Good advice from Billie. I think the sleeping giant is under-employment. The regime of short term contracts works as a penalty for older workers. Life becomes a treadmill of trudging from one interview to another - or facing no acknowledgement when they apply on line.

Quite right to call for more media on this issue as it has national social and economic ramifications. Age prejudice is insidious because it's hard to prove. Employers can say, 'we just had a better candidate'. That's sure to be true in some cases but King's article tends to lift the lid on the lie. Some hard facts would be handy although the stories on this post are evidence.

This is an intelligent factual article on the real situation regarding the employment of older Australians. Makes a change from the usual government spin.

This problem of an aging population is really not the fault of the portion of the baby boomers who are now in the 55-60year age group. They have a fairly big demographic of workers under them. It is the 30 and 40year olds who havent had children or have left it until their late thirties to have children who are going to have a real problem with no taxpayer base(workers)under them. Most of those in the 55-60year age group will be dead within 20years.

We don’t ALL ? live until we are 80years. That’s a maximum not an average. More spin by governments and superannuations funds. The average is still around 73years for women and 67 for men. Some live 10 or 15 years more than the average but a lot die 10or more years earlier than the average too. I think funeral statistics would bear this out. Preferably statistics done by people who can present facts and not spin.

SHOCK!HORROR! this isnt what society wants to hear is it? We all like to buy into the idea that we will live to 80years or more don’t we.

I often see people in the financial advice columns who have $500.000 dollars in super who are 62years old and still working, because they think they will live until they are 80or 90. I see people in my own community with money who do this too, and the next minute they get cancer or drop dead from a heart attack. They could have paid themselves a wage of $50.000 for the next 10years and retired. Once you reach 70years you can kiss the ground every day you wake up alive because you just don’t know when your time will be up.

Malcolm says that - "One has to wonder about the existence of age prejudice in the 21st century."

Mankind has this idea that they can intellectualize and legislate away man's basic biological programming and they are surprised when it doesn't work like they thought it would. It is the way of every species to abandon the old and the sick when times are hard. The young are always climbing up behind, chanllenging the territorial control of the old and the old eventually have to give way to them.

There are 2 parts to this debate

1. the difficulty the older job candidate has finding work

2. the push to keep the workforce participation rate above 65% for people over 40.

When I was at school we assumed that mechanisation would mean that work was less hard - yes physically demanding work has almost been eliminated, and we would have more leisure - work less than 38 hours a week and retire from the workforce at 55.

The Australian Financial Review is full of articles saying that the older worker would like to restrict their work to about 40 hours a week and suggestions that 70 is the right age to retire.

As KeesB and I can attest that means a lot of low self esteem individuals scrabbling for their next contract - with worse conditions than the last contract.

Suitability of older workers to do the job? Most jobs are designed to be done by younger bodies - so older workers on production lines end up with chronic shoulder or lower back complaints, office lighting needs to be increased for older workers as their reading glasses need more light, documents must be printed in 12+ point to be legible. There is no question that older workers suffer from more chronic complaints than younger workers and older workers would be more interested in part time work.

As rehctub says social security recipients are penalised for accepting part time [or seasonal] work so its easier to not do any work.

Governments could improve labour mobility for older workers by
* introducing the superannuation contribution clearing house - as promised in 2007 election
* change the mechanism for social security recipients to top up their payments without harsh penalties for miscalculation of estimated earnings - encourage reporting of actual earnings

A good post and most comments are on the money.

However, let us consider some other aspects.

Older workers with relevant education are not overpriced as they are generally prepared to give a seniors discount for their labour and wisdom. They do not demand top market rates when asked.

Business has shed responsibility for spending on staff training.

Australia is to suffer as long as 457 visas are issued at an employer's whim. Every 457 visa issued REDUCES business's desire to spend on education of employees. Unions used to know this and force apprentices to be employed.

Not so now at either end of the age spectrum.

Business should pay an education tax on every 457 visa they import.

On the other hand the arguments as to the cost of social welfare called pensions is a smokescreen to cover the welfare payments in family tax benefits and youth education at the other end of the age spectrum - do a comparison and it becomes obvious that Big Business has shed its cost for education off to Government and families. We have been returned to a role of serfs.

Alas, even the pollies are manufactured agents at the ultimate command of the Big Four.

There is no loyalty even to manufactured agents.

A very insightful article DICKO, What you say