The amount of people over the age of 65 that are still working in 2019 was double the amount in 1985. Reasons for this impressive increase could be longer life expectancies, a need (or desire) for income beyond 65, or the fear of losing a career that would be impossible to get back. Lots of employers still see people over 65 as a kind of liability; employers patiently await some mistake that can be blamed on an employee's age to push people to retire. Like a senior dog getting traded in for a brand new puppy, these older employees are stranded, with very few options going forward; after all, no one wants to waste new-hire resources on someone that will serve less tenure in the company.
This leads into a discussion of age discrimination in the workforce. Is it right for employers to hire the younger applicant because the number of years they will be able to give the company is presumably larger? Should employers allow their preconceptions of "old age" to deny a job to these experienced workers? Is it discrimination or is it common business sense to hire younger, possibly more able-bodied people that can give more years to a company?
Getting older is something that all of us will (hopefully) experience. Gray hair, loss of agility, difficulty finding work are all things each one of us will experience in our senior years. It's important to recognize issues that our older populations are facing now - not only to help them, but also to help older generations in the future. Getting older shouldn't mean stagnation, instead it should mean giving yourself room to continue to grow.
BTW, the new "old" age is 76!
ReplyDeleteThis is a hard topic to breach, there are many ways of looking at it. I for one believe that the business and the employee require a mutual respect for one another. Obviously a construction company needs to be able to be hire younger more able bodied individuals, but businesses other then those that require extreme physical labor should not be allowed to fire based on age alone, especially when the individual is getting close to retirement age and deserve a pension. The topic is going to be a very had one to break down in the future, and we really won't see what happens until it all unfolds, hopefully for the best.
ReplyDeletecurious on what you think "the best" is. Experience can only come with time. A merit based system would contrast with a potential system. I agree the validity of hiring/firing based on age would be contingent on the job.
DeleteClaire, this is a great post! It definitely provoked some thinking. The topic of age reminds me of the episode from The Office where Micheal Scott claims that Ryan (the youngest VP in company history) is an ageist due to introducing PowerPoint to the company for the first time.
ReplyDeleteIn a world where the retirement age is creeping further and further away, how are all ages still viewed as equal in the workplace, if that is even possible?
I like to look at it this way... all ages are not equal, instead they are vastly unique. Unique in ability, experience, talents, and skills.