Social Sciences
Age Discrimination
Age discrimination refers to the unfair treatment of individuals based on their age, often in the workplace or other social settings. This can manifest as hiring, promotion, or firing decisions based on age rather than merit. Age discrimination can have negative impacts on individuals' careers and well-being, and is often addressed through anti-discrimination laws and policies.
Written by Perlego with AI-assistance
Related key terms
1 of 5
8 Key excerpts on "Age Discrimination"
eBook - PDFAge Discrimination and Diversity
Multiple Discrimination from an Age Perspective
- Malcolm Sargeant(Author)
- 2011(Publication Date)
- Cambridge University Press(Publisher)
This means the tackling of Age Discrimination. Below, we consider further what this means in practice. Framework for diversity Age is a characteristic that, if we are fortunate, will come to each of us. The result of this ageing process is not a uniform greying population who share the same identity and appearance. The older population is as diverse as any other age group within the population. It will consist of people from different ethnic backgrounds, different genders, and so on. Age is an extra dimension to the scope of discrimination that people may suffer. It is often the combination of age with another apparent disad- vantage that may multiply the discrimination suffered. One study (Tackey et al. 2006), for example, highlighted the exceptional difficulties suffered by older Pakistani and Bangladeshi men: 7 Figure is for 2007. ageism and Age Discrimination 7 Looking first at personal characteristics, it was evident that age repre- sented a significant barrier to work, especially for men in their 40s and 50s. It is striking that at the age where most people of working age in Britain are at the height of their productive capability, a large number of Pakistani and Bangladeshi men had stopped working altogether. Age was linked directly with people’s health, and Pakistani and Bangladeshi men were likely to suffer multiple health problems, which also prevented them from working. Age also excluded older men from new forms of skilled employment, particularly because the only skills they possessed were limited, outdated and no longer relevant to the changed industrial econ- omy of Britain. The Law Commission of Ontario has produced a study called ‘Theoretical and economic approaches to understanding ageism’ (Spencer 2009). It states that most discussion of ageism has come from the sociological, psychological and gerontological fields.
- M. Noon, E. Ogbonna, M. Noon, E. Ogbonna(Authors)
- 2000(Publication Date)
- Palgrave Macmillan(Publisher)
In the second section, we report relevant results from an empirical study of employers’ attitudes towards ageism. In the third and final part of the chapter, the critique of existing conceptualisations and the empirical findings are used as a basis for developing an alternative theory of Age Discrimination in employment. Cliff Oswick and Patrice Rosenthal 157 AGEISM AND CONTEMPORARY THEORIES OF DISCRIMINATION The term ‘ageism’ is believed to have been first coined in 1969 by Rob- ert Butler, a psychiatrist, who championed the cause of the elderly regard- ing the proposed building of a block of highrise flats in Maryland. This initiative was reported in the Washington Post and was purported to be ‘the first time the word “ageism” appeared in the mass media’ (Bytheway, 1995: 30). Ageism, according to Whitehouse (1978), is ‘discrimination against people on the basis of chronological age’. A more extensive definition has been provided by Butler and Lewis. They suggest: Ageism can be seen as a process of systematic stereotyping of and discrimination against people because they are old, just as racism and sexism accomplish this for skin colour and gender. Old people are categorised as senile, rigid in thought and manner, old fashioned in morality and skills . . . Ageism allows the younger generations to see older people as different from themselves, thus they subtly cease to identify with their elders as human beings. (Butler and Lewis, 1973: 9) In this account, the role of discriminator and discriminatee are clearly delineated: the discriminators are ‘the younger generation’ and those who are disadvantaged are ‘older people’. This type of distinction is typically drawn within definitions of ageism provided by gerontologists (see for instance Butler, 1975, 1980; Comfort, 1977; de Beauvoir, 1977; Whitehouse, 1978; Woodward, 1988).
eBook - PDFAge as an Equality Issue
Legal and Policy Perspectives
- Sandra Fredman, Sarah Spencer, Sandra Fredman, Sarah Spencer(Authors)
- 2003(Publication Date)
- Hart Publishing(Publisher)
senior managers and practitioners can be expected to know of their existence. It is even more difficult to identify and quantify discriminatory practice resulting from individual judgments and decisions made by thousands of health and social care staff. This can only be determined by identifying and comparing pat-terns of referral, treatment, care and support relating to people of different age groups. Unfortunately, very little of the information that is routinely collected to measure performance in health and social care can be used for that purpose. More research is therefore needed to clarify the extent to which older people are being disadvantaged (or not) by this kind of hidden discrimination. Even then, it will be important to disentangle Age Discrimination from other issues around gender, poverty, ethnicity, and chronic ill health and disability. 4. Controversy. Fierce debates can surround the evidence on Age Discrimination, as research findings do not always provide conclusive proof that age discrim-ination is actually taking place. A closer look reveals that this is frequently because there are widely differing ideas as to what constitutes discrimination itself. Some argue that practices appearing to disadvantage older people are not discriminatory, because they are legitimately based on the capacity to benefit. It is only because older people tend to have a lower capacity to benefit that the dis-advantage appears to be concentrated among older people. For example, New and Mays 28 have contested whether restricting access of older people to treat-ment for end-stage renal failure constitutes Age Discrimination, arguing that age is statistically associated with the clinical ability to benefit. Grimley Evans 29 takes a different view, arguing that it is discriminatory and unfair to deny treat-ment to individual older people on the basis of the likely benefits to the ‘average’ older person.
- Emma Parry, Jean McCarthy, Emma Parry, Jean McCarthy(Authors)
- 2016(Publication Date)
- Palgrave Macmillan(Publisher)
For example, Loretto et al. (2000) conducted a large-scale survey that found that at least 25 per cent of young workers have reported 17 Millennials, Media, and Research: Ageism and the Younger Worker 439 experiencing some form of Age Discrimination. Young workers described expe- riencing denial of promotions, demeaning attitudes from older workers, and disproportionately lower pay. Thus, North and Fiske (2012) suggested that future research address ways in which ageism affects all age groups. Conclusion Ageism is one form of discrimination that everyone is susceptible to in their lifetime. It is socially condoned through everyday conversations and the media. Even though it is so prevalent on a daily basis, there are many things that necessitate further action. A major issue that currently requires attention centres around US state laws concerning ageism. Some states have their own laws and others do not. Also, many of these state laws do not include workers of all age groups, particularly ones who are just entering the workforce. This chapter has provided evidence for the presence of ageism towards Millennials, as it is not limited to the US legal definition of individuals who are over the age of 40. Past research (Falkenberg 1990) has found that individuals often use ste- reotypes and individuating information to either justify or suppress their prejudice towards that individual. The justification–suppression model has been applied to race (King and Ahmad 2010) and obesity (Hebl et al. 2008) discrimination but not to Age Discrimination. Future studies should investi- gate whether or not individuals can suppress age-based stereotypes with indi- viduating information to reduce the impact of ageism in the workplace. Since we know that there are differences among different age groups based on stereotypes that are held towards them, it is important to note that these stereotypes are not always accurate.
eBook - PDFThe Aging Workforce Handbook
Individual, Organizational and Societal Challenges
- Alexander-Stamatios Antoniou, Ronald J. Burke, Cary L. Cooper, Alexander-Stamatios Antoniou, Ronald J. Burke, Cary L. Cooper(Authors)
- 2016(Publication Date)
- Emerald Group Publishing Limited(Publisher)
Although some of the ups and downs of employment opportunities appear to be caused by ups and downs in the world ’ s economies, some of them surely manifest perceptions and misperceptions of older workers and their capabilities on the job. To What Extent Do These Perceptions Constitute Age Discrimination? Age Discrimination violates the principle of equality, because it is based on a difference (chronological age) that may be irrelevant or irrational in relation to occupational demands. Reliance on chronological age alone re fl ects stereotypes and ageism ( Doron & Klein, 2010 ). Regardless of the reality, the perception of Age Discrimination is widespread ( James et al., 2013 ). A survey con-ducted in Israel ( Hendeles, 2010 ) examined perceptions of discri-mination at work that stem from belonging to different groups. Findings revealed that job seekers age 45 and older reported the 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 2010 2011 2012 2013 Figure 3. Involuntary Part-Timers Age 55 and Older, by Country (2010 2013). Source : OECD (2016c) . Employers ’ Attitudes toward Older-Worker Job Seekers 497 most discrimination; 48 percent of the older job seekers, employed and unemployed, reported that they had encountered many refusals that they interpreted as being age-related. Perceptions, however, do not make for successful litigation, and Age Discrimination is notoriously hard to discern. Employers ’ decisions on the basis of age may be unintentional or deliberate, conscious or explicit ( Levy & Banaji, 2004 ). Employers, con-cerned about litigation, do not want to be asked about it or, if asked, do not want to admit its presence. Discrimination law-suits, while numerous, are very hard to win, at least in the UNITED STATES ( Selmi, 2000 ). Thus, researchers struggle to come up with methods for identifying and rectifying the practice of Age Discrimination. A common technique in researching discriminatory hiring practices is to measure response rates to résumés sent to job vacancies.
eBook - PDFAttitudes and Related Psychosocial Constructs
Theories, Assessment, and Research
- Lewis Aiken(Author)
- 2002(Publication Date)
- SAGE Publications, Inc(Publisher)
Furthermore, 84% of the respondents said that they would be happy to live to be 90 years old. If ageism were merely an attitude and not expressed in the treatment of older adults, it would be of less concern than it actually is. As with racism and sexism, however, ageism is manifested in the discriminating behavior of society toward older adults, and most particularly in employment contexts. Historically, older workers have been characterized as slower; less able to learn new skills; more prone to accidents; less able to get along with cowork-ers and customers; more resistant to supervision and change; more likely to miss work; slower in making judgments; lower in speed, strength, and en-durance; less motivated; and more stubborn and overcautious (Rhodes, 1983; Sparrow & Davies, 1988). Managers who accept these unproved as-sumptions are more likely to discriminate against older workers in making personnel decisions. Older adults may have a lower work output volume than younger adults, but their work is generally of higher quality and per-formed with less wasted effort and fewer mistakes. They are also quite capa-ble of learning new jobs, and their experience can compensate for age-related declines in the speed or strength of their performance (Rhodes, 1983; Stagner, 1985). The civil rights atmosphere of the 1960s not only led to legislation requir-ing equal treatment of the races and sexes but also mandated equal treatment by age. For example, the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA) banned the use of age as a criterion in hiring, firing, promo-tion, training, retirement, working conditions, referral by employment agen-cies, job announcements, or any action taken against a person with regard to compensation, conditions, or perquisites of employment.
- Ronald R. Sims, William I. Sauser, Jr.(Authors)
- 2010(Publication Date)
- Information Age Publishing(Publisher)
Age norming poses the danger of bias leading to assumptions that certain jobs exceed the capabilities of workers just because they are older. Both forms can result in discrimination at either the institutional level (e.g., in hiring, training, promotion, firing decisions) or the interpersonal level (e.g., prejudicial at- titudes or discriminatory actions in daily interactions). Actions at the institutional level might include rejecting mature job applicants as overqualified, requiring years of experience on job applica- tions and then screening out candidates by inferring age from their re- sponse, using age limits as a proxy for health and fitness, refusing to hire the long-term unemployed or to consider mature employees for training and development opportunities, making unfair work assignments based on age, monitoring older workers more closely on the job than others, and providing them less favorable feedback. Actions at the interperson- al level might involve ageist remarks such as insulting jokes, disrespect, patronizing behavior, or assumptions about frailty or ailments (Chou & Choi, 2011). HR professionals need to not only be aware of all forms of Combating Age Discrimination 177 bias and discrimination, whether explicit or implicit, but also act when necessary to correct such prejudicial beliefs or actions. It is also crucial that they have up-to-date knowledge of the legal and regulatory issues that affect mature workers. LEGAL AND REGULATORY ISSUES Federal and State Laws The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) of 1967 and its amendments in 1986 provided managers with another reason to critically examine their attitudes, policies, and practices regarding mature workers. Originally, the legislation prohibited age-related discrimination for persons aged 40 to 65, but in 1978 amendments increased the upper age limit to 70 and in 1986 upper limits were eliminated altogether.
- Liat Ayalon, Clemens Tesch-Römer(Authors)
- 2018(Publication Date)
- Springer Open(Publisher)
This conclusion is much in line with a sug-gestion that was put forward by King and Hebl ( 2013 ) who claimed that stereotyp-ing is best investigated in real life contexts and interactions. This would also counteract the concerns regarding ecological validity (e.g., a meta-analysis on age bias in laboratory and feld settings identifed negative relations between generaliz-ability and effect size, Gordon and Arvey 2004 ). In sum, although conceptually an involvement of age stereotypes in age discrimi-nation is inevitable, the mere activation of age stereotypes is by no means a suf f-cient condition for the occurrence of Age Discrimination. A full understanding of the complexities of these relations requires frameworks that incorporate additional per-sonal and contextual constraints and also consider the domain-specifcity of age stereotypes and Age Discrimination. References Abrams, D., Swift, H. J., & Drury, L. (2016). Old and unemployable? How age-based stereotypes affect willingness to hire job candidates. Journal of Social Issues, 72 , 105–121. https://doi. org/10.1111/josi.12158 Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) of 1967. (1967). 29 U.S.C. § 621, 81 Stat. 602. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (2005). The infuence of attitudes on behavior. In D. Albarracín, B. T. Johnson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The handbook of attitudes (pp. 173–221). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. Allgemeines Gleichbehandlungsgesetz (AGG) [General Act on Equal Treatment]. (2006). BGBl. I S. 1897. Allport, G. W. (1958). The nature of prejudice . Garden City: Doubleday. Amodio, D. M., & Devine, P. G. (2006). Stereotyping and evaluation in implicit race bias: Evidence for independent constructs and unique effects on behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91 , 652–661. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.91.4.652 Australien Human Rights Commission. (2010). Age Discrimination – Exposing the hidden bar-rier for mature age workers.
Index pages curate the most relevant extracts from our library of academic textbooks. They’ve been created using an in-house natural language model (NLM), each adding context and meaning to key research topics.
