It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Age discrimination should get more focus than sexual harrassment

page: 3
18
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 9 2017 @ 09:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Nyiah
To be very honest, I think if I ran a business, I'd be very hard-pressed to staff it with majority 55+. Between the legitimate physical & physiological health issues & legitimate cognitive decline that crop up the older folks get that impact their ability to work and not just "clock in", and looming retirement for the younger end of that range, I'd rather hire younger folks (30/40-somethings) without those issues on their horizon.


Nope, it's not totally within their rights to weigh those age related pros and cons. You can't discriminate against people over 40. Just like you can't weigh the pros and cons of hiring dark skinned people.

One of the reasons it's illegal to do so is because it really has no basis in fact. It's people like you who assume things that just aren't true.

Cognitive declines don't tend to happen to until much later than the 70's.
Most people jobs aren't super physical (like fire fighters). A 60 year old can sit 8 hours a day just like a 20 year old can.
As for physical jobs, you can easily test to see if someone is physically able to do a job. There are 60 year olds who are more fit than a junk food, video game playing 25 year old.




posted on Dec, 9 2017 @ 09:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Daughter2
As an older woman who has faced both I can tell you my stance. Sexual harassment is more emotionally devastating - age is more financially devastating.

In my younger days, I had to leave a great job a worked very hard for because of sexual harassment - changed me as a person and I'm still dealing with issues today. But I managed to find a better paying job fairly quickly.

Age is another thing - it's less violating but it's hard to recover from.

I've heard time and time again about hiring some "kid" with one to two years experience out of college. I've even seen many many ads with a specific limit on experience.

This is totally legal because in theory, you could go back to school at 50, so they aren't discriminating on age. This loop hole needs to be closed - it has the effect to discriminate against age.

There's also the notion that "younger" kids are more computer/IT savvy. This may have been true 30 years ago due to training but isn't based in reality now. In fact, I have seen a decline in skills because steps have been reduced to pushing a series of buttons. Their ability to create and understand "these buttons" is lost.


Bolded by responder
You may have argued so successfully for the scrubbing of
Object Oriented Programming I almost cried. Almost.
If you don't understand the consequences of your actions:
it still doesn't excuse you from the program blowing up.



posted on Dec, 10 2017 @ 01:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: onthedownlow
a reply to: openminded2011

Employees become less productive as they get older... in fact, I think you would agree that you have become less productive as you have aged, and most logically a larger liability in the workplace. I am less productive than I was 15-20 years ago, regardless that my work ethic and physical ability make me a better worker than most?


What the hell? What industry are you in? Porn? That's one of the few jobs I can think of where you would be "less productive" than you were 20 years ago.

It may sound as if I'm being cheeky but I'm mostly not. Why are you less productive than you were 20 years ago? Unless your job is really specific to young folks, I think you mayy need to speak for yourself on this "less productive" thing.

Perhaps you haven't been progressing in your skills and experience like one should be doing as they move through their career, which makes a person even more skilled and efficient. Part of my job is physical, and because I've continued to challenge myself and apply that same work ethic that you say you've got, I'm even more of an expert than I was 20 years ago. In addition, I have the experience and seasoning that comes with staying in one's career field, and constantly challenging myself and not resting on my laurels. I've contunued to learn and improve, so I can actually get more done, more quickly, than 20 years ago.

Touching on a part of the OP's reply to your post: because my expertise is considerable and because I have the many and varied experiences, as well as impressive accomplishments on my resume, if someone wants to hire me, they must compensate me accordingly. Employers may try to get by with YOUNGER and less qualified people so that they can pay them less.

So anyway...why are you less productive now??
edit on 10-12-2017 by KansasGirl because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-12-2017 by KansasGirl because: Actly/actually



posted on Dec, 10 2017 @ 01:34 AM
link   
a reply to: derfreebie

Well, qualifications and experience are certainly on the side of the older applicant and your mention of the cost factor serves to demonstrate the pros and cons of young vs old.

Fact is, the closer you are to retirement, the sooner you'll need to be replaced. That's a big factor for many employees, given the hiring and training processes.

I don't think it's right to force a business to ignore that by law.

People are bringing up race and gender as justification, but I think it's also ridiculous to offer employment to an unsuitable candidate just because their skin colour or their gender satisfies.

Yet, I believe that business should still have a right to do so.

They should be free to choose candidates based on their own criteria, whether it sucks or not.



posted on Dec, 10 2017 @ 01:48 AM
link   
Yes they do discriminate upon age,but it's not ok to discriminate against weirdo transexuals,tatooed freaks etc,just shows who is to blame for demise of society,the milleniums are screwing their futures themselves,good riddance,get what you pay for



posted on Dec, 10 2017 @ 07:20 AM
link   
a reply to: openminded2011

Just want to say I agree with everything you've said.

Age discrimination is widespread. And - as someone else has pointed out - it affects both ends of the age spectrum.

Under 21s in Britain are definitely discriminated against in terms of rate of pay and eligibility for benefits, for no good or logical reason.

It's the last taboo, which is why expressions like 'pimply youths' and 'old farts' are still in common currency, with no expectation of moral outrage.

Sexual discrimination in the workplace is still a problem too; there's no good or logical reason why a woman doing the same job as a man should get a smaller salary. I'm pleased to say that this doesn't happen in my line of work.



posted on Dec, 10 2017 @ 07:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Oldtimer2

Doesn't seem fair.

Given that the generation calling 'ageism' are the last of the baby boomers, are you sure it's the millennials that "screwed their own futures?"

You're just passing it down, oldtimer.

How you can do so with any air of self-righteousness is a complete mystery to me.



posted on Dec, 16 2017 @ 04:00 AM
link   
While it may not need more attention than the ills that go on with sexual abuses, it needs attention. It's been accepted so to speak, even joked about over the years as if it was a norm. So has age related discrimination. Also, it's not limited to older age discrimination.

Try being a younger female applying for a job, having the sentiment(even on this site by claimed employers) that hiring older women instead of younger means you'll have a more stable employee. Such as, they won't have children and or pregnancy issues to get into the way of working. Are you recently married young woman? Don't be surprised if you're confronted and or turned down for a job because they believe a child in is your immediate future. I guess until you address these issues overall age wise in this current culture, nothing will change.
edit on 16-12-2017 by dreamingawake because: (no reason given)







 
18
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join