|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Ageism
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
In the US (and I assume to one extent or another in the rest of the industrialized west -- I hope to be corrected if I'm wrong), we freely recognize that we worship youthfulness. The flip side of that is ageism, which abounds in our culture. Some random examples:
- On her blog The New Old Age in the NY Times, Paula Span notes that when Bill Clinton's speech at the 1988 Democratic convention bombed, no one made mention of his age, but when Clint Eastwood's presentation bombed last week, pundits quickly put it down to his age rather than to his simply having failed to prepare. (Eastwood has since then said he got the idea to talk to an empty chair just minutes before taking the stage.)
- When we compliment people over the age of about forty for their appearance, it tends to take the form of telling them they look good for their age, or they don't look as old as they are -- taking it for granted that aging and appearing to age are not good things.
- We are bombarded by ads for "anti-aging" serums -- again because aging is bad -- peopled by youthful or youthful-looking models.
- People over 50 (or 40, depending on the field) have a harder time finding work than younger people. They are encouraged to take off their resumes things such as they year they graduated college that document their age.
- We think saying that an old person is "young at heart" is a compliment.
Is it ageist to refer to "senior moments"? (Yo Is This Ageist? blog says it is -- I'm guessing the blogger considers it internalized ageism.) What will it take to do away with ageism? Are recognizing ageism and doing something about it complicated by the fact that we really do change as we age, albeit not in the lockstep ways predicted by stereotype?
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Loquacious beachcomber
Shipmate
# 8783
|
Posted
Okay, let me preface this by stating that what I am about to write concerns actions in the workplace ONLY and has nothing to do with comments placed on a bulletin board.
In Canada, the Human Rights Commisssion specifically includes ageism in the workplace as discrimination and harrassment that can create a poisioned atmosphere or deny an equally qualified person employment. As such, it can assign penalties and order remedies.
But, the issue is certainly more one of basic human dignity; if we would not consider racist or sexist remarks acceptable, we should also not accept ageist remarks, even if they are disguised as humour (as racist aand sexist comments long were.) Ageist remarks should be spoken against wherever and whenever they are found, IMO.
[ 09. September 2012, 22:06: Message edited by: Loquacious beachcomber ]
--------------------
TODAY'S SPECIAL - AND SO ARE YOU (Sign on beachfront fish & chips shop)
Posts: 5954 | From: Southeast of Wawa, between the beach and the hiking trail.. | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
[*]People over 50 (or 40, depending on the field) have a harder time finding work than younger people. They are encouraged to take off their resumes things such as they year they graduated college that document their age.
Underemployed & 55 married to unemployed & 57: it seems to us that your "prime" hiring years are nothing more than a blink in time. Seems like for so many decades we were too young, too inexperienced-- then you turn around and the next thing you can't even get an interview because you're over 50. It's a mighty narrow window in which you can actually move up in your careers-- and sadly seems to coincide precisely with child-rearing.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Loquacious beachcomber
Shipmate
# 8783
|
Posted
As far as "is it ageist to refer to senior moments" it seems to me that those who are ageist, sexist, or racist know exactly when they are acting like an asshole.
As to sexism, if a relief pitcher in a ball game mows down the side with a total of just 8 power pitches, you are probably safe to call that a testosterone-fueled barrage; if Serena Willams argues with the line referee, don't comment on her 'time of month.'
As to racism, probably fine to say that you are a white man with rythem,; it would be racist to tell all of your neighbours to lock their garage from now on because a black family moved onto the street.
Probably fine to talk about senior moments; not okay, if you are the lead clergy, to tell the personel committee to please make certain the new secretary that the church needs to hire is enthusiastic and energetic, and not someone likely to nap through their shift and forget how to print the bulletin every week.
If you yammer about crotchety old seniors in front of your school-aged children you are probably hurting their rapport with several 60-plus teachers.
Most people know all of that; if they cross the line, poke them with very clear words.
Right away.
[ 10. September 2012, 00:39: Message edited by: Loquacious beachcomber ]
--------------------
TODAY'S SPECIAL - AND SO ARE YOU (Sign on beachfront fish & chips shop)
Posts: 5954 | From: Southeast of Wawa, between the beach and the hiking trail.. | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
One, small check on the age being inversely proportional to employability; compensation. Older people have generally been longer in the workforce and have more personal responsibilities, therefore are less tolerant of lower pay. This is sometimes a component of the issue. Another component is, in some professions, recent education. The perception that a recent graduate will have the most current information.
This does not negate any of RuthW's points, just that I do not see them as being the entire problem.
BTW, viewing Mr. Eastwood's speech, I would have thought him potentially bonkers had he been only 20.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Loquacious beachcomber:
As to racism, probably fine to say that you are a white man with rythem,
No, that is actually racist. It implies that black people naturally have rhythm. Did you know this was attributed to the Irish as well, when first they emigrated in large numbers to America? That, with being physically more powerful, bigger penis, etc. All associated with being more animalistic, base, lower forms.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
One, small check on the age being inversely proportional to employability; compensation. Older people have generally been longer in the workforce and have more personal responsibilities, therefore are less tolerant of lower pay. This is sometimes a component of the issue. Another component is, in some professions, recent education. The perception that a recent graduate will have the most current information.
This does not negate any of RuthW's points, just that I do not see them as being the entire problem..
That may be the perception, it's not the reality. Oldsters such as my husband and the several dozen over 50 unemployed men in my congregation are applying for jobs at Starbucks and Costco, expecting the same starting wages as the 18 year olds. Many are recent grad-school graduates. The jokes about "senior moments" don't bother me, it's the real-life discrimination on the job front that is destroying the families I work with.
With ageism, just like racism and sexism, I think it's actually so embedded that people don't realize they're doing it. They have a picture in their mind of the person they want to hire. People outside of that picture-- whether the wrong gender, race, or age-- are going to have a hard time competing on an even playing field.
fwiw, I've found dealing with ageism much more daunting than the sexism I dealt with as a young minister in the 80s.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
I think that ageism is so ingrained into the culture that many older people themselves believe that they're of no value.
<Tangent> It may be one of the drivers of the call for euthanasia.</Tangent>
I don't think that saying 'senior moments' is ageist, but disrespecting people or turning them away on the basis of their age alone clearly is. It happens all the time.
Where older people deliberately engage with younger people and put across the positive aspects of their maturity bridges are built. As with all prejudice, meeting the people and finding that the stereotype is false makes the biggest contribution toward tearing it down.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
I don't think that saying 'senior moments' is ageist, but disrespecting people or turning them away on the basis of their age alone clearly is.
The term 'senior moment' is used around here to mean difficulty in recalling a word or proper name on a specific occasion. It is a problem that most elderly people have, and it is not an indication of general senility.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
All the 'ists' are down to fear in the end, are they not? I think we all fear, to some extent, what our own old age will be like - I know I do. There is a certain age (45?) before which most of us have no idea what it's like to slowly, slowly degenerate in body and mind.
I have to say, I'm 55 now and I hate it! (growing older) If there were a pill to make me stick at 35 physically and mentally I would take it instantly!
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
HCH
Shipmate
# 14313
|
Posted
As most of us pass through various different ages, one could argue that ageism is more acceptable than various other forms of bias: what goes around will indeed come around.
It is worth noticing that people do express biases against the young as well: "She'll outgrow that behavior" or "He'll learn better in time".
Of course, I could be wrong--I'm getting on.
Posts: 1540 | From: Illinois, USA | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
Well, I'm 64 and employed in a technical field. I can say with absolute confidence that I'm not nearly as valuable an employee as I was 20 years ago, and I cost a lot more. Is it ageism to prefer someone who has more energy and mental agility? Or is it a reality that we just don't like?
--Tom Clune
[ 10. September 2012, 16:24: Message edited by: tclune ]
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
Well, I'm 64 and employed in a technical field. I can say with absolute confidence that I'm not nearly as valuable an employee as I was 20 years ago, and I cost a lot more.
For the sake of argument, let's say you were out of a job, needed one, and were willing to work for what you're actually worth as an employee. Would anyone in your field hire you?
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
Well, I'm 64 and employed in a technical field. I can say with absolute confidence that I'm not nearly as valuable an employee as I was 20 years ago, and I cost a lot more.
For the sake of argument, let's say you were out of a job, needed one, and were willing to work for what you're actually worth as an employee. Would anyone in your field hire you?
I can answer that probably better than he can: no.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by HCH:
As most of us pass through various different ages, one could argue that ageism is more acceptable than various other forms of bias: what goes around will indeed come around.
Yes - my answer to ageist comments is - 'your turn will come, unless you are unlucky!'
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
One, small check on the age being inversely proportional to employability; compensation. Older people have generally been longer in the workforce and have more personal responsibilities, therefore are less tolerant of lower pay. This is sometimes a component of the issue.
You've made a huge generalization about older people. I have no more personal responsibilities at 49 than I did at 29, and I don't see that changing. And I can name a bunch of people I know who are older than I am who have only themselves to take care of.
Furthermore, it's up to the potential employee to say what pay they're willing to take, though of course employers frequently think they know better.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by HCH:
As most of us pass through various different ages, one could argue that ageism is more acceptable than various other forms of bias: what goes around will indeed come around.
Yes - my answer to ageist comments is - 'your turn will come, unless you are unlucky!'
True. But the reality for the later middle-aged not-ready-for-retirement unemployed in my house and congregation is not really all that funny. When you have worked hard all your life and suddenly find yourself unable to even get an interview to sweep floors at Starbucks, unable to provide for your family, knowing "they'll get theirs someday" doesn't really help much.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mary EW G
Apprentice
# 17015
|
Posted
Isn't this very objection to ageism in itself proof that it is a form of ageism?
I'm 72 and I don't care who knows it.
Furthermore I KNOW I was more energetic, felt better,looked better, etc.etc. when I was 25
Posts: 7 | From: ONtario, Canada | Registered: Mar 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mary EW G:
I'm 72 and I don't care who knows it.
I'm guessing you're not looking for work to support your family though. You might be singing a different tune were that the case.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
Having employed all ends of the spectrum, I can say with absolute certainty that age and price work together. We only need SO many people that know everything (older people generally) and we can make do with most people that know most everything, but are cheaper. The problem is that the job market is so bad right now that cheap rules.
I am also sure that someone that is 60+ has a lesser chance at finding a job because the fear is they will be brought on board, trained (a real expense) to fit the job, and then retire too soon to get back the investment.
I however, fight all these things as I can.
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
It depends to some extent on the job you do - Mr. C. was treated like an old grandad in his late 50s - in the computer consultancy environment, he was the oldest one left. It's such a fast-moving environment and you have to stay on top of the game. But if he were a priest, he'd be considered as having another 12 years of productive full-time work ahead, plus many years into late retirement as a fill-in.
In the teaching world, the last generation were encouraged to retire early - the teaching profession lost at a stroke their most experienced staff, with a huge bill for pensions of people who were still perfectly capable of working.
When you look at the armies of retired volunteers keeping many charities going, you wonder at the waste of able bodied people going too early from paid employment. But then - if young people are unemployed for an increasing number of years - how else to play it?
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
One, small check on the age being inversely proportional to employability; compensation. Older people have generally been longer in the workforce and have more personal responsibilities, therefore are less tolerant of lower pay.
I realise you aren't yourself identifying with this argument. It seems so nonsensical that anyone who advances it must simply be being disingenuous.
If a 55-year-old applies for a job that's advertised as paying Ł18K, that implies they are willing to work for Ł18K. If you offer them the job and they turn round and say 'I'll only do it for Ł24K', then you say 'bugger off' and ring up the candidate who came second. Compensation is not an issue for the employer because expensive candidates should self-select themselves out of the process.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sighthound
Shipmate
# 15185
|
Posted
A problem is that retirement age is being pushed upwards, and yet there is no increased appetite among employers to recruit older people. And in this context 'older' means anyone over about 45.
People vary enormously. I can think of one former colleague who was energetic and efficient at 65, and could have carried on longer. On the other hand there are people like me - at 59 I have nothing like the mental powers and concentration I had ten years ago, and I am also physically weaker and less healthy.
Given that Governments seem to want us all to work until at least 69 or so, they need a strategy to deal with the issue. It can't just be left to the market. (Although it will be.)
--------------------
Supporter of Tia Greyhound and Lurcher Rescue.http://tiagreyhounds.org/
Posts: 168 | From: England | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sighthound:
A problem is that retirement age is being pushed upwards, and yet there is no increased appetite among employers to recruit older people. And in this context 'older' means anyone over about 45.
Yes - and in my field (teaching) older teachers are being forced out at an alarming rate. I am now the oldest on our staff by far and I am semi-retired, only teaching two days a week. I am 55.
This is repeated in all the Primary schools I know.
It's becoming a job for the young.
[ 11. September 2012, 10:04: Message edited by: Boogie ]
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
Devil's Advocate mode:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Yes - and in my field (teaching) older teachers are being forced out at an alarming rate.
But there are only so many teaching jobs available, so if all the older teachers stay on in their posts then there won't be any younger teachers coming through. This is also true of most jobs, of course. And older people are more likely to be in a position where they (or their spouses) can support themselves through unemployment than young people who haven't had any chance to build up savings or pay off mortgages.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
If a 55-year-old applies for a job that's advertised as paying Ł18K, that implies they are willing to work for Ł18K...Compensation is not an issue for the employer because expensive candidates should self-select themselves out of the process.
That's not how employers have explained it to me. If you used to work for 35K, they think you will be treating their 18K job as a temporary parking place while continuing to look for something closer to (or exceeding) your former income. So they will be wasting their time hiring you, they'll just have to hire someone else soon. And wasting their time training you, since you won't be a "loyal" employee, and won't take the job seriously, but will leave as soon as you find something at your prior level.
I don't totally understand -- won't anyone leave if they get a better offer? But someone who used to be paid 30K "obviously" has the skills already to move on.
I do see oldsters at McDonalds, etc, they have such rapid turnover it shouldn't matter if they think an oldster won't stay.
But there's another issue. One interviewer at a company told me (at 39) I was too old, I would have to be given orders by someone younger than me, and "that doesn't work."
So I suspect some ageism is the dislike youngsters have being around oldsters, or "reversing roles" - treating oldsters as subordinates instead of as social and wisdom superiors.
And that's our fault as a society for segregating youth into their own youth programs. The youth of my church don't even attend church with adults, they have their own service Sunday evening. How will they learn to mix with all ages as equals if they are age-segregated in everything?
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
sebby
Shipmate
# 15147
|
Posted
Perhaps the CofE could take a lead in anti-ageism? Amongst those considered for the archbishopric of Canterbury some names of so-called retired bishops might be considered?
Is it now just silly to insist on a specific retirement age in parishes and dioceses when the rest of the civilised world seems to be moving against such retriction? By all means issue a limited contract, but the contract for the parish/diocese could be open to any qualified candidate of any age.
The ageist tendency is perhaps made more absurd in the CofE considering the age of its following.
--------------------
sebhyatt
Posts: 1340 | From: yorks | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Geo:
Having employed all ends of the spectrum, I can say with absolute certainty that age and price work together. We only need SO many people that know everything (older people generally) and we can make do with most people that know most everything, but are cheaper. The problem is that the job market is so bad right now that cheap rules.
I am also sure that someone that is 60+ has a lesser chance at finding a job because the fear is they will be brought on board, trained (a real expense) to fit the job, and then retire too soon to get back the investment.
I however, fight all these things as I can.
Sums it up really. I stopped looking for paid work a lot of years ago now, and basically do stuff for free in the voluntary sector. The fact that I'm almost 70 is a good deal less important in the voluntary sector than what I know and what I can do.
Money and employer/employee obligations produce different criteria, as MadGeo indicates. Some of these may look age-related but they are basically value-for-money-related.
In general, ageism is something I've got used to. Some aspects of it (like supermarket staff offering to pack bags, being offered seats on buses etc) I treat as a reward. The grey beard works to advantage in other ways. It's quite helpful in negotiating with folks who get the idea that age means less mentally sharp. There are advantages in being thought dumb.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
But there's another issue. One interviewer at a company told me (at 39) I was too old, I would have to be given orders by someone younger than me, and "that doesn't work."
So I suspect some ageism is the dislike youngsters have being around oldsters, or "reversing roles" - treating oldsters as subordinates instead of as social and wisdom superiors.
I'm not that much younger than you, but I'll admit that when I was recently given management responsibility over a new member of staff I scanned through the applications and was quite unnerved by the fact that some of them were older, more experienced or better qualified than me. I struggled to see how I could possibly have (much less exercise) authority over such people.
The reverse is also true - I tend not to feel comfortable having a manager who is younger, less experienced or less qualified than me. It feels like I should be the one telling them what to do.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
There are advantages in being thought dumb.
The motto on our family crest!
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
FWIW, I think the market for older folk is going to get stronger. Just a hunch.
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Loquacious beachcomber
Shipmate
# 8783
|
Posted
Sadly, though, you can't buy groceries or pay rent with a hunch. If pension eligibity ages are delayed while ageist attitudes are barriers to receiving employment, hoping for better days ahead won't fill an empty stomach.
--------------------
TODAY'S SPECIAL - AND SO ARE YOU (Sign on beachfront fish & chips shop)
Posts: 5954 | From: Southeast of Wawa, between the beach and the hiking trail.. | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Loquacious beachcomber:
Sadly, though, you can't buy groceries or pay rent with a hunch. If pension eligibity ages are delayed while ageist attitudes are barriers to receiving employment, hoping for better days ahead won't fill an empty stomach.
Exactly.
And to those employers who eschew hiring the post 50 crowd because they'll retire in 10 years... how long do you think 20 and 30 year olds are gonna stick around? That is a notoriously mobile age-- moving away to college or grad school, getting married and moving w/ spouses job, deciding to stay home w/ the kids, etc. There's certainly no guarantee you'll get 10, 15, or 20 years out of a young person you hire and train. In fact, hiring someone at 55 or so-- with a good 10-15 years left, but more limited options for moving elsewhere-- might be the better bet in terms of longevity.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Geo:
FWIW, I think the market for older folk is going to get stronger. Just a hunch.
Hi, Madge! Good to see you! ![[Axe murder]](graemlins/lovedrops.gif)
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by Loquacious beachcomber:
Sadly, though, you can't buy groceries or pay rent with a hunch. If pension eligibity ages are delayed while ageist attitudes are barriers to receiving employment, hoping for better days ahead won't fill an empty stomach.
Exactly.
And to those employers who eschew hiring the post 50 crowd because they'll retire in 10 years... how long do you think 20 and 30 year olds are gonna stick around? That is a notoriously mobile age-- moving away to college or grad school, getting married and moving w/ spouses job, deciding to stay home w/ the kids, etc. There's certainly no guarantee you'll get 10, 15, or 20 years out of a young person you hire and train. In fact, hiring someone at 55 or so-- with a good 10-15 years left, but more limited options for moving elsewhere-- might be the better bet in terms of longevity.
All good stuff. I'm inclined to agree that prospective length of service is not so important as may sometimes be suggested. But image is a factor. It can't be stated, at least not under current UK employment legislation I think, but there may very well be a problem of image.
"We're a bright, go-ahead, vibrant company. How well is that represented by grey (or bald) heads and a surfeit of wrinkles? Mmm, can't say that, can we? But prospective length of service needs to be weighed off against training/ familiarisation costs. Besides, isn't there some evidence to support the saying that it's harder to teach an old dog new tricks?" On that last point, I believe there is evidence to that effect.
Such things go through the minds of prospective employers, based on their perceptions of customer/client base. Is it ageist, or just value-for-money prudent? YMMV.
[ 12. September 2012, 09:24: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Geo:
FWIW, I think the market for older folk is going to get stronger. Just a hunch.
It'd batter because me & millions of others will still be paying our mortgages when get get to 65. Retirement will soon be a thing of the past for all excepr the very high paid. We're going to need to carry on working for money.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
HCH
Shipmate
# 14313
|
Posted
It's interesting that almost all of these comments have to do with the employability of the aged, rather than other concerns: sex lives, taste in music, pace of life, adoption of new technology, etc.
Posts: 1540 | From: Illinois, USA | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by HCH:
It's interesting that almost all of these comments have to do with the employability of the aged, rather than other concerns: sex lives...
Absolutely. The number of young ladies who are not interested in having sex with me can only be explained by their vile and ill-founded ageism.
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Geo:
FWIW, I think the market for older folk is going to get stronger. Just a hunch.
A hunch based solidly on demographics. In the years to come, there will be fewer young people entering the workforce than baby boomers leaving. And I second Mousethief's greeting!
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
daisymay
St Elmo's Fire
# 1480
|
Posted
I was doing work from when I was 7, helping in the area about us where there were cows and I learned to milk them out. Later I also picked strawberries, ready to sell, and also got involved in selling them. I did earn not a huge amount, but some money.
My granny worked from aged 14, singing in performances, and retired as a dental surgeon aged 70. She still was an excellent singer, had done it often throughout her life.
What do we feel about working and earning money for many many years?
--------------------
London
Flickr fotos
Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Soror Magna:
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Geo:
FWIW, I think the market for older folk is going to get stronger. Just a hunch.
A hunch based solidly on demographics. In the years to come, there will be fewer young people entering the workforce than baby boomers leaving. And I second Mousethief's greeting!
That makes the market for young workers stronger as there are fewer of them. If bosses really think that young people make better workers than old people then they will be willing to pay more to get hold of the decreasing supply.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Devil's Advocate mode:
... And older people are more likely to be in a position where they (or their spouses) can support themselves through unemployment than young people who haven't had any chance to build up savings or pay off mortgages.
Another unjustified generalization about older people. The economic divide hardens as you get older -- when you're young, you might move up economically or down, but once you're well into middle-age, chances are you're either doing well and going to stay that way (barring catastrophe) or you're not doing well and going to stay that way. Wealth is concentrated in the hands of older people, but not all of them -- loads of older people in the US are just barely getting by, trying to live on Social Security and some small savings, or just Social Security.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Loquacious beachcomber
Shipmate
# 8783
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
quote:
Originally posted by HCH:
It's interesting that almost all of these comments have to do with the employability of the aged, rather than other concerns: sex lives...
Absolutely. The number of young ladies who are not interested in having sex with me can only be explained by their vile and ill-founded ageism.
--Tom Clune
Well, Tom, without getting into the obvious fact that there must have been plenty of women (and men) who were not interested in having sex with you at any age or point in your lifetime (otherwise, there wouldn't be enough of them left to maintain a diverse genetic pool) may I ask why it is that you are concerned about the sexual needs of women outside of your own age group?
--------------------
TODAY'S SPECIAL - AND SO ARE YOU (Sign on beachfront fish & chips shop)
Posts: 5954 | From: Southeast of Wawa, between the beach and the hiking trail.. | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by HCH:
It's interesting that almost all of these comments have to do with the employability of the aged, rather than other concerns: sex lives, taste in music, pace of life, adoption of new technology, etc.
Maslow's hierarchy of needs. As important as those things are, they pale in comparison with the need for employment in order to have access to food, shelter and health care.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
And older people are more likely to be in a position where they (or their spouses) can support themselves through unemployment than young people who haven't had any chance to build up savings or pay off mortgages.
Other way round. When I was in my teens & twenties I could fall back on my parents if I had to. Now in my fifties I can't. There is just me, and other people who depend on me. So I need a steady income more, not less, than I did.
Also the idea that we all get to pay off our mortgages is, like livable occupational pensions, over for many people. It belonged to the period of rapid population growth, when the young outnumbered the middle-aged, who outnumbered the old. That stopped by the 1960s, and the population peak is approaching the age of 50 and about to start thinking about retiring.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
Other way round. When I was in my teens & twenties I could fall back on my parents if I had to. Now in my fifties I can't. There is just me, and other people who depend on me. So I need a steady income more, not less, than I did.
Yesterday I went to our local Senior Center to sign up for the fall programs I was interested in. While we were waiting I got in a conversation with an eighty-nine year old woman. She said that her fifty-year old daughter, who had never been able to manage her life very well, kept asking her for money.
The woman said that her golden age was rusty.
I am not suggesting that this is a common situation. My point is that all sweeping generalizations about the elderly are inaccurate.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
My point is that all sweeping generalizations about the elderly are inaccurate.
And on this thread, ironic!
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Loquacious beachcomber
Shipmate
# 8783
|
Posted
And perhaps on any thread, moronic.
--------------------
TODAY'S SPECIAL - AND SO ARE YOU (Sign on beachfront fish & chips shop)
Posts: 5954 | From: Southeast of Wawa, between the beach and the hiking trail.. | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
Other way round. When I was in my teens & twenties I could fall back on my parents if I had to. Now in my fifties I can't. There is just me, and other people who depend on me. So I need a steady income more, not less, than I did.
Yesterday I went to our local Senior Center to sign up for the fall programs I was interested in. While we were waiting I got in a conversation with an eighty-nine year old woman. She said that her fifty-year old daughter, who had never been able to manage her life very well, kept asking her for money.
The woman said that her golden age was rusty.
I am not suggesting that this is a common situation. My point is that all sweeping generalizations about the elderly are inaccurate.
Moo
Except that your story both refutes but also confirms the original point re: the elderly having more dependents than the younger.
Of course, we are taking in sweeping generalizations. That is the nature of the conversation. In general, people in their late teens/early 20s have fewer dependents/ responsibilities than do people in their 50s. Are there teens/ early 20s with great responsibilities? Sure. Are there slacker 50-somethings living off their elderly parents? Sure. Heck, I even know of some slacker 50-somethings living off their 20-something kids.
But in general, I think the point was at least a valid counter-point to the prior thesis that young people had greater responsibilities.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Haydee
Shipmate
# 14734
|
Posted
At the time I left the UK (a few years ago) I remember reading about some companies who made a point of encouraging 'older' (however they defined it, I can't remember) people to apply (as well as those needing part-time work to fit around other responsibilities), and allowing a range of flexible working hours so those wishing to scale up or down gradually could.
I think B&Q and Nationwide were two of them. The reason being it made good business sense - they often have the maturity & patience to provide better customer service, as well as sticking around longer, than those just out of school.
Each applicant was then assessed against the needs of the specific job, as per employment legislation, but their advertising was aimed at specific sectors of the population.
Posts: 433 | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
