I defintely agree with the author about ageism being rampant through the workforce. I've now spent two periods of time recently applying for government and private jobs with upward of 40+ applications. I have always made a point of contacting the company and speaking to someone about the position before applying, even if the add doesn't give a contact name. At the start of discussions they are always interested and yes your background/experience sounds a good fit etc for the position. But when the talk about experience starts to indicate that one may be a "mature" age worker, I am 58 and therefore 35+ years of experience, the interest evaporates. At least I am in the position that I don't financialy need to work.

Trying to prove that this is age descrimination would be the problem. When the likes of the ACCC can't prove collusion on things like petrol prices, what hope does the ordinary mug punter in the street have?

On a slightly more positive note, does anyone have any suggestions for agencies that actually treat people on merit rather than age? I'd be interested especially for any in the Melbourne area.

Dkit

I notice that you do not mention discrimination against younger people, which is just as prevalent in our society. The article focuses on discrimination during job applications, perhaps a wider scope would reveal that young people are discriminated against when it comes to issues of finance, democracy (there is no upper age limit to voting rights), and treatment by law enforcement. 43% of British youth reported experiencing discrimination based on their age, compared to other categories such as sex (27%), race (11%), or sexual orientation (6%).

Willow, C., Franklin, A. and Shaw, C. (2007). Meeting the obligations of the Convention on the Rights of the Child in England. Children and young people's messages to Government. DCSF.

alas ageism is alive and well in HR. If you ever wondered why older people get knock backs its usually because the client has told the HR agency that they're after new blood, which means young people. It's the default mindset in a lot of agencies. They want to place the applicant so they're not going to take risks with an 'oldie'.

Even if that older person has 15 years experience, excellent contacts, is reliable, intelligent, highly motivated, etc.

I'd say that's almost criminal - wouldn't you?

What comes around, goes around.

I would imagine that there is also an undercurrent of "they've had their turn, now it's ours" that is in play here. They (the young recruiters and hirers) would be considering the financial legacy left by us boomers, and coming to the conclusion that they owe us nothing. Especially not the leg up that they could give instead to a thirty-year-old with a young family.

They would also look at, say, Dkit, and think "they probably don't need the money".

Oh, yes...

>>I am 58 and therefore 35+ years of experience, the interest evaporates. At least I am in the position that I don't financialy need to work<<

It's also possible you might remind them of their parents, and visualise how their parents might behave in a managerial position.

Or, just as bad, as a peon.

Yes, there is age discrimination. Yes, it is just as bad as any other form of discrimination - race, colour, religion, gender, national origin, whatever. But "affirmative action" is not the answer, since it simply shifts the unfairness in another direction. Education is clearly not the answer - even well-educated people can remain bigots all their lives, they just manage to hide it more cleverly.

And we all know what a "Consultative Forum" will achieve, don't we?

So suck it up, people.

*All* human action consists of discrimination, of preferring A to B, of picking and choosing, of preferring and setting aside.

On what ground do we consider some discrimination unethical? That it adversely affects the interest of some other person? But *all* action adversely affects the interest of some other person? That it affects the right of some other person? But other persons don't have a *right* to associate with others against their will.

There is apparent agreement that discrimination on the ground of sex is bad. What about separate public toilets? Bad? What about when we choose sexual partners of the opposite sex? Bad, because it discriminates against prospective sexual partners of the same sex?

Discrimination doesn't have to be correct in each case for it to be rational. There is case probability and there is class probability. Let's say there are two races of people. One race has a rate of unprovoked aggressive violence of 1 percent. The other has a rate of unprovoked aggressive violence of 10 percent. A taxi driver can rationally decide not to pick up a person of the second race because there's a class probability of 10 percent that his prejudice is well-founded, even though there's a case probability of 90 percent that it's wrong.

This is no more than using the information available to us, which we do all the time, and which we cannot avoid doing all the time. It is no argument to say the information might be wrong: it might be wrong in any case. Perfection is not an option.

Give Aussie Battlers a go

Fellow Aussies give the lower income battler a bloody go
Cease paying labourers, truck drivers and non-tertiary
qualified people wages well below

Some of us never given the opportunity to be well paid
permanent public servants, sitting in an airconditioned or heated
office, sipping on coffee working, the luxury of stability, long
service and hefty pay out super you know

The rest of us Aussies slogging it out in the elements
treated like dirt half the time, no rights, stagnant union power
come rain, hail, sleet, heat and snow

Laid off constantly over the years when companies cut their costs
Long term contractors, casuals and full timers; a manager looks across.
Up goes a hand, he points to the door, no thanks, little notice, “cutting costs” he says, “You know how it is Ross”.

“Oh c’mon man, its just a week away from Christmas; my kids, what’ll I do”, despairs Ross.
“Mate, its not my problem, don’t shoot the sender, just doing my job for the Boss”.
“Will I get a reference at least, to secure another position after Christmas”, asked tired 40’s something Ross.
“Sorry mate”, laughs the Manager, shifting from foot to foot, “The boss doesn’t give ‘em for contractors and part-timers, his hours of the essence, the company can’t afford this type of ‘friggin’ reference writing time loss.

Over the next day, Ross rings around companies, feeling defeated.
After all, he’s already trodden this private enterprise non-tertiary qualified path before uphill.
Trying to ward off depression, low self esteem, anxiety and tempted not to pop a pill,
Ross uses the job seeker internet site spruiking his experience UNTIL….