In the lead up to October's new anti-age discrimination law, some older workers are finding themselves eased out of jobs before the changes come into force

More than three quarters of firms think older workers do not benefit their business, according to a survey out this week by Peninsula Business Services, an employment law firm.

Just over half believe that employing people over 65 would cause additional problems because of health issues, and 86% of employers have yet to adapt their human-resources policies in response to anti-ageism laws that come into force on October 1, 2006.

Mike Huss of Peninsula said: “The survey figures are a sad commentary on our society and employment practice. We are dealing with deep-seated prejudice against older workers. Too many employers assume that anyone over the age of 50 is past it, which is sheer stupidity.”

Research shows there is little difference between the performance of younger and older workers. There is also a growing body of evidence that employees can work well into their late 60s with no decline in capability. “To put it simply: older workers often make better workers,” said Huss.

The new law

The new anti-age discrimination laws will make it an offence to force people to retire before the age of 65. But some companies are getting rid of older staff before they have to comply with the new rules. Age Concern has reported a 200% jump in the number of calls from older workers who have been sacked without warning.

Arpita Dutt of Russell Jones & Walker, a law firm, has also noticed a rise in the number of such cases. She said: “The upturn in calls from people over 50 who have been forced out without any fair or justified reason is definitely going up. There is no genuine case for redundancy, and certainly no issues with performance or conduct. It can be devastating for older workers, particularly because it often comes completely out of the blue.”

Double blow

Employees suffer in two ways. First, there is the psychological blow. Second is the financial hit. Dutt said: “If you are dismissed without warning or reason, it wreaks havoc with your retirement planning. You are also thrown into an ageist workplace.”

It can be difficult to find a job after a certain age, particularly in some sectors. Research by Russell Walker & Jones reveals the City and the media to be particularly biased towards younger people. In the City, 68% of professionals are under the age of 40. The average age in a marketing agency is 27.

Beating the law

Lawyers believe that employers are culling their workforce of older employees ahead of the new laws. At the moment, you can take an employer to a tribunal for unfair dismissal, but any award is capped at about £56,000. The age discrimination laws will scrap the cap, exposing employers to much bigger claims. The government predicts that firms will pay out £193m in compensation in the first year alone.

“The laws will undoubtedly help employees who are dismissed because of their age, many of whom are not now supported by the law,” said Dutt. But it might take longer to change employers’ attitudes. Huss said: “You cannot bring about a cultural shift with a new law. We are challenging myths and stereotypes that go back decades.”

There is also a chance that the anti-ageism laws will backfire. “If the new laws force more employers into dealing with age discrimination claims and payouts, they might well decide not to employ older people. If firms want to discriminate, they can always find a way.”

Have you just lost your job ? We would like to hear your views, so leave a comment below or use our message boards.

This article was created: 12 September 2006.
This article was last edited: 6 November 2006.

Email Back to top

Site map | About Us | Privacy policy | Contact Us