Recruiters need to confront ageism – not ignore it.

Early last year I went to a pool (not my local pool) and had my first experience of being considered an ‘older Australian’.

At the entrance, the customer service officer, probably no more than 19, said, “Do you have a seniors card?”

Of course, he was helping me to avail myself of discounted admission if I was eligible (I was not).

I mean,  I am bald, have lines on my face and certainly look like I’m at the wrong end of my fifties…..but do I really look like I’m a ‘senior’?

As a (at the time) 57-year-old, it was rather confronting (teenage reality is that anybody who looks as old, or older, than their parents is ‘old’).

Increasingly, it seems many older Australians have much more consequential experiences with being seen as ‘old’ when it comes to participating in the labour market.

The issue of ageism in hiring and employment is one I have written about consistently since my first few weeks of blogging (What’s age got to do with it? featured in issue 6 of InSight, 1 November 2007).

One of my most popular blogs on the topic (Innovative employer proves labour shortage is a myth) describes an outstanding example of how an attitude change and a different approach to sourcing has provided a Victorian restaurant owner with a skillful and committed team of older Australian workers, many of whom had previously felt unwanted by employers.

Recently, I have noticed a rise in comments on this topic via LinkedIn. In the past two weeks, local recruiters, Urszula Lusk, Pam McKean, Vincent Borg, and Alistair McClymont have all posted thoughtfully about ageism in hiring and employment.

Sydney-based executive recruiter John Colebatch wrote one of the most impactful posts I have read on the topic. His short article A Lesson in Humility recounts his experience, earlier in his career, of placing a 62-year-old man into work and the subsequent impact that job had on him and his family. It still moves me every time I read it. I highly recommend you read it too.

One of my now-retired clients recently sent me (thanks, Chris) a copy of National Seniors Australia’s publication, Elements of Ageism 4: Experience of discrimination and exclusion. It makes for confronting reading (see extract).

 

 

The report’s conclusion comments,

“The most common forms of exclusion our survey respondents reported were discrimination by employers against older job seekers, ageist attitudes towards older workers within workplaces, and retail or hospitality staff treating older customers as if they were invisible. All these forms of exclusion are illegal in Australia as they constitute discrimination on the basis of age and therefore breach the 2004 Age Discrimination Act. Yet, like other forms of discrimination and exclusion, they clearly still occur.”

So-called ‘skills shortages’ are, in many cases, artificial shortages. I suspect many employers would be surprised by how many more good candidates they would attract if they didn’t discriminate against older workers and also increased pay to reflect the reality of demand and supply in the market for skills in which they operate.

The good news is that the participation rate of older Australian workers is on the rise relative to younger workers, indicating the motivation for older Australians to participate in the labour market is trending in the right direction.

It’s the attitude of many employers that needs to change.

I hope you, as a recruiter or hiring manager, see that you have a role to play in being part of the required change – treat all candidates on merit and insist your clients do the same.

Think of it as acting in your long-term self-interest (because, almost certainly, you’ll be seen as an ‘older worker’ much sooner than you think).

Related blogs

A Lesson in Humility

Bunnings busts talent ‘shortage’ by hiring an 87 year-old (who’s still there 4 years later)

Innovative employer proves labour shortage is a myth

The best news of 2022 – new respect for unretired and won’t-retire workers

Exile on Main Street: Older job seekers feel unwanted.