The hottest subject of conversation in HR networking should be age discrimination legislation by far, argues Phillip Walker, Chairman of the Campaign Against Age Discrimination in Employment and the CAADE Centre Charity.
Legislation on age discrimination in employment will be the biggest regulatory change to hit the profession in 20 years. Bigger by far than race, ethnicity, sexual orientation and even gender – ageism hurts everyone at least twice in their lifetimes. The Government are going to legislate against age discrimination in recruitment, training, promotion, early retirement and retirement.
So, what’s the big deal? The big deal is that few in the profession have taken on board the full implications of this change. Forget the rhetoric and look at some of the facts.
There are about three million people over the age of 45 in a state of ‘unwanted’ unemployment because of employer prejudice. They are either long-term unemployed, on benefits or economically inactive – but a majority of them, when asked, said they would take a job tomorrow! They range in ability from labourers to ex CEOs.
Half of the workforce is over 45, a half under – a rough parity exists that might be termed the ‘essence’ of a balanced workforce. Yet most employers cannot claim anything like ‘parity’ in their workforce. For example, in the Financial Services Industries on average only 8% of employees are aged over 45. If that is not unsatisfactory, what is?
Clearly, if companies do not ‘put their houses in order’ – and the Government is giving them two whole years to do just this – then they can expect some very hefty age discrimination court cases hitting the headlines and their pockets from October 2006 onwards.
Given the size of this problem, HR professionals should be running around like headless chickens ‘putting their houses in order’. Unfortunately, we are not seeing any evidence of this. In fact, most seem blissfully unaware of what is about to hit them.
My own organisation, catalyst for many of the changes that will take place, has been warning for many years of the dangers of employer apathy. We offer companies age audit programmes to help them focus on the next two-year period. These programmes are not only designed ‘to put the house in order’, but to help companies realise the very real cost savings of employing a mixed age workforce.
In this instance, employer apathy could cripple. Initially, it is likely that there will be no Commission to manage the new law when it comes in 2006, so there is likely to be a free-for-all of hefty lawyer-led test claims. Don’t wait to be caught out, find out what you need to be doing now.
Related items
Stamping out ageism in the workplace through training
Firms lack formal policies on age discrimination
Feature article: Age discrimination: A job for life?
One Response
Yes. it is already happenning
Countries that have introduced anti age discrimination laws have found that this quickly becomes one of the main areas of anti-discrimination cases, effectively overwhelming the resources of anti age disrimination specialists. It is also worth pointing out that employers may not be safe waiting until 2006 for another reason. A British employee of an organisation that has a base also in, say, Belgium ought to have access to the same rights. The employer will be forced as of now to implement age policies in Belgium. How will the employer explain to its British employeees that it feels able to discriminate against them in the implementation of these rights? The source of considerable friction exists already.