Surely as an employer I should have the freedom to employ the people that will benefit my company and therefore the people that I have already employed.
2006-09-30 06:57:42 · 16 answers · asked by clive 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Your statement is a tad arrogant. How do you measure this wonderful success and also remain within the law and not discriminate on grounds of sex, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin,disability. Do you just employ ms/mr body beautiful? Many organisations are now actively seeking more mature employees, B & Q in the United Kingdom for example because they have come to realise that this class has the ability to WORK HARD, BE CIVIL AND HELPFUL TO CUSTOMERS and ARE ABLE TO SPEAK AND WRITE GOOD ENGLISH. Enough said?
2006-09-30 07:23:10 · answer #1 · answered by Raymo 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Believe it or not, there are actually companies which dismiss employees on their 50th birthday, even senior executives! That's their corporate policy.
It's a destructive policy on several counts. Firstly, junior employees need mentoring, and they need to rely on the advice and experience of long-termers to succeed. Next, the client relationships long (old) timers cultivate over years often make up a substantial proportion of a company's business. Get rid of the staff, lose the clients. Finally, if you fire a 50+ year old, it is quite likely that he/she will not get another job and will be forced to live on unemployment benefit until retirement. This puts an unnecessary strain on state and federal welfare budgets.
We are living longer, healthier lives today. The average 50 year old has the stamina and good health that a 30 year old did 100 years ago, and of course has the wisdom, maturity and work experience that no 30 year old could possibly claim.
2006-09-30 14:24:56 · answer #2 · answered by lesroys 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Surely after seeing the way the kids write on here you dont need to ask that question,they are not articulate,cant spell and are downright ignorant.
I think its a good thing the new law,50 now is the new 30,the people of this age are very knowledgable,experienced,and good comunicators,so why should they be written off,Im not saying you do it ,but a lot of companies do,and it shouldnt be allowed.
2006-09-30 14:34:40 · answer #3 · answered by Pat R 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Its an interesting one. I need to recruit for a new policy officer post and have been told that it would suit a 'recent graduate' - yet I know an older person whom it would suit down to the ground.
I think that sometimes, as an employer, you do tend to lose touch with reality in terms of 'the kind of people who would be willing to accept the kind of job'. I think that any legislation that helps (rather than hinders) employers to think more broadly about the different skills and talents that people of different ages can bring to an organisation - is a GOOD piece of legislation. I also think that in most workplaces, the greater range of ages amongst the workforce, the better.
Sorry to sound cliched but we all need to surround ourselves - at work and at home - with people from different ages and backgrounds. So I think that we need these laws to actually challenge us to think beyond our own small-mindedness. And I include myself in that.
2006-09-30 16:05:40 · answer #4 · answered by zuffin 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because discrimination is wrong. Yes hire people who can do the job, but it will, from Monday be illegal to exclude anyone because of their age. Just as it is with sex, race or sexual orientation. The only thing this is going to fail over, is employers only employing those under 21 (thus extempt from minimum wage) and may set the system into chaos.
2006-09-30 14:02:26 · answer #5 · answered by nert 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I maybe not as agile as i once was but i still have an active mind.I can read write & do maths in my head without a PC or Calculator wich seems to be a lot more than some school leavers,Also years of experience and problem solving.Why should we be written off because of our age.
More power to the old folk,Doh where did i leave my car.
2006-09-30 14:20:08 · answer #6 · answered by Francis7 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Because we are so screwed up with political correctness in the u.k.Aageing piopulation and all that I think that jobs will have to be more open so that there is enough money in the Govt kitty for nat health and pensions,The life expectancy age is up so peoples pensions have to last for thirty or forty years past retirement.and provision hasn't been made in most instances.
2006-09-30 14:19:25 · answer #7 · answered by jimmyfish 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Surely, if you decide to ditch all the people you've already employed because they are no longer young and beautiful and replace them with beach and snow bunnies, that won't be of any use to society as a whole, will it?
You're going to get older too. What if organizations you belong to freeze you out as you become less desireable from a sex appeal perspective?
2006-09-30 14:00:36 · answer #8 · answered by nora22000 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
I think it's a wonderful idea. After all, one can't discriminate against someone because of age, sexuality, religion or gender so why should anyone be allowed to discriminate because of age?
2006-09-30 14:21:28 · answer #9 · answered by ? 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
There wouldn't be a need for any anti-discrimination laws if people didn't discriminate - the fact is that some employers do.
2006-09-30 14:06:25 · answer #10 · answered by ? 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋