Many people over 40 who are laid off after numerous years with the same employer have the hardest time trying to be hired by companies. Case in point is myself, a woman of 55 years of age. I was laid off at my last job almost 2 years ago with a company that I had been with 10 years. Another employee who was there 14 years & myself were let go as we later found out that our hourly wages were the most in our department. Since being out of a job, I have been everywhere online, in person, and networking just trying to get anything in the way of work. What was discovered is that no one wants to hire anyone with a few lines in their face or gray hairs on their head. Several times I was close with 2nd and even 3rd interviews, (being very qualified for the position) but always a younger person got the job. I know this as I would always go back to the company to see who was picked. It could just be that the Managers doing the hiring are younger themselves & feel more comfortable with an employee more in their age group. I'm not sure. But being mature doesn't mean you're not active physically or mentally. I exercise daily, teaching aerobics & martial arts students. My mind can still calculate complex Math and Statistics problems. All we need is a chance. Please.
This is interesting. Reading through the 'No' responses it is clear that folks on the other side are also arguing for discrimination based on competency. They are stating that businesses should be able to discriminate individuals based on age IF the cannot perform the job. Well, this is a non-argument, because if the employer can demonstrate that the individual cannot perform the job well, for whatever reason, there is no law that requires the employer must hire such individuals, regardless of age.
Yes, it should be illegal to discriminate against someone at work because of their age, but it also needs to be carefully designed. Some jobs may not be appropriate for all age groups. Some jobs may be too hard for older people to do, and some may be too difficult for younger workers to handle.
Whether the employee is younger or older than the other employees, it should be irrelevant. What is relevant is their ability to get the job done, and age does not reflect the factors that determine that. 50-year old employees may still have the strength and vitality of 20-year old employees. 20-year old employees may still have the intelligence and experience of 50-year old employees. Age is not an indicator of ability, and should not be a basis for discrimination.
I do not think age should be a factor in the hiring process if a candidate otherwise exhibits all of the other required skills; this to me is as serious a form of discrimination as gender or race discrimination. In other words, age is a factor the candidate cannot control, and it does not in any way directly affect the candidate's ability to successfully perform the job.
While people generally try to do their best, decisions involving hiring and assigning tasks in the workplace are sometimes made for superficial reasons. Private interest is not enough to assure fairness in individual assessments. Government must do what it can to secure the best interests of the entire public, by codifying fairness as laws.
As long as someone can do their job well, age should not be considered. We aren't allowed to discriminate based on sex, religion, or anything else, and age should be on that list as well. Age should only be a problem if it hinders job performance.
Older workers are more focused on their careers. They usually have grown past the "going-out phase", and stay closer to home during the week. This increases the probability that they will show up and on time. They are less susceptible to be involved in workplace drama. This maturity and dependability is something that usually only comes with age.
Discriminating against potential employees based on age is pure stupidity. For one thing, older people are more reliable, honest and hard working than their younger peers and are more likely to stay with the company. Men and women are living longer and staying healthier than in the past. Social Security benefits cannot support the elderly in any real way, so to discount them as employees because of age is to run the risk of creating a new breed of homeless and destitute people.
As long as the person in question is good at their job, it should not matter what age they are, whether old or young. Discrimination because of age can be very insidious because an employer can make assumptions based on age that could be proved false if they only move past that barrier in their minds and talk with the person in question to determine if their skills fit the position.
There is already discrimination against age for being too young in the work place for safety and liability reasons; why should there not be the same checks in place for old age? If a person is too old to walk without assistance, why should a company be forced to hire them as a stock boy, a job that they cannot hope to perform? While I feel there should be more discrimination against physical fitness and what the person can perform on the job, an age cap is a good place to start as long as it is set high enough.
A child cannot drive until age 16, and they cannot drive unsupervised until age 18. It is illegal in most states to own a gun until age 21. Why? Because they are not fully competent until that age arrives. After age 60, pilots cannot fly commercial jets in most countries. After age 70, most nations put limits on the right to drive or practice medicine. Why? Because at this age, the mental acuity declines and their abilities also decline. When one says, "ban age discrimination in the workplace", we ignore the proficiency that age (or lack of) brings. Shall we say that 16-year-olds shall now be allowed to drive tractor trailers, because they are legal working age, regardless of maturity? Shall we now ban the removal of 80 year old doctors because of a misguided prevention of age discrimination, and then hope they perform the surgery right? Age discrimination is so closely tied to ability to work that it cannot be outlawed for the public's own safety.
Business should be allowed to discriminate against older employees based solely on age for a variety of reason. For one, older people tend to be less productive. Most older people would rather rely on experience as opposed to technology in order to do their jobs because they are too stubborn to change their ways. Also, older people are more than likely about to retire and it costs businesses money to recruit new help.
Where I work we have this lady who is 73, she makes a lot of mistakes and at times acts as if she's the boss and has no more power than any other workers, when I started working where I work now almost 4 years ago she created a lot of problems for me and even went as far as lying about an incident that she started up with me and she talked about me behind my back without me there to defend myself and itr got to the point every time she would report back to work the ED would talk to her and the latest we had a death and she failed to inform the Business Manager and the ED and everyone in our Department herd about by emails. If you make a mistake, she's all over you and if she makes a mistake she doesn't want to hear it. I believe there should be a cut off age limit!
Any individual who acquires property legally, through their own labor, mutual exchange, or voluntary gift, has arbitrary and unaccountable power over that property. If I want to burn $1000 dollars of my own money, that should be legal. If I want to give out free bus rides on the bus I own, that is my right. If I want to exclude free bus rides to any person who isn't black, that is my right. If I want to exclude employment to drive those buses to any person who isn't white, that is my right. In fact, if I want to charge $5 a bus ticket to one man, and $1 per bus ticket for the man next to him, with no explanation given, that is my right.
People age at different rates. While abilities tend to decrease as we get older, there are often many older people that can outperform their younger counterparts. This can be due to experience, or simply better physical condition. Simply put, overall ability to perform the tasks required is more important than the age of a given individual.