“The only difference between the man and man all over the world over is one of degree, and not of kind, even as there is between trees of the same species. Where is in the cause of anger, envy or discrimination?”
– Mahatma Gandhi
INTRODUCTION:
Today’s organizations face new challenges thrown by changing demographics and increasing diversity in the workplace. These differences generate conflicts and are demonstrated as discriminatory practices that decrease both individual and organizational effectiveness. These practices include discrimination on the behalf of gender, region of origin, education, marital status, and caste, most importantly the age of the employee. Discrimination is a word that conveys a very high negative implication. It is a word and action that community has been struggling with ever since there were two people on this planet. The wordbook dictates bias as a therapy or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class or category to which that person belongs[1]. The discrimination on the basis of age is known as ‘Ageism’. For example, someone might experience ageism when an employer refuses to hire them because of their age. Or, an older worker might be shooting or treated dissimilarly than their co-workers because of their age.
Ageism explains, ‘any attitude, action or institutional structure which subordinates a person or group because of age. As an “ism”, ageism give thought to bias in society. An “ism”, ageism is unlike from other “isms”, that is sexism, racism, etc. essentially for two causes. First, age categorization is not fixed. An individual’s age categorization changes as one progress through the life cycle. Therefore, age classification is marked by continual change, while other classification systems traditionally used by the society such as race and gender remain static. Second, no one is spared from at some point achieving the position of old, and therefore, unless they die at an early age, experiencing ageism.
It’s no secret- with age comes experience. A young worker lacks the ample background of the first-hand knowledge that an older worker has acquired over time. Employers who do not come up with the opportunities for older workers lose valuable experience sometimes.
Thus, Ageism has developed into something that upshot productivity in the workplace. Companies favor younger workers to work for them, thinking that they grant better productivity whereas other organizations prefer to have older employees because they are more experienced and hard working. Yet these older adults may somehow be mistreated. Today’s culture shows that youngsters are smarter and head towards achievement.
NOT JUST A PART OF CORPORATE WORKPLACE
“Ageism is prejudice against time.”
Age discrimination is not only the part of corporate workplaces and is experienced and encountered daily on everyday basis in various other sectors. India’s entertainment industry set an appropriate example and has been accused of being ageist from very long, with older actors, models and performers mislaying their roles to youth counterparts. The advertising industry a bit depicts a sphere with no aged people or shows them as a burden. Unfortunately, this is the bigotry not many people are willing to speak about.
PIN-POINTING THE AGEISM AT WORKPLACE
Young employees are frequently handed a higher workload since they can grasp and process more work at faster rate. Not only does this put a lot of pressure on youth employees, but it lowers the usefulness of the expertise of experienced workers. Harassment or stereotypical occasions, where a person is treated differently because of the age factor is considered as age discrimination. Other instances of on-the-job differences are:
- Being repudiated for a work because you look too old or too young.
- Experiencing age specific comments before being fired or denied a promotion.
- Being laid off primarily older workers.
- Being at the receiving end of age related jokes or discriminatory insults.
- Retiring involuntarily due to age.
Occasionally, the age discrimination might not be that apparent. It can be frequently covered up with a comment saying something about the age and the experiences a person possess. Although it can be hard to spot and ultra- fine to notice, ageism in the workplace is a growing problem, mainly due to the young applicants increasing at a rapid rate in the countries.
People want to work in an environment that is welcoming. Ageism creates a negative working scenario. While workers might not straightly affected by it, but the discrimination causes distrust within a workplace. Youngsters will start to ponder if they will be the upcoming prey or simply will not want to work for a biased workplace.
If an institution promotes age bigotry at workplace, they are likely to see a loss in productivity and increase in turnovers. Therefore, low morale and an inability to continue a consistent workforce give a company little chance for long – term success.
“Youth is a gift of nature but the age is work of art.”
The 2015 Hollywood comedy ‘THE INTERN’ interestingly captured the story of the retired top executive seeking an internship programme at a new wave startup. His everyday interplay with his young fellow workers, the inceptive struggles of not being taken solemnly in a new technology based organization and his gentle overcoming of this bias wonderfully captured the movie’s tagline ‘ experience never gets too old’.
In an age where our corporate workforce is largely comprised of young millennial, it is often difficult for those belonging to Generation X or the Baby boomers to feel equally valued and respected. Interestingly, ageism doesn’t just impact choices during recruitment. Employers often exhibit pessimistic attitudes towards elder employees even they are not necessarily not so much well or fruitful than their young counterparts. Older employees are often missed when it comes to new career opportunities, learning and development programs. Rather than rope in their huge experience to benefit the organization, the over 50 years are passed over for promotions and are shifted to lesser important departments to ‘bade time’ till they get retire. In a universe that super values youth, it also not uncommon to see older employees ill-treated and assigned work well below their positions in a subtle way to push them out of the organization.
IBM SUED FOR AGESIM IN THE COMPANY.
Three former IBM employees sued the technology company for age discrimination. The tech company has fired more than estimated 20000 employees aged 40 or older in the last six years that accounts for 60% of all its firings in that period of time. ‘Over the past several years, IBM has been in the process of systematically giving up the older employees in order to build a younger workforce”, the employees claim in the suit, which was filed on September, 18, 2018.
AGE DISCRIMINATION LAWS IN UNITED STATES
Age discrimination in the workplace persists as serious and pervasive problems. Charges of ageism spiked during the Great Recession. The age discrimination laws in US are codified Act that deal personally with these issues. The Age Discrimination in Employment Act[2] (ADEA) shields the workers from age based discrimination in terms of hiring, firing, and other conditions of employment. In inclusion to the ADEA, does not apply to elected officials, independent contractors or military personnel. The law does apply to:
- Employers with at least 20 employees.
- Employment agencies.
- The federal government.
- The limited remedied of state or local government.
- Labour organization with at least 25 members.
The ADEA outlaw ageism in resolving about hiring, firing, layoffs, pay, benefits, promotions, demotions, performances analysis or any other circumstances of employment. Set limits of age for training programs. The law also restricts policies and practices that have a “disparate impact” on older workers. This is a strategy that seems to be age – neutral but fall more harshly on older workers. An example is a school district that announces it won’t hire teachers with more than 20 years of experience. Policies and practices that have a disproportionately inauspicious impact on older workers are unlawful unless the employer can prove they are based on a reasonable factor other than age.
NO CODIFIED LAW IN INDIA FOR AGEISM.
“All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights[3].”
The Constitution of India ensures fundamental rights to protect the basic human rights of the citizens and is put in to effect by the courts, subject to some limitations. It mandates the state shall not discriminate any citizens on the basis of religion, race, caste, sex, and place of work or any of them[4]. The Article 23[5] of the Universal Declarations of human Rights has identified and clarified The Right to Work as crucial human right. Everyone has the entitlement to work and can opt for working in a secure environment. But discrimination at work is backed by all these opportunities. ‘ The word “Discrimination” is expounded in ILO Convention as any qualification, prohibition or inclination made on the premise of race, color, political opinion, religion, sex, social inception or national extraction, etc. which has the effect of nullifying or impairing equal opportunity and treatment in employment or occupation[6]. ‘Injustice and preconception can cultivate impoverishment, smother improvement, planning and touch off political insecurities. Therefore, the discrimination is still a typical issue in the work environment.
In general, bias with the reasonable cause on the basis of age, such as nature of the job, location of the workplace, etc. the discrimination may be valid. As there is an age boundation for recruitment in armed forces, and the retirement age of cabin crew of national airlines of India is less than the retirement age of other central government employees or public undertakings sets the best example for justified ageism at work.
There are no systematical national or local laws in India that personally deals with the ageism. The Fundamental Rights engraved under the Constitution of India, only protect the individuals from discrimination only on the grounds of religion, caste, sex or place of birth and are enforceable only against the State. Yet, the age is not involved in such provisions. Moreover, the India being the common law country, it would be possible for an individual to seek protection against the age discrimination.
In the absence of designated statute that personally deals with matters pertaining to the age discrimination. The general provisions of Indian Penal Laws[7] describe no criminal sanctions in relation to the age discrimination at work place. Since, there is no statutory protection at hand, only common law can be instated where the ageism is highly unjustified. Civil treatments may include reinstatement, where an employee is terminated with or without back wages and compensation. Depending on the category of the employee and the nature of the allegation, such cases can be instituted in Labour courts, service tribunals and civil courts. On the other hand, the claims concerning to age biasness are not very common in the country and there are limited precedents which deal with the issue. In distinction, claims alleging other forms of bias such as religion, race, caste, gender or place of birth do exists as these are guaranteed as fundamental rights under the Constitution of India. Also, allegations related to workplace discrimination in India are more common to sexual harassment. Even claims pertaining to age bigotry in recruitment are very rare. There are very limited instances of claims of discrimination being made on the behalf of age at the time of recruitment.
Declarations on age discrimination are rarely brought to the Indian Courts. The case Air India vs. Nergesh Meerza and Others[8], deals with the issues of different age of male and female crew members of Air India. The matter that came up for deliberation before the Honorable Supreme Court of India was whether Regulation 46 (i)(c) and Regulation 47 of the Air India Employees Service Regulations were prejudicial in nature and were unconstitutional. Regulation 46 (i)(c) attached the age of retirement for air hostesses working for Air India at 35 years. It also furnished that the air hostesses would retire upon first pregnancy or on marriage within first four years of service, whichever is earlier. Regulation 47 came up with the provision that on being found medically fit, the retirement age of air hostesses could be expanded by 10 more years at the option of the Managing Director. The age of retirement for male cabin crew on the other hand was 58 years.
The Supreme Court of India struck down two service conditions applicable to Air India employees. First, the Court struck down the service situations which provided the termination of service of air hostesses on first pregnancy, clutching it to be in violation to Article 14[9] of the Constitution of India. Second, the court struck down the facilities which furnished the extension of service of an air hostess beyond 35, if found unhealthy, would be at the discretion of the Managing Director. While striking the latter situation, the Court held that real purpose of the makers of this regulation has not been carried out because the Managing Director has been given uncontrolled, unguided and absolute power to extend or not to extend the time of retirement after an air hostess attained the age of 35 years. The Court held that the said regulation gave broad powers to the Managing Director which might result in bigotry.
Though, concerning to the assertion regarding the inconsistency in retirement age of the air hostess and the male crew members, the Court refused the claim as not being preferential. The Court perceived that male and female crew members are distinct cadres with different service conditions. Acknowledging the reality that Air India had allotted the retirement age of air hostesses unalike from the male crew members taking into account the character of work, persuading the situations of service, the requirement to protect the health of females, and other relevant factors, the Court negated the disservice that service conditions providing lower age of retirement to air hostesses is unfavorable or biased.
CORRECTING THE AGEISM AT WORKPLACE
The course of correcting a wrong begins with the realization that a problem exists. For ageism to be accepted as a real problem, we need to talk about it as much as we talk about sexism or any other form of discrimination. Organizations that genuinely desire to extend their full prospective and upgrade retention and productivity must strive to create equitable workplaces where all workers where all workers irrespective of age, gender or any other dissimilarity, feel free and praised. Combating ageism needs a multi-pronged approach. It requires removal of all kinds of conscious and unconscious biases against a particular age group and mechanisms that promote people of all age groups working together in cohesive groups.
All organizations must invest in regular training strategies to teach their employees new skills, new technology as also train them about the need for adopting the right attitudes, team approach and inclusivity. If the organization is of opinion that aged people are not flexible to new technology, the straightforward way to address it is to launch uniform learning and enlarging programs to onboard employees to newer skills and technology. This would include not just the older employees but an employees but any employee to adopt new technology. To be fair, it is not just older people who might be technophobic[10]; people belonging to any age group might struggle with the new technology.
Efforts can be initiated to retain employees past retirement. This will secure a well mixture of experience and youth in any organization. This can be done by commencing benevolent policies such as gifting flexible working hours, work from home and consultancy alternatives.
CONCLUSION:
Bias and stereotyping lead to age discrimination that can affect everyone. It disadvantages the older workers, resulting in fruitless utilization of human resources. Ageist beliefs effect health care providers’ professional training and service delivery, which in turn negatively impacts the older patients’ treatment and health outcomes. Narrow views of aging lead people to disregard considerable differences among older adults’ driving abilities and to underappreciate their social needs. Ongoing education is needed to inform those in power that age is a poor predictor of performances and ability and should not be a basis of discrimination.
“Beautiful young people are accidents of nature, but beautiful old people are works of art.” Eleanor Roosevelt
[1] https://www.coursehero.com
[2] Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 1967 is Labor law of United States that forbids employment Discrimination against workers at least 40 years of age and provides equal employment under conditions that were not explicitly covered.
[3] Article: 1 of Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
[4] Article: 14 Right to Equality states this.
[5] This Article of UDHR states, that everyone has right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favorable conditions of work and to protect against unemployment.
[6] ILO Convention No. 111 defined the word Discrimination as stated.
[7] Indian Penal code, 1860 is official code of criminal laws in India.
[8] ( AIR 1981 SC 1829 )
[9] Deals with the right to equality mentioned in the Constitution of India.
[10] The word means, having or showing a fear or dislike of new technology.
For more Blogs – CLICK HERE.
Lawyers Gyan is now on Telegram (t.me/LAWYERSGYAN). Follow us for regular legal updates. Follow us on Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter or join our WhatsApp group.
Disclaimer:
Lawyers Gyan has no control over above-listed items as it is directly from the customer or taken from other sources. Despite our best efforts, some of the content may contain errors. You can trust us, but please conduct your own checks too. In case of any discrepancy please write to lawyersgyaan@gmail.com.
