EMPLOYMENT MATTERS A lunchtime seminar series about employment relations and the world of work

EMPLOYMENT MATTERS

A lunchtime seminar series aboutemployment relations and

the world of work

http://www.dti.gov.uk/er/emar/events.htm

19 May 2004 DTI Employment Relations Seminar 2

The End of Ageism?

Dr Wendy LorettoThe School of Management

University of Edinburgh


What is ageism?

‘Ageism is the type of prejudice and discrimination which consistsof the unjustifiable use of social notions associated with chronological or biological age.’ (Branine and Glover 1997)

i.e. two interconnected aspects:

(i) Ageist ideology of negative stereotypes, attitudes & beliefs(ii) Age discrimination – behaviour that excludes or disadvantages

people solely because of their age.(McMullin and Marshall 2001)


Origin & development of the concept

• Oxford English Dictionary - the term first appeared in US in 1969

• Parallels with racism (1936) and sexism (1968)

• Concept borne of fear of mortality and ageing process.

Awareness in UK heightened in 1990s. - Why the delay?

• Strong age-lobby in US

• Concerns over early exit ~ demographic time bomb

~ issues of (social) exclusion


Consequences of Ageism

Ageism affects:

~ The economy (e.g. PIU 2000)~ Organisational performance~ Individuals’ health and quality of life

Surveys typically find that between 20-25% of their samplehave experienced negative discrimination related to age.


Political initiatives

• Advisory Forum on Older Workers (Conservatives 1992)• Employers Forum on Age (Conservatives 1996)• Code of Practice on Age Diversity in Employment (Labour 1999)• EC Directive on Equal Treatment in Employment & Occupation (2000) to be UK law by Dec 2006.

all based on current orthodoxy that ageism in employment is irrational and commercially damaging.

Move from voluntary approach to legislation.


Legislation

• Aims to prohibit and combat direct and indirect discrimination in employment• Draft regulations by 2005.

The government recognises that change in attitudes is important

=> “Planning for the introduction of age legislation will reinforce our promotion of the Code of Practice.” www.agepositive.org.uk

=> Formed Age Advisory Group in 2001.Purpose: how to implement age discrimination legislation and to assess the impact on employers.


Key issues affecting success

1. Debates over scope of legislation

a) What

(i) Age legislation will differ from sex and race in that less favourable treatment that can be objectively and reasonably justified can be allowed.

(ii) Mandatory retirement

Should compulsory retirement be abolished?~ Are fixed retirement ages ageist?~ How would employers manage exit without a fixed age?


b) Who

Origin of concept has meant that the phenomenon is still mostly associated with prejudice towards older age groups.

But this association has now loosened.

(i) Ageism and Younger Workers

Loretto, White and Duncan (2000)Survey of 460 undergraduates

~ 25% had experienced negative age discrimination

Survey of 1,100 financial services employees ~ 18% experienced negative discrimination


Working straight from school, people assume you are less intelligent/capable in terms of doing more challenging workor being trusted with things. (Female, 18)

Some people tend to talk down to you, especially those who are older and have been there longer. (Male, 20)

Was turned down for a promotion and when asked why was told, ‘that would have made me the youngest person to hold that position’. (Female, 29)


Employers’ Forum on Age (2000)

Survey of 1000 young people aged 18-30 ~ 26% thought to be ‘too young’ for certain jobs. ~ 25% feel they have to leave current employer to gain promotion.

Pilcher (1996) -Younger and older people can be argued to share disadvantage in the labour market.

But: Age Positive website focuses almost exclusively on older workers.


ii) Ageism may affect different types of employees in different ways

No account taken in government’s approach of disability, race or gender.

Duncan and Loretto (2004) – analysis of financial services ~ Women perceived to grow older earlier than men

Example: gender and ageism

Itzin and Phillipson (1993) referred to ‘double jeopardy’ - ageism and sexism.


• Young women (16-29) more likely to have experienced ageism - being refused promotion & hindered by youthful appearance.• But only women in age group 30-39 were considered too old for promotion• Frequent references to interaction between ageism and sexism

• Brunt of negative attitudes continued to fall more heavily on women in 40-49 and 50+ age groups.

Women may never be the ‘right’ age.


One senior team member sent an e-mail when I forgot to sign a form….’Tell the dried up old maid to get her teeth in’. On another occasion a Team Leader called us a bunch of “old *******”….a coach asked us which was greater, our team’s combined ages or [Finserv’s] bank balance….to name but a few incidents. (Female, 35)

Team leader went into [my] private bank account to get [my] date of birth and then proceeded to discuss it with other members of staff. He asked them….guess how old she is???. I was told it was ‘harmless fun’ and I should ‘learn to take a joke’. (Female, 38)


Key issues (contd)

2. Does ageism exist?

i.e. is prejudice irrational?

~ Duncan (2003) – older workers cost more => discrimination is rational.

~ Investigation between age and performance to date has been relatively limited.


Key issues (contd)

3. Government is motivated by the ‘wrong’ concerns

• Government concern is by-product of social, economic and welfare concerns (Desmond 2001).• Other forms of discrimination are not similarly constrained (at least, not explicitly)

4. Workability of legislation

(i) New Zealand experience 1993 Human Rights Act abolished retirement age in 1999

McGregor (2001) found widespread evidence of discrimination, despite very few formal complaints - Why?


• Employee ignorance• Level of disadvantage is minor• Employee vulnerability• ‘Internalised’ ageism• Employers distinguish between overt and covert age discrimination

(ii) Weak links between policies and practices

Loretto & White (2004) – study of Scottish employers~ all claimed to have an EO policy – but widespread evidence of bias and discrimination (both +ve and –ve)~ gaps between central policy and grassroots practice.


Policy Implications

1. Reconsider dominance of the ‘business case’

Business case may inhibit effectiveness of legislation

Duncan (2003) – ‘fighting stereotypes with stereotypes’.

Instead we need to challenge the stereotypes

=> First stage is understanding them


Behind the stereotypes

Prejudice or Experience?

‘Grain-of-truth’

Internalisation

Institutionalised ageism

Generalisation

Job age-typing


2. Focus on individuals

~ Match jobs to workers, not just workers to jobs (Hirsch 2003)~ Examine how employment and employment practices may affect health.~ Consider differential effects on individuals, e.g. by gender~ Proposed Commission on Equality & Human Rights (2006)

Policy Implications (contd)



3. Recognise limits of legislation

Should legislation focus on employment practices, policiesor attitudes?

Considerations

~ Gaps between policy and practice already identified~ ‘Good practice’ may exist independently from policy, e.g. SMEs~ (Favourable) attitudes do not always translate into practice.



Key employer attitudes = complacency and fatalism

‘I think you'll find that the age thing will disappear from the country completely, it's already happening. A lot of the call centre jobs are going abroad to India etc, and an awful lot ofmenial-type jobs will be shoved off elsewhere whenever possible.’

Addressing these attitudes may represent a more fundamental challenge for law and policy-makers.


Contact details

Please get in contact If you would like to receive more details of the research findings mentioned today.

Dr Wendy Loretto The School of Management and EconomicsThe University of Edinburgh50 George SquareEdinburgh EH8 9JY

[email protected]

Tel. 0131 650 3824


References

Branine, M. and Glover, I. (1997) Ageism in work and employment: thinking about connections, Personnel Review, 26 (4), pp233-244.

Desmond, H.J. (2001) The Generation Game – Third age workers and the labour market, Nottingham Law Journal, pp17-31.

Duncan, C. (2003) Assessing anti-ageism routes to older worker re-engagement, Work Employment and Society, 17 (1) pp101-120.

Duncan, C. and Loretto, W. (2004) Never the right age? Gender and age-based discrimination in employment, Gender, Work and Organization, 11 (1), pp95-115.

Employers Forum on Age (2000) Releasing Potential – Younger workers and ageism, London: EFA.

Hirsch, D. (2003) Crossroads after 50. Improving choices in work and retirement, York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

Itzin, C. and Phillipson, C. (1993) Age Barriers at Work: Maximising the potential of mature and older workers. Metropolitan Authorities Recruitment Agency: Solihull.


References (contd.)

Loretto, W. and White, P. (2004), The Employability of Older Workers Glasgow: Scottish Enterprise.

Loretto, W., Duncan, C. and White, P. (2000) Ageism and employment: controversies, ambiguities and younger people’s perceptions, Ageing and Society, 20, pp279-302.

McGregor, J. (2001), Employment of the Older Worker, Palmerston North: Massey University.

McMullin, J.A. and Marshall. V.W. (2001) Ageism, age relations and garment industry work in Montreal, The Gerontologist, 41 (1), pp111-122.

PIU (2000), Winning the Generation Game, London: PIU

DISCUSSION

EMPLOYMENT MATTERS

A lunchtime seminar series aboutemployment relations and

the world of work

http://www.dti.gov.uk/er/emar/events.htm

Documents

EMPLOYMENT MATTERS A lunchtime seminar series about employment relations and the world of work