Human Resources in the Legal Context - Essay Example

The contributions of older workers to the economy United Kingdom is definitely underappreciated and much of this is directly attributed to long standing prejudices (Shore & Goldberg, 2005). These longstanding prejudices are evidenced by human resources and training policies in a number of organizations throughout the UK. In these organizations, ageism operates as a belief that older workers have fewer resources to exchange for their rightful place in the workforce. They are deemed to have less or somehow inappropriate education, to have too few working years left to justify the investment in their training, and to be less physically and mentally capable when compared to their younger counterparts (Andersson, 2002, pp. 6-11). In research studies, age does not appear to be a central variable affecting the perception of personal work-related traits, but in the hiring decision its significance rises with increased employee age (Andersson, 2002, pp. 16-20). Data analyzed in the Louis Harris & Associates Laborforce 2000 Survey revealed that 40% of 406 companies who responded said they avoid hiring older workers because of the physical demands of work, despite the fact that relatively few jobs today require the ability to perform hard physical labor (Carnevale & Stone, 1994). Most jobs require cognition, experience, and wisdom—qualities that can be presumed to increase with age and are considered important competencies for many managerial and decision-making roles (Sterns & Sterns, 1995). Even so, 25% of corporate respondents in the Harris survey used the mental demands of work as a reason for not hiring older applicants (Carnevale & Stone, 1994). Much of the underutilization of older workers both those currently working and those wanting to work is the result of rigid corporate and government policies and practices (Morgan, 1996). Many assumptions about the elderly have been transferred to workers in their 50s and early 60s. The result of this transference is that retirement age is typically viewed as a cutoff point for one’s working capabilities (Carnevale & Stone, 1994). The Avolio Experiment (Carnevale & Stone, 1994) revealed the damaging effects of stereotypical assumptions about age. In his study, Avolio asked young professionals to listen to audio recordings of simulated interviews. Avolio told his subjects that the candidates had similar work experience and equivalent on-the-job performance. The same actors voiced the young and the older candidates on the tapes. When it was time to evaluate the candidates, the listeners tended to regard the older workers as non-valuable contributors and to judge the younger ones as adequate performers (1994). In another study, female supervisors favored older employees less (regardless of the work environment) in their evaluations (O’Brien, Robinson, & Taylor, 1986). These authors’ findings were further validated by Carnevale and Stone (1994) who reported that older workers are often the recipients of management’s unjustified assumptions, particularly when it comes to competing with younger people for training. For example, older employees are often refused training opportunities, despite working in organizational cultures that value those who maintain and improve their skills. Some human resource managers believe that older workers are less flexible, are unwilling to learn or change their ways, and have work styles that conflict with the work styles of younger workers (Sterns & Sterns, 1995). These unjustified assumptions often lead to rationalizations based entirely on the bottom-line. Investing in older workers whether by hiring them, training them, broadening their skills by varying work assignments, or retaining them yields a poor return for the company resources expended. Ironically, when any of this holds true, it is largely because management or company policy has created a self-fulfilling prophecy. By devaluing its older workers, especially by denying them training, management creates a depressing work environment that encourages neither high quality nor productivity. (Carnevale & Stone, 1994, p. 105). The effects of workplace ageism are numerous. They include: (a) the potential for lower employee morale and productivity; (b) a rising number of costly lawsuits; and (c) demographics shifts that will make it difficult for organizations to maintain a highly skilled workforce in the midst of rapid technological change. Workplace ageism promotes feelings of inadequacy among older workers (Carnevale & Stone, 1994). Employees who work in an environment influenced by ageist suppositions tend to believe that at a certain age they will, or have suddenly become, useless. In many cases, these feelings of inadequacy and loss of purpose conflict with an aging worker’s growing need for the intrinsic rewards of work (e.g., job satisfaction, congenial coworker relationships, participation in meaningful activity). (Sterns & Sterns, 1995). Cleveland, Shore & Murphy (1997) wrote that many of the problems and challenges faced by older workers are likely to be the result of others reactions to and beliefs regarding the individual’s age rather than a result of age per se. (p. 240). Companies and managers who accommodate ageist myths about older workers often discourage them from participating in training opportunities that would keep their skills up-to-date. In such environments, it is often the case that older workers also believe the myths, and self-select themselves out of training. It’s a self-image problem they feel they can’t learn. There is a greater probability that older workers who lack access to training opportunities will find themselves obsolete and, eventually, out of a job than their peers who are able to keep their skills and knowledge current. Between 30 and 40% of workers over 40 years of age feel they need training to update their skills (Kaeter, 1995). One study revealed that workers in the year 2020 will need to be retrained .up to 13 times to keep pace with technological changes in the work environment. (Fyock, 1991). Despite the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006 which came on 1 October, many older workers continue to be denied opportunities for training, development, and promotion in both private and public employment. This situation has developed because of age prejudice and because employers have assumed that most workers would retire before age 65 (BBC News, 2006). Much ado has been made recently about early baby boomers turning. For employers, the number to watch is 40. When employees become eligible for protection under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). Now that nearly a quarter of [43 million] boomers has reached that magic number, [human resource practitioners] must be even more vigilant about avoiding age-discrimination lawsuits. (Flynn, 1997, p. 105) The numbers of individual and class-action lawsuits alleging age discrimination filed by older workers in the U.S. reached a high of 22,800 in the first half of 1992 alone (Hassell & Perrewe, 1995). This is a new consideration the UK must face since its statute against discrimination based on age has been recently instituted. If businesses in the UK are going to avoid costly litigation on the scale as experienced in the U.S., it is prudent that they recognize age bias and discrimination as a pervasive, escalating issue and immediately expand preventative training on age bias (BBC News, 2006). One extension of an aging workforce is that stereotypes may change as the sheer number of older workers increase. According to one estimate, more than 50 million workers will need to upgrade their skills to perform tomorrow’s jobs. Of the companies surveyed for the Louis Harris Laborforce 2000 study, 83% expected to expand training programs in the 1990s (Carnevale & Stone, 1994). Demographic factors alone suggest that employers will be forced to confront issues raised by the growing proportion of older workers in the labor force. This demographic imperative may lead to a more accurate assessment of their behavior on an individual basis, rather than reliance on an outdated stereotype. (Hassell & Perrewe, 1995). As the literature suggests, human resource practitioners should be concerned with the effects of workplace ageism for several reasons. Not only are age and ageism frequently central variables in hiring decisions, but ageism can strongly influence the morale and productivity of older workers and their younger counterparts. Ageism can be costly to employers in terms of age discrimination litigation. Furthermore, the changing nature of the workforce age composition may force employers to increase their training investments at the expense of other strategically planned expenditures. Without an understanding of the effects of workplace ageism, human resource practitioners are ill prepared for effectively troubleshooting the negative outcomes as they occur. References Andersson, L. (Ed.). (2002). Cultural Gerontology. Westport, CT: Auburn House. BBC News. (2005). Q & A—Age discrimination law. Retrieved on 13 January, 2007 from, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/5260510.stm Carnevale, A. P., & Stone, S. C. (1994). Developing the new competitive workforce. In J.A. Auerbach & J.C. Welsh (Eds.), Aging and competition: Rebuilding the U.S. workforce (pp. 94-144). Washington, DC: The National Council on the Aging, Inc., and the National Planning Association. Cleveland, J. N., Shore, L. M., & Murphy, K. R. (1997). Person- and context oriented perceptual age measures: Additional evidence of distinctiveness and usefulness. Journal of Organizational Behavior (UK), 18(3), 239-251. Flynn, G. (1997). Aging baby boomers may mean more lawsuits. Workforce, 76(12), 105-106. Fyock, C. D. (1991). Teaching older workers new tricks. Training & Development Journal, 45(4), 21-23. Hassell, B. L., & Perrewe, P. L. (1995). An examination of beliefs about older workers: Do stereotypes still exist? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16(5), 457-468. Kaeter, M. (1995). Age-old myths. Training, 32(1), 61-64. Morgan, J. (1996). What Do Comparisons of the Last Two Economic Recoveries Tell Us about the UK Labour Market?. National Institute Economic Review, (156), 80-89. O’Brien, F. P., Robinson, J. F., & Taylor, G. S. (1986). The effects of supervisor sex and work environment on attitude toward older employees. Public Personnel Management, 15 (2), 119-130. Shore, L. M., & Goldberg, C. B. (2005). Age Discrimination in the Workplace. In Discrimination at Work: The Psychological and Organizational Bases, Dipboye, R. L. & Colella, A. (Eds.) (pp. 203-220). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Sterns, H. L., & Miklos, S. M. (1995). The aging worker in a changing environment: Organizational and individual issues (Special issue). Journal of Vocational Behavior, 47(3), 248-268. Sterns, H. L., & Sterns, A. A. (1995). Health and the employment capability of older Americans. In S. A. Bass (Ed.), Older and active: How Americans over 55 are contributing to society (pp. 10-34). New Haven: Yale University Press. Read More