Latest / The Diversity Career Podcast with Fexingo: Inclusion, Equity, and Underrepresented Professionals / How Returnship Programs Are Failing Mid-Career Women
Transcript
- Lucas: Let's talk about the returnship model, because I think we've spent enough time celebrating its successes without really interrogating who it's actually designed for. Most of these programs, launched by firms like Deloitte or JPMorgan, are built around a very specific narrative: the mother who paused her career for five years to raise kids, then wants to slide back into her old role with a gentle onboarding ramp. Luna: Right, and the assumption is always that the skills gap is temporary, just a matter of brushing up on Excel or refreshing your industry knowledge. But what happens when the person leaving isn't a new mom, but a forty-five-year-old project manager whose team was outsourced? Lucas: Exactly. And here's the thing—those older workers don't fit the mold. They're often too experienced for entry-level reentry roles, but too disconnected from current workflows to be hired as senior leaders. So they get stuck in this limbo where the returnship program technically exists for them, but the curriculum is geared toward someone coming back after a two-year maternity leave, not a ten-year career break due to economic displacement. Luna: It feels like we're treating the symptom of 'time off' rather than the root cause, which is often systemic ageism wrapped in benevolent programming. Lucas: That's a fair point. But let's look at the data from Q3 2026. There's been a noticeable uptick in companies extending the age eligibility for these programs beyond the traditional thirty-five cutoff. Deloitte, for instance, recently tweaked their parameters to include professionals up to fifty-five, acknowledging that the 'mid-career pause' is becoming more common post-pandemic, driven by burnout and industry consolidation. Luna: So they're widening the net, but are they actually changing the content? Or is it just the same fast-track resume review, just with older faces? Lucas: That's the million-dollar question. The structural issue is that most returnships are essentially unpaid or lightly paid internships disguised as professional development. For a twenty-eight-year-old fresh out of school, that's manageable. For a forty-eight-year-old with a mortgage and student loans, it's financially impossible unless the stipend is substantial. And very few programs offer living wages. Luna: Which creates a huge barrier to entry for anyone who didn't have independent wealth before stepping away. It basically filters for privilege, even if unintentionally. Lucas: Precisely. And then there's the algorithmic layer. When these candidates apply through standard portals, their resumes are often scanned by ATS systems that flag gaps longer than eighteen months as red flags. Even if they're in a returnship pipeline, the initial screening can be brutal. I spoke with a recruiter last week who admitted that their AI tools are still tuned to penalize 'tenure decay,' which disproportionately affects older professionals who took breaks for caregiving or health reasons. Luna: So the technology is actively working against the people these programs are supposed to help. That seems like a design flaw, not a bug. Lucas: It is. And here's where it gets tricky for HR departments. They want to hit diversity metrics, so they create these inclusive programs. But they also want efficiency, so they keep the automated filters. The result is a lot of good intentions colliding with cold, hard code. You end up with highly qualified mid-career women sitting in pipelines that never convert to offers because the system doesn't know how to value their non-linear paths. Luna: I wonder if the solution is less about 're-entry' and more about 'lateral mobility.' Instead of trying to plug them back into their old jobs, could companies create new roles that leverage their experience without requiring them to prove they're 'current'? Lucas: That's an interesting angle. Lateral mobility usually implies moving within the same company, but you're talking about external hires who need a bridge, not a ramp. Some firms are experimenting with 'project-based contracts' instead of full-time returnships. A six-month contract to solve a specific problem, with no expectation of immediate promotion. It lowers the risk for the employer and gives the candidate a recent reference. Luna: But does that actually lead to long-term retention? Or is it just another way to use older workers as cheap, flexible labor without investing in their future? Lucas: That's the cynical view, and sometimes it's accurate. But when done right, it works. Look at IBM's approach. They don't call it a returnship; they call it a 'talent reskilling initiative.' The language matters because it signals growth, not rehabilitation. They pair participants with sponsors, not just mentors, which means someone in leadership is betting on their career trajectory. Luna: Sponsors are key. Because mentors give advice, but sponsors give access. If you're forty-five and trying to re-enter, you need someone in the room fighting for you, not just someone telling you to update your LinkedIn. Lucas: Agreed. And that ties back to our earlier discussion about sponsorship versus mentorship. In returnships, the sponsor element is often missing. Participants are told to 'network internally,' but without a champion, networking is just talking to walls. The ones who succeed are usually the ones who had prior relationships at the firm, which brings us back to the class bias issue we covered in Episode 193. Luna: So the system rewards existing networks over actual potential. Which means if you didn't have the right connections before you left, you're doubly disadvantaged when you try to come back. Lucas: Double disadvantage. And it's compounded by the fact that many returnship programs are voluntary for managers to host. So if a VP doesn't see the immediate ROI, they won't take the risk on a mid-career candidate who needs training. It becomes a lottery of who gets assigned to a supportive leader. Luna: Which makes it unreliable. You can't build a diversity strategy on luck. It has to be baked into the compensation structure of the managers who host these participants. Lucas: Yes. Tie the bonus of the hosting manager to the conversion rate of the returnship participant. If they fail to retain them, they lose a piece of their payout. That forces engagement. It stops being a charity case and starts being a strategic investment. Luna: That would change the culture immediately. Managers would start preparing for these hires instead of treating them as administrative burdens. Lucas: It would. And it acknowledges that integrating diverse talent requires effort and resources, not just goodwill. We've been asking for goodwill for decades. It's time to ask for infrastructure. Luna: Infrastructure sounds boring, but it's probably the only thing that will actually move the needle for mid-career women who are currently falling through the cracks. Lucas: Exactly. And for listeners in that position, my advice is to look for programs that explicitly mention 'sponsorship' or 'leadership exposure' in the job description, not just 'training.' Ask during the interview who will be advocating for your placement. If they say 'you'll find your own path,' run. Luna: Practical advice. Find the ally in the room, not just the trainer in the classroom. Lucas: Before we go further, I want to mention something important. If we've helped you think through a career move or decision, a couple of dollars a month is genuinely what keeps these going. Buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo, if you've gotten something out of them. It’s small, but it adds up and helps us keep producing ad-free content for our community. Luna: Yeah, and it lets us dig deeper into topics like this one without corporate pressure. Really appreciate the support. Lucas: Back to the topic. One final thought on the 'returnship' label itself. Some critics argue that the term itself is problematic because it implies a return to a previous state, rather than an evolution. Maybe we need a new vocabulary altogether. Luna: Like what? 'Career Resumption' sounds too clinical. 'Re-entry' feels punitive. Lucas: Maybe 'Talent Reintegration' or 'Professional Continuity Program.' Language shapes perception. If we call it a 'break,' we frame it as a loss. If we call it a 'continuity challenge,' we frame it as a solvable logistical problem. Luna: I like that. It shifts the burden from the individual's failure to stay on track, to the organization's ability to adapt. Lucas: Exactly. And until companies stop using 'returnship' as a catch-all bucket for anyone with a gap, regardless of age or reason, we'll keep seeing the same disparities. The focus needs to shift from 'getting them back' to 'building them forward.' Luna: So the real question isn't how to bring them back to the old table, but how to build a new table that includes them from the start. Lucas: That's the goal. Because once you've been pushed out, you don't just want to be let back in. You want to be invited to lead.