I entered the HR profession as a mid-career changer five years ago at the age of 40. I am currently 45 and work as an HR Administrator so at least I can say that I successfully broke into it, obtained a role, gained experience and have worked in HR.
However, I am also a very perceptive person and can clearly see, understand, identify and pick up on certain 'patterns,' demographics and typical applicant stereotypes which people either fit into the category of or not.
It is an undeniable fact that the vast majority of people entered HR in their 20s or 30s. That is why people already my age or even younger are HR Directors.
I clearly cannot compare myself with others as their career trajectory and pathway started earlier than mine, but having entered the profession at 40 and still on the junior levels in my mid 40s:
(1) Is it a case that I am now playing at least 15-20 years of catch up?
(2) Do I have at least 15-20 years less on my side for advancement?
(3) Will I now need to extend my career by at least 15-20 years (it all takes time to reach the higher levels) to compensate and make up for being a later stater?
(4) Is it more difficult to eventually become a Chartered Fellow starting out in one's 40s, or can added life experience and greater maturity bring some additional bonuses?
Finally, there is anti age discrimination legislation but it can be difficult to prove it. If you however look in an HR Department, you also get an idea of the pattern of who they tend to employ.
