• Replies 13 replies
  • Subscribers 3 subscribers
  • Views 2417 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related

Ageism in recruitment

Fiona

I want to ask what HR professionals really think about a company creating it EVP employee value proposition with the exclusive aim of attracting and retaining younger workers or creating an employer of choice package which works to retain them whilst not retaining the older workforce - do you think that having this as an explicit HRM policy and approach, overtly discussed, written about and planned for, is actually discriminatory? As a trainer of CIPD programmes for 30 years ive often come across research which talks about characteristics of younger and older workers and documents about X Y generations compared to the milleniells etc and I can udnerstand the need to consider succession planning in an ageing company workforce but to find HRM proactively using this to create barriers to our ageing population in tihe workforce, Seems too close to discrimination to me????  Id be grateful for any feedback! :-) 

Parents

  • I think this is potentially a more subtle issue than at first appears.  To take the OP at face value:

    employee value proposition with the exclusive aim of attracting and retaining younger workers or creating an employer of choice package which works to retain them whilst not retaining the older workforce

    Yes, discriminatory on an illegal level because as expressed it focuses on age.  However, I wouldn't expect such an EVP to actually focus on age but, rather, on behaviours and priorities that, at first glance, appear to prioritise younger people but which actually is more to do with prioritising certain attitudes and values.

    For example, let's suppose that you're a manufacturer of upper-level high street fashion.  Your clothes are predominantly worn by people in the 16-28 age bracket.  You offer discounts on purchases to your employees.  That's an EVP element that prioritises an attitude (a desire to wear a particular fashion brand) found more prevalently among the younger age bracket.  But there's nothing in it to prevent older employees from wearing the same clothes.

    Or perhaps you elect to provide daily internal promotions through TikTok - an app almost exclusively used by under-30s.  This appeals more to those within the younger age bracket who are more likely to already be engaged with this app and its content.  But that doesn't stop older employees from using it.

    It is mistaken to assume that younger people behave in one way and older people behave in another.  Populations may behave in certain ways, but we deal with individuals.  If you have a corporate brand and EVP that emphasizes early technology adoption, digital communities and short-burst/low-friction interactions, that will certainly mould your workforce into one that tends to share attitudes and preferences with younger populations but it doesn't automatically mean that your workforce will be young or that your propositions are illegal.

  • in reply to Robey
    As an example of tacit signals of employer attitude, we offer 3 days paid leave in a rolling year to care for a sick child and a couple of years ago we changed the wording to say the time off is to care for a sick child or grandchild. The reason we changed the wording was to signal our desire to be more inclusive, but if you think about it, it doesn't actually change the benefit at all as we hadn't previously said that the sick child had to be the employee's own child.

    If you have an ageing workforce and can demonstrate that statistically, then you should be able to defend your position if you ever face an indirect discrimination challenge. However, I think you could influence the kinds of applicants you get by thinking through your benefits package and including details in your recruitment ads. For example, listing an enhanced maternity pay package in your benefits signals to all applicants that you are a family-friendly employer but will also appeal directly to women who are of an age to have a baby. Even though there is no physical cut-off point for men to become fathers, an enhanced paternity leave package is going to attract men in a particular life stage which typically tends to occur years before retirement.
  • in reply to Elizabeth Divver
    But do you offer the benefit to care for a sick parent or grandparent?
Reply Children
  • in reply to Keith

    We do. We offer 3 days paid leave for that too but we just say "relative", so it could be parent, grandparent, brother or sister, uncle, cousin or anyone else who is a family connection.

    I think there is a phase in life where the older generation starts needing care and that generally seems to be in the years when people's children (if they have any) are in their teens, but I have had young colleagues dealing with family illness in their twenties.