That would require a sea change in their cultural philosophy, one which they may not be able or willing to embrace.

The last 40 years have seen a gradual shift from hiring mature workers towards younger and younger workers, not in order to facilitate better training of younger minds but simply because younger workers can be hired for less cost, and dismissed more easily under current legislation.

Less experienced minds are less likely to have the experience to seek redress for dismissal without notice, and they would have less money to pay for legal representation than more mature workers.

The modern trend nowadays seems to be to forgo hiring people altogether, and replace automatable tasks with machinery; the creeping automation which is threatening job security in every business sector, at all levels.

There is a small movement of firms which are beginning to acknowledge the value of the experiences of employees of advancing years, but it is sadly very small compared to the percentage of companies which are dabbling in automation to cut overheads.

I agree with Alexander's points, but would add another "culturally-oriented" issue that will war against hiring 55+ white men in particular, unless prevailing business conditions require the serious triage that those with serious experience can provide. Many of the growing number of organizations led by GenX or Millennial chief executives/owners, especially along the coasts, may find it hard to tolerate the "traditional" or conservative/Christian values of many within the Boomer generation who have less deeply-imbedded postmodern notions about reality. It's been said that those who aren't liberal/progressive/socialist in their 20's lack heart and those that aren't conservatives by their 30s lack a brain. This is a comical way to describe the fact that the reality that living life and raising children helps many to see enduring principles and truths that are always true/best no matter the prevailing, politically-correct sensitivities of the day. This is even more true today versus a generation ago, as diversity of thought/debate/logic is sadly missing in our schools and universities. As Millennials leave the nest, get married, and have children much later, I'm afraid that the old aphorism may need another decade tacked on to it! Common sense, equal opportunity, and high performance and behavioral standards are embraced by most "mature" professionals in a way that "diversity-driven" younger professionals are far less likely to resonate with. A recent movie - The Intern with Robert DeNiro - comically but somewhat realistically illustrates this. One thing that sold-out, young progressive, diversity warriors can generally agree on in this digital bubble generation is that a free enterprise meritocracy can be operated only under laws and regulations that guarantee numerical social-engineering progress on the basis of demographic/socioeconomic targets. This, unfortunately, excludes consideration for accomplished older folks and for those perceived as being a part of the "favored" historical majority.

I believe the issue is situational. In many large companies where employees are numbers to be financially engineered, more experienced, higher salaried employees are somewhat easy to lose with a "numbers game" mindset. However, in the digital age where older employees (50+) are not "digital natives", there is a skillset reality that does not favor older workers. Having said that, principled, strategic leadership is not always dependent upon a digital skillset, and I think many seasoned, older leaders can effectively lead companies of a wide variety of industries. Case in point, would Mark Zuckerberg have been wise to have more experienced corporate advisors to help develop the Facebook strategic plan? Might he have avoided some of the pitfalls he ran into with regard to potential government regulation? I don't know if he had experienced, seasoned advisors who have guided corporations through dramatic periods of growth, but if he did not, perhaps that kind of leadership experience would have been valuable. Food for thought, anyway.

The value of the older and more experienced individuals should not be discounted in the workplace. Their experience can be invaluable and cost effective ( even catastrophe prevention) in circumstances where there’s no time to try to “reinvent the wheel.“Their capacity to learn new technologies is natural if given the chance through work-sponsored continuing education. Merit-based performance evaluation should be the determinant for job placement rather that age bias.

One way to look at the situation is according to the functional roles. Experienced project managers for term rojects are at a premium. Line or business managers jump from company to company to gain value but are more commonly replaced with younger people looking for experience. The market today is becoming a short term gig employment situation where senior most experienced people freelance more and more. This was a logical byproduct of the previous recession and will continue as the workforce ages.