Skip to main content

Age discrimination: Over 50s search twice as long for work than 15-24yos

If you lose your job past the age of 50, you are in the hardest age bracket to find work again thanks to age discrimination.
A recent study by the University of South Australia's Centre for Workplace Excellence confirmed there was a strong perception that older workers were not suitable for employment.
"Older job seekers that we spoke to felt they were rejected based on their age alone," the centre's Justine Irving told ABC Radio Adelaide's Drive program.
One-third of people surveyed aged over 50 revealed they had experienced age discrimination when applying for work.
"Some adults described a subtle pressure from their colleagues and management to stop working in order to make room for a younger generation."
Age-related discrimination was causing many to withhold their age on résumé, Dr Irving said.
The centre's study follows the Willing To Work Inquiry by the Human Rights Commission released in May 2016.
It revealed a rise in long-term mature-aged unemployment.
The report found the average length of time job seeking for those unemployed over 55 was 68 weeks.
Employment seekers aged 25 to 54 spent an average of 49 weeks looking for work, while it was a mere 30 weeks for 15 to 24-year-olds.
The report also found 27 per cent of people over 50 had experienced age discrimination.
Dr Irving said human resource managers needed to adapt and adjust to an ageing workforce or they would face large recruiting problems.
"It's important employers look for workers right for the job and not to make judgements about a person's capacity or abilities based on age alone."
AWPTI - workplace investigation Sydney and through-out NSW, QLD and Victoria. Workplace training national wide
Misconduct investigations, bullying investigations, harassment investigations & sexual harassment investigations, complaint investigations, grievance investigations, discrimination investigations
www.awpti.com.au
http://awpti.com.au/investigations/
Labels:
Location: Sydney NSW, Australia

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Unfair dismissal – harsh to dismiss, however reinstatement not appropriate

In the recent decision of  Paul Johnson v BHP Billiton Olympic Dam Corporation Pty Ltd  [2017] FWC 4097, Commissioner Hampton found that, although the employee had engaged in misconduct constituting a valid reason for dismissal, the dismissal was nevertheless harsh due to a number of mitigating factors. However, the Commissioner did not consider reinstatement appropriate because the employer had a rational basis for its loss of trust and confidence in the employee given the importance of the need for compliance with safety policy and the maintenance of appropriate discipline in connection with workplace health and safety matters. The employee was instead awarded compensation. The facts The employee was employed by BHPB from 24 May 2001 until his dismissal on 31 March 2017. At the time of his dismissal, the employee was a process specialist, responsible for a team of technicians looking after a flash furnace and other equipment in areas of a smelting facility at an und...
Post a Comment
Read more

Lorna Jane vindicated after two-year, $570,000 bullying case

Legal experts are urging businesses to train their staff in up-to-date social media policies this year, after activewear brand Lorna Jane won a two-year legal battle in November against a former employee who claimed the company was responsible for the psychiatric impacts of bullying at work. Former Brisbane store manager Amy Robinson filed a legal claim against Lorna Jane in 2015, seeking $570,000 in damages. The former manager claimed Lorna Jane was negligent and should be held responsible for her being bullied by a learning and development manager at the company, which led to psychiatric illness and a loss of employment and future employability. The company came out swinging against the claims early on,   posting a later-deleted Facebook post in 2015 defending itself against the claims  and saying it had been “very disappointed” by what had been reported in the media about the case. The claims included that Robinson was bullied and called a variety of names while...
Post a Comment
Read more

Stop-bullying application rejected

An employee who claimed his new team leader micromanaged and bullied him has had his stop-bullying application rejected, after the Fair Work Commission found her behaviour "abrupt" but not repeated or unreasonable. The Bunnings Warehouse employee claimed that in May 2016 the new team leader asked him about his face – the left side of his face "droops" and he is unable to move his left arm – which he found "deeply disrespectful and hurtful". A few weeks later, the team leader on two occasions confronted him and questioned why he was in different sections of the store, he told the Commission, noting he believed he was being singled out and treated differently from colleagues. He contacted the store manager to discuss the issue but was told she was too busy to speak with him, and he subsequently took two days off because of work-related stress. The employee claimed that when he returned to work, the employer suspended him but didn't tell him wh...
Post a Comment
Read more