“New Ageism” in The Workplace[i]
While
the following information was published in the UK about 10 years ago, let’s
assume that there is still improvement to be done and not only in the UK but
all of the business world. Reading the article, given at the bottom of the
post, will help develop a deeper understanding of "new ageism."
The
article opens with a statement that “Older workers in recent times have become
increasingly under-represented in the workforce….” Data is then cited that
supports this statement. It may be assumed to be because employers are
recruiting and keeping at work younger workers over older workers.
The
policy makers in the United Kingdom have responded to this data. In 1999 they published a voluntary code
of practice, with the goal of employing older workers expressed in the
principle of “equal opportunities of employment.” Why is it that while organizations may use the language of
“equal opportunity” the problem still exists?
The
authors then describe how this situuation can be analyzed by using discourse
analysis. “What
this means, in relation to age discrimination, is that the use of the language
of equal opportunities cannot be accepted simply as evidence of a consistent
commitment on the part of organizations to implement fair employment practices
and thus improve the prospects of older workers?”
The
researchers carried out some interviews with human resource managers or
recruitment managers of just over 10 medium to large enterprises operating on a UK-wide basis.
The
following three sets of responses were used:
"1)
Avoiding
‘ageist’ attributions 1 Making non-discriminatory practices visible.
2)
Avoiding
‘ageist” attributions 2 Making discriminatory practices less visible.
3)
Avoiding ‘ageist’ attributions 3 Making
potentially discriminatory practices invisible."
Dialogue
Examples:
1) CM: “Could you tell me what sort of form [your equal opportunity
policy] takes?
LL:” We have
an equal opportunities statement exam and we
are in the process of forming it into a full-blown policy etc.
But I do say that we don’t discriminate against ethnic origin, etc.
etc. We don’t include age at the
moment, we’re
sort of… we are revising our handbook at the moment,
we are inserting age and some other issues, to make
it up front (.) I don’t think we
have discriminated against
age per se in the past, but I do want it to be up front anyway.”
2)
CM:
What sort of age balance is there within [organization name] say between
younger worker and the over 40s?
LL: A high percentage of the population
is under 34 years old
(.) I mean it is something like
70% of the organization is
under 30.
3)
CM: Why is there that age balance in
[organization name]
LL: We’re still suffering because the older ones all left you know,
a couple of years on the early retirement err (.) and certainly now the
population is too young arm, for the type of
work that we are asking them to do.
“The
responses obtained in the present study, which draw explicitly upon language of
equal opportunities and seek to justify the non-employment of older workers in
non-ageist terms, similarly would appear to reflect a form of “new ageism”
Finally,
using flexible categories and “easy deployment of mundane reasoning ”… may
indicate that new ageist discourse may
be easier to use than other forms “new” discriminatory talk and harder
to remedy than other ‘new isms and within the world of work.
[i]
McVittie, C., McKinley, A. & Widdicomebe, S. (2003). Committed to (un)equal opportunities?:
‘New Ageism’ and the older worker, British Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 595-612.
No comments:
Post a Comment