Navigating Proponents of Legacy Code

In my mind there are two types of ~older engineers: those who continue to learn and those who want to maintain and coast. As a younger engineer, I’ve come across both but have found it difficult to navigate the latter. I’m excited to learn and be on the cutting edge with new open source projects but do understand the value in reusability and not reinventing the wheel. At a certain point, I don’t know how to argue with those who don’t want to reason objectively with what make sense for the company in the long term. It seems like it’s an ego thing but, for example, why should we continue using a homegrown job scheduler written in the nearly unmaintained .NET framework by developers who are no longer on staff? We could be using a great open source tool like airflow. Don’t get me wrong, I get the argument of cost – “we already have this and it works.” But other than the obvious argument of general tribal-knowledge risk, I can’t find a compelling way to argue that we should continue to grow and improve our software – that’s how it works and it’s better to upgrade and improve overtime instead of all at once when it’s already too late. Maybe I just want to work on the cutting edge, but if the core components are antiquated, it’s hard to do that with anything else. I know my commentary is somewhat high level but seeking advice on strategy here. Open source is a beautiful thing and I feel so deprived.