Dispelling the myth of ageism

The new laws prohibiting discrimination on the grounds of age, which came into force on 1 October, have prompted an outcry from the media. In fact, we have probably not seen a reaction like this since the introduction of laws prohibiting discrimination on the grounds of gender. Businesses throughout the country have been left confused and concerned by reporting that has, at times, been hysterical and inaccurate. Here we debunk seven popular myths that have arisen around the legislation. For example:

I won’t be able to use length of service as a criterion when awarding benefits.
Joanna Lada-Walicki, legal member of UK200Group and associate at Barlow Robbins LLP, says: “This is not quite right. According to the regulations, using length of service to calculate an employment benefit will be lawful if its aim is to recognise experience, reward loyalty or encourage motivation and the employer reasonably concludes that there will be a business benefit in doing this and applies the length of service criterion to all staff in similar situations. Furthermore, a length of service requirement of five years or less does not need to be justified and will be lawful.”

If one of my employees wants to carry on working after they turn 65, all they have to do is ask me and I have to comply.
Judith Watson, head of employment at law firm Cobbetts, says: “An employer can give the employee notice of an intended retirement date, at, or beyond, the employee’s 65th birthday and, as long as they follow the correct procedure of notification and consideration of any request received from the employee, they can still refuse the request and dismiss the employee. They don’t even have to give a reason why.”

I won’t be able to ask for a job candidate’s age in the recruitment process.
Smair Soor, a barrister at Seven Bedford Row chambers, says: “You will be able to, but only if you’re asking for monitoring purposes, or because the job genuinely needs someone of a particular age and that can be justified. In the latter case, remember that very few job criteria are necessarily connected to a person’s age.”

I can’t set a maximum age for recruiting or promoting employees.
Sally Morris, a partner at mfg solicitors, says: “This is one of the few circumstances under the new legislation when it is actually lawful to treat people differently due to their age. This can be classed as an objective justification, under which employers are permitted to set age requirements, providing there is a proper reason. So, for example, it could be acceptable to set an age limit where a set period of training is required for the role, or the employer would need the employee to be in post for a reasonable period before reaching retirement.

It will be impossible to target lower-level accountants and finance professionals without using traditional industry phrases such as ‘part qualified’.
Chris Herrmannsen, managing director of recruitment consultancy Ochre House, says: “You will get the right person for the job by describing the skills and capabilities for the lower-level roles. Years of experience and generic age-related job titles will not provide you with the best candidates for the role.”

I can’t use the university ‘milk round’ to recruit any more.
Matt Jenkin, employment lawyer at Wiggin LLP, says: “Employers are not prevented from using the milk round to recruit. However, employers who limit recruitment to the milk round only may be guilty of indirect age discrimination unless this is objectively justified. Employers should use a broader recruitment plan in addition to the milk round to ensure access to potential workers of differing ages.”

This legislation has been brought in by meddling do-gooders in Brussels and will be damaging to business.
Tony Bourne, senior partner and head of the employment department at Glovers solicitors, says: “The UK has an ageing workforce. A decreasing birthrate coupled with increased life expectancy means that by 2007 there will be more people over state pension age than under 16 years of age. The country also has an increasing economic dependency ratio. The support ratio of worker to non-worker is currently 4:2, but it is anticipated that by 2031 this will rise to 2:6. Businesses need to act now and this legislation is an important step in the right direction.”