Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
By federal law employers are not allowed to consider race, ethnicity, religion, or age in the hiring process. The case for prohibiting discrimination against potential employees based on race, ethnicity, or religion is obvious. There is no provable argument that those factors have anything to do with the capacity of a person to perform a job.
However in regards to age it could be proven that it does in fact limit a person's capabilities. Employers routinely use age as a basis for not hiring someone. But because of the federal law they are not allowed to disclose that, and the job-seeker is given some other made-up reason for why they were passed over.
I may be off base here, so someone please build the case for why we need a legal prohibition against age discrimination. Without the law job-seekers would at least be able to find out the real reason(s) why they are rejected by employers. This could be useful information that enables the job-seeker to more effectively manage their careers and job search efforts.
There is a caveat in that law. If it is considered a BFOQ, it’s not illegal. So it would be fine to discriminate on age if it were proven that older people actually had difficulty on the job. An example is mandatory retirement for pilots. A common BFOQ for gender is gender and Hooters waitresses. It’s part of their business model that the servers are female, so it’s considered A BFOQ.
If age can be proven to limit a person's capabilities, then so can race, gender, ethnicity, and religion. I have seen studies done of different races and inferences made about the aptitudes of each race. There were British studies done at one time which arrogantly claimed one race was better than another.
If you do racial studies you won't find exactly the same capabilities in every race studied. We know that people of all races have the same capabilities, but the averages just won't work out the same for the study, even if groups of people of the same race were studied. Every group just won't have the same average. So these "studies" could be used to "prove" that one race is better than another. This type of logic can also be used for gender, ethnicity, and religion.
And the same invalid logic can be used to say that old people cannot perform as well as youngsters. But there are many factors involved. Some jobs are better suited for oldsters and some for youngsters. Some older people are better workers than when they were young, and vice versa. Some older people are computer savvy, some are not. Same with younger people. Some are better workers when they are young, some will be better when they are older. What about work ethic? Older people usually have a better work ethic than younger people. Younger people are on the average in better health than older people. And there are more factors.
Individuals are different based on these factors, so to blindly say that people of a certain age are better or worse is an inaccuracy and has to be judged on a case by case basis. Perhaps that is why age is not allowed to be considered in the hiring process.
But since we have opened this can of worms, it can be argued that men would be the better choice for hiring than a woman. And this does not involve intelligence or capability. Why? Because women can have babies but men cannot. Women need maternity leave, men do not. I have heard plenty of politically incorrect talk from managers who won't hire women because they don't want a reduction in productivity for when women employees get pregnant. That is an unarguable fact, black and white, indisputable, and you don't need a study to see that. Perhaps then since it "limits a person's capabilities" as you have said regarding age, then it should follow that men should be the natural preferred choice over women?
I think it all boils down to decency and not in that some group of people can do a job better than another. I think that is what the federal laws want to protect - decency. Everyone should have a fair shake that is not based on their gender, age, race, ethnicity, and religion. Equality for all!
Good question, since age discrimination is rampant and laws against it almost never enforced. The message is: You won't be prosecuted for it, but remember it's against the law.
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,322 posts, read 80,639,850 times
Reputation: 57331
Quote:
Originally Posted by pvande55
Good question, since age discrimination is rampant and laws against it almost never enforced. The message is: You won't be prosecuted for it, but remember it's against the law.
It's not lack of enforcement, but lack of solid evidence, just like discrimination by race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy, gender identity, and sexual orientation), national origin, or disability. Most employers are not stupid enough to give their reason for rejecting as one of the above. They will simply say that they selected someone better qualified or other generic reason. That is, in fact why people cannot benefit from their rejection and do better next time by understanding the actual reason they were not hired. Discrimination lawsuits most often won involve demonstrating a clear pattern, and that's nearly impossible to prove without access to data, requiring a lawyer and discovery, so few would pursue it.
The discrimination laws do not apply to a small business with less than 15 employees.
By federal law employers are not allowed to consider race, ethnicity, religion, or age in the hiring process. The case for prohibiting discrimination against potential employees based on race, ethnicity, or religion is obvious. There is no provable argument that those factors have anything to do with the capacity of a person to perform a job.
However in regards to age it could be proven that it does in fact limit a person's capabilities. Employers routinely use age as a basis for not hiring someone. But because of the federal law they are not allowed to disclose that, and the job-seeker is given some other made-up reason for why they were passed over.
I may be off base here, so someone please build the case for why we need a legal prohibition against age discrimination. Without the law job-seekers would at least be able to find out the real reason(s) why they are rejected by employers. This could be useful information that enables the job-seeker to more effectively manage their careers and job search efforts.
So I find out that employers have decided that i'm too old to be hired. How is this useful information?
I doubt there have been many cases where someone proved they were not hired because they were too old. I think in many cases, a hiring manager thinks an older person may be a problem. The person might think they should be the manager based on their experience. There is also a perception that an older person may have health issues and miss work, or may just not be physically or mentally up to the job.
I think the law is more often used to protect older workers from layoffs. When a company is laying people off, they often have to be able to prove they are not discriminating against older workers. In some fields such as healthcare, there are a higher percentage of older workers and they are more likely to file disability claims.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Protected Class
