If not, then it's not discriminatory (in the "can I be sued for this" sense, although it may be discriminatory in other ways). IANAL but I feel sufficiently confident saying this.



    3) It might not be appropriate to have on a JD though, because it makes the company feel a bit unprofessional. Like, "if I work for this company, am I going to have my salary capped based on how good I am at Mortal Kombat?" It might be something to come up in the interview, if such a conversation can easily be raised without feeling awkward.



    tl;dr: You are not wrong in thinking it is unnecessary. You are wrong in thinking it would be perceived as discriminatory by a reasonable applicant (although this is somewhat opinion). If I was the HR manager, I would not want to hire someone who would perceive such a thing as discriminatory; such a person would not be a good culture fit at a company I was in charge of.






    share|improve this answer

















    • 1




      Not being familiar with SNES games is not any more age discriminatory : especially since they now re-edited the good ol' NES and SNES and that I know some millenials having fun with it ;)
      – OldPadawan
      4 hours ago










    • "We want a Java developer, bonus if you also know Angular" Additional bonus points if you can explain in the interview what the two have to do with each other?
      – a CVn
      2 hours ago










    • I haven't seen COBOL listed on a job ad unless it was going to be used in the job. (And I never learned COBOL, nobody saw me, and you can't prove anything.)
      – David Thornley
      37 mins ago















    up vote
    1
    down vote













    1) "Bonus" qualifications are just that, "bonus". If you have those qualifications, then you are looked on as a better candidate. It's like "We want a Java developer, bonus if you also know Angular".



    2) Not being familiar with SNES games is not any more age discriminatory than not being familiar with COBOL or FORTRAN or BASIC. Replace SNES with COBOL on the JD and see if it still feels discriminatory. If not, then it's not discriminatory (in the "can I be sued for this" sense, although it may be discriminatory in other ways). IANAL but I feel sufficiently confident saying this.



    3) It might not be appropriate to have on a JD though, because it makes the company feel a bit unprofessional. Like, "if I work for this company, am I going to have my salary capped based on how good I am at Mortal Kombat?" It might be something to come up in the interview, if such a conversation can easily be raised without feeling awkward.



    tl;dr: You are not wrong in thinking it is unnecessary. You are wrong in thinking it would be perceived as discriminatory by a reasonable applicant (although this is somewhat opinion). If I was the HR manager, I would not want to hire someone who would perceive such a thing as discriminatory; such a person would not be a good culture fit at a company I was in charge of.






    share|improve this answer

















    • 1




      Not being familiar with SNES games is not any more age discriminatory : especially since they now re-edited the good ol' NES and SNES and that I know some millenials having fun with it ;)
      – OldPadawan
      4 hours ago










    • "We want a Java developer, bonus if you also know Angular" Additional bonus points if you can explain in the interview what the two have to do with each other?
      – a CVn
      2 hours ago










    • I haven't seen COBOL listed on a job ad unless it was going to be used in the job. (And I never learned COBOL, nobody saw me, and you can't prove anything.)
      – David Thornley
      37 mins ago













    up vote
    1
    down vote










    up vote
    1
    down vote









    1) "Bonus" qualifications are just that, "bonus". If you have those qualifications, then you are looked on as a better candidate. It's like "We want a Java developer, bonus if you also know Angular".



    2) Not being familiar with SNES games is not any more age discriminatory than not being familiar with COBOL or FORTRAN or BASIC. Replace SNES with COBOL on the JD and see if it still feels discriminatory. If not, then it's not discriminatory (in the "can I be sued for this" sense, although it may be discriminatory in other ways). IANAL but I feel sufficiently confident saying this.



    3) It might not be appropriate to have on a JD though, because it makes the company feel a bit unprofessional. Like, "if I work for this company, am I going to have my salary capped based on how good I am at Mortal Kombat?" It might be something to come up in the interview, if such a conversation can easily be raised without feeling awkward.



    tl;dr: You are not wrong in thinking it is unnecessary. You are wrong in thinking it would be perceived as discriminatory by a reasonable applicant (although this is somewhat opinion). If I was the HR manager, I would not want to hire someone who would perceive such a thing as discriminatory; such a person would not be a good culture fit at a company I was in charge of.






    share|improve this answer












    1) "Bonus" qualifications are just that, "bonus". If you have those qualifications, then you are looked on as a better candidate. It's like "We want a Java developer, bonus if you also know Angular".



    2) Not being familiar with SNES games is not any more age discriminatory than not being familiar with COBOL or FORTRAN or BASIC. Replace SNES with COBOL on the JD and see if it still feels discriminatory. If not, then it's not discriminatory (in the "can I be sued for this" sense, although it may be discriminatory in other ways). IANAL but I feel sufficiently confident saying this.



    3) It might not be appropriate to have on a JD though, because it makes the company feel a bit unprofessional. Like, "if I work for this company, am I going to have my salary capped based on how good I am at Mortal Kombat?" It might be something to come up in the interview, if such a conversation can easily be raised without feeling awkward.



    tl;dr: You are not wrong in thinking it is unnecessary. You are wrong in thinking it would be perceived as discriminatory by a reasonable applicant (although this is somewhat opinion). If I was the HR manager, I would not want to hire someone who would perceive such a thing as discriminatory; such a person would not be a good culture fit at a company I was in charge of.







    share|improve this answer












    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer










    answered 4 hours ago









    Ertai87

    6,5021619




    6,5021619








    • 1




      Not being familiar with SNES games is not any more age discriminatory : especially since they now re-edited the good ol' NES and SNES and that I know some millenials having fun with it ;)
      – OldPadawan
      4 hours ago










    • "We want a Java developer, bonus if you also know Angular" Additional bonus points if you can explain in the interview what the two have to do with each other?
      – a CVn
      2 hours ago










    • I haven't seen COBOL listed on a job ad unless it was going to be used in the job. (And I never learned COBOL, nobody saw me, and you can't prove anything.)
      – David Thornley
      37 mins ago














    • 1




      Not being familiar with SNES games is not any more age discriminatory : especially since they now re-edited the good ol' NES and SNES and that I know some millenials having fun with it ;)
      – OldPadawan
      4 hours ago










    • "We want a Java developer, bonus if you also know Angular" Additional bonus points if you can explain in the interview what the two have to do with each other?
      – a CVn
      2 hours ago










    • I haven't seen COBOL listed on a job ad unless it was going to be used in the job. (And I never learned COBOL, nobody saw me, and you can't prove anything.)
      – David Thornley
      37 mins ago








    1




    1




    Not being familiar with SNES games is not any more age discriminatory : especially since they now re-edited the good ol' NES and SNES and that I know some millenials having fun with it ;)
    – OldPadawan
    4 hours ago




    Not being familiar with SNES games is not any more age discriminatory : especially since they now re-edited the good ol' NES and SNES and that I know some millenials having fun with it ;)
    – OldPadawan
    4 hours ago












    "We want a Java developer, bonus if you also know Angular" Additional bonus points if you can explain in the interview what the two have to do with each other?
    – a CVn
    2 hours ago




    "We want a Java developer, bonus if you also know Angular" Additional bonus points if you can explain in the interview what the two have to do with each other?
    – a CVn
    2 hours ago












    I haven't seen COBOL listed on a job ad unless it was going to be used in the job. (And I never learned COBOL, nobody saw me, and you can't prove anything.)
    – David Thornley
    37 mins ago




    I haven't seen COBOL listed on a job ad unless it was going to be used in the job. (And I never learned COBOL, nobody saw me, and you can't prove anything.)
    – David Thornley
    37 mins ago










    up vote
    0
    down vote













    It is quite obviously discrimination. It is also quite obviously not illegal discrimination. On the third hand, you will be losing out on some good candidates.



    You may reject a candidate who hasn't grown up playing these games (but may be willing to accept candidates who refused to grow up while playing these games). And candidates of all ages will think that your advert is rather childish and ignore you.






    share|improve this answer





















    • Your answer made something click for me. When I was saying "discrimination", I think that I misused the word (or didn't qualify it) correctly. I was feeling that the post was being exclusive rather than inclusive and was not necessarily implying an illegality. Simply put, I felt as though it was going out of it's way to say "it's only a bonus to like the things that we like" which isn't fair.
      – user95595
      2 hours ago










    • @user95595 you want to be exclusive. Specifically, you want to exclude anyone who would not fit the corporate or team culture.
      – Richard U
      2 hours ago






    • 1




      @RichardU "culture is not a foosball table" or in my case video games...
      – user95595
      2 hours ago






    • 1




      @user95595 yeah, it is, and far more than you think.
      – Richard U
      2 hours ago















    up vote
    0
    down vote













    It is quite obviously discrimination. It is also quite obviously not illegal discrimination. On the third hand, you will be losing out on some good candidates.



    You may reject a candidate who hasn't grown up playing these games (but may be willing to accept candidates who refused to grow up while playing these games). And candidates of all ages will think that your advert is rather childish and ignore you.






    share|improve this answer





















    • Your answer made something click for me. When I was saying "discrimination", I think that I misused the word (or didn't qualify it) correctly. I was feeling that the post was being exclusive rather than inclusive and was not necessarily implying an illegality. Simply put, I felt as though it was going out of it's way to say "it's only a bonus to like the things that we like" which isn't fair.
      – user95595
      2 hours ago










    • @user95595 you want to be exclusive. Specifically, you want to exclude anyone who would not fit the corporate or team culture.
      – Richard U
      2 hours ago






    • 1




      @RichardU "culture is not a foosball table" or in my case video games...
      – user95595
      2 hours ago






    • 1




      @user95595 yeah, it is, and far more than you think.
      – Richard U
      2 hours ago













    up vote
    0
    down vote










    up vote
    0
    down vote









    It is quite obviously discrimination. It is also quite obviously not illegal discrimination. On the third hand, you will be losing out on some good candidates.



    You may reject a candidate who hasn't grown up playing these games (but may be willing to accept candidates who refused to grow up while playing these games). And candidates of all ages will think that your advert is rather childish and ignore you.






    share|improve this answer












    It is quite obviously discrimination. It is also quite obviously not illegal discrimination. On the third hand, you will be losing out on some good candidates.



    You may reject a candidate who hasn't grown up playing these games (but may be willing to accept candidates who refused to grow up while playing these games). And candidates of all ages will think that your advert is rather childish and ignore you.







    share|improve this answer












    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer










    answered 2 hours ago









    gnasher729

    80.6k34145254




    80.6k34145254












    • Your answer made something click for me. When I was saying "discrimination", I think that I misused the word (or didn't qualify it) correctly. I was feeling that the post was being exclusive rather than inclusive and was not necessarily implying an illegality. Simply put, I felt as though it was going out of it's way to say "it's only a bonus to like the things that we like" which isn't fair.
      – user95595
      2 hours ago










    • @user95595 you want to be exclusive. Specifically, you want to exclude anyone who would not fit the corporate or team culture.
      – Richard U
      2 hours ago






    • 1




      @RichardU "culture is not a foosball table" or in my case video games...
      – user95595
      2 hours ago






    • 1




      @user95595 yeah, it is, and far more than you think.
      – Richard U
      2 hours ago


















    • Your answer made something click for me. When I was saying "discrimination", I think that I misused the word (or didn't qualify it) correctly. I was feeling that the post was being exclusive rather than inclusive and was not necessarily implying an illegality. Simply put, I felt as though it was going out of it's way to say "it's only a bonus to like the things that we like" which isn't fair.
      – user95595
      2 hours ago










    • @user95595 you want to be exclusive. Specifically, you want to exclude anyone who would not fit the corporate or team culture.
      – Richard U
      2 hours ago






    • 1




      @RichardU "culture is not a foosball table" or in my case video games...
      – user95595
      2 hours ago






    • 1




      @user95595 yeah, it is, and far more than you think.
      – Richard U
      2 hours ago
















    Your answer made something click for me. When I was saying "discrimination", I think that I misused the word (or didn't qualify it) correctly. I was feeling that the post was being exclusive rather than inclusive and was not necessarily implying an illegality. Simply put, I felt as though it was going out of it's way to say "it's only a bonus to like the things that we like" which isn't fair.
    – user95595
    2 hours ago




    Your answer made something click for me. When I was saying "discrimination", I think that I misused the word (or didn't qualify it) correctly. I was feeling that the post was being exclusive rather than inclusive and was not necessarily implying an illegality. Simply put, I felt as though it was going out of it's way to say "it's only a bonus to like the things that we like" which isn't fair.
    – user95595
    2 hours ago












    @user95595 you want to be exclusive. Specifically, you want to exclude anyone who would not fit the corporate or team culture.
    – Richard U
    2 hours ago




    @user95595 you want to be exclusive. Specifically, you want to exclude anyone who would not fit the corporate or team culture.
    – Richard U
    2 hours ago




    1




    1




    @RichardU "culture is not a foosball table" or in my case video games...
    – user95595
    2 hours ago




    @RichardU "culture is not a foosball table" or in my case video games...
    – user95595
    2 hours ago




    1




    1




    @user95595 yeah, it is, and far more than you think.
    – Richard U
    2 hours ago




    @user95595 yeah, it is, and far more than you think.
    – Richard U
    2 hours ago










    up vote
    -1
    down vote














    The person hiring and writing the job ad loves SNES video games and grew up around that time.




    It's hard to tell if this same person is also running your team. From what I gather this person's job is to interview and hire talent.



    With that said, can you bring it up to your team's lead? Also, in your day to day job, are you or coworkers playing SNES games? So it's misleading if no one except this person is playing or into SNES.



    If the person doing the job ad is also your team's lead, I would bring up that this could lead to potential conflict especially if he's friendly on the ground that the person is into SNES games. I had coworkers in the past who got friendly with the boss by playing online games for hours. Things went south when the boss and coworker had a conflict and discipline had to be done. It caused a fallout.






    share|improve this answer

























      up vote
      -1
      down vote














      The person hiring and writing the job ad loves SNES video games and grew up around that time.




      It's hard to tell if this same person is also running your team. From what I gather this person's job is to interview and hire talent.



      With that said, can you bring it up to your team's lead? Also, in your day to day job, are you or coworkers playing SNES games? So it's misleading if no one except this person is playing or into SNES.



      If the person doing the job ad is also your team's lead, I would bring up that this could lead to potential conflict especially if he's friendly on the ground that the person is into SNES games. I had coworkers in the past who got friendly with the boss by playing online games for hours. Things went south when the boss and coworker had a conflict and discipline had to be done. It caused a fallout.






      share|improve this answer























        up vote
        -1
        down vote










        up vote
        -1
        down vote










        The person hiring and writing the job ad loves SNES video games and grew up around that time.




        It's hard to tell if this same person is also running your team. From what I gather this person's job is to interview and hire talent.



        With that said, can you bring it up to your team's lead? Also, in your day to day job, are you or coworkers playing SNES games? So it's misleading if no one except this person is playing or into SNES.



        If the person doing the job ad is also your team's lead, I would bring up that this could lead to potential conflict especially if he's friendly on the ground that the person is into SNES games. I had coworkers in the past who got friendly with the boss by playing online games for hours. Things went south when the boss and coworker had a conflict and discipline had to be done. It caused a fallout.






        share|improve this answer













        The person hiring and writing the job ad loves SNES video games and grew up around that time.




        It's hard to tell if this same person is also running your team. From what I gather this person's job is to interview and hire talent.



        With that said, can you bring it up to your team's lead? Also, in your day to day job, are you or coworkers playing SNES games? So it's misleading if no one except this person is playing or into SNES.



        If the person doing the job ad is also your team's lead, I would bring up that this could lead to potential conflict especially if he's friendly on the ground that the person is into SNES games. I had coworkers in the past who got friendly with the boss by playing online games for hours. Things went south when the boss and coworker had a conflict and discipline had to be done. It caused a fallout.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered 3 hours ago









        Dan

        6,74721325




        6,74721325






















            user95595 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            user95595 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













            user95595 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












            user95595 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















            Thanks for contributing an answer to The Workplace Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





            Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


            Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworkplace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f124482%2fis-it-discriminatory-to-put-bonus-video-game-skills-in-a-job-advertisement%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown











            Popular posts from this blog

            Trompette piccolo

            Slow SSRS Report in dynamic grouping and multiple parameters

            Simon Yates (cyclisme)