[Here is a posting from June 2011. The original title was Age Discrimination, but the idea is broader.]
Recent news articles presented the fact that the older unemployed are finding it harder to reenter the workforce. In one television interview a man told the reporter that one company directly admitted to him that he had all the qualifications and experience and if he were 20 years younger, the job would be his. This is not only illegal, but a distinct failure in the dimension of critical thinking. It’s illogical and probably a disservice to the owners and customers of the company.
Recent news articles presented the fact that the older unemployed are finding it harder to reenter the workforce. In one television interview a man told the reporter that one company directly admitted to him that he had all the qualifications and experience and if he were 20 years younger, the job would be his. This is not only illegal, but a distinct failure in the dimension of critical thinking. It’s illogical and probably a disservice to the owners and customers of the company.
Consider that until recently it was not unusual for a company to have a turnover rate in the area of 20% - much higher in some cases, slightly lower in others depending on the work. [Today (2019) it might be higher than that considering the number of job openings available to any disgruntled worker.]
At 20% turnover the company is losing it’s entire workforce, on average, every 5 years. Even a person 55, who expects to retire no earlier than 62, would have a longer than average tenure. In any economy it's likely that a 55-year-old would remain a loyal employee for those seven or more years until retirement with a company willing to give him or her a chance.
Furthermore some studies have shown that older workers spend more time on the job, with fewer sick days, no lost time due to maternity leave, fewer interruptions with calls from the daycare or school, etc. Add in the mentoring potential, and arguments in favor of age discrimination become even weaker. (Here are links to just a couple of articles supporting this position.) Furthermore, older employees have not grown up with all the technology. Those who are successful have shown that they can learn and adapt on the fly.
A company that ignores these realities exhibits behavior based on unwritten policies, past practices and gut feelings. That is both irrational and not in their own best interests – a failure in the dimension of critical thinking.
Furthermore some studies have shown that older workers spend more time on the job, with fewer sick days, no lost time due to maternity leave, fewer interruptions with calls from the daycare or school, etc. Add in the mentoring potential, and arguments in favor of age discrimination become even weaker. (Here are links to just a couple of articles supporting this position.) Furthermore, older employees have not grown up with all the technology. Those who are successful have shown that they can learn and adapt on the fly.
A company that ignores these realities exhibits behavior based on unwritten policies, past practices and gut feelings. That is both irrational and not in their own best interests – a failure in the dimension of critical thinking.
Reflect on this: how many other laws are in place, including all other aspects of illegal discrimination, that would be unnecessary if company executives made sound (critical thinking) decisions instead of letting their prejudices short-circuit their brains? And how many tax dollars could be saved on the development and enforcement of those laws and regulations if people just acted sensibly?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Click again on the title to add a comment