Latest posts:
Rate this!
Chris Ball
Member - 2 posts
This accords with our view in TAEN - The Age and Employment Network. We too have regular contacts with people who feel that they have suffered age discrimination. There reports point pretty convincingly to the fact that age discrimination is still a common experience of employees.
The problem appears to be particularly acute around retirement. The default retirement age has served to formalise 65 as the date when people leave in some companies though a relatively tiny number of enlightened employers are abolishing the age of retirement as a fixed date. The so called "right to ask" to remain in work beyond the retirement date is very patchily observed as far as we can see. Notice of forced retirement is commonly less than the minimum of six months recommended by ACAS.
Obviously, one hopes that flexible approaches will become more common though the majority of employers seem to be showing people the door when they reach 65, irrespective of the implications in terms of lost talent and skills to the organisation.
As a non profit organisation dedicated to making the labour market work better for older and mid-life people, TAEN offers opportunities to meet and discuss aspects of "age management." "Age management represents an esssential body of knowledge and practice for HR Professionals. They surely need new skills and techniques to make sense of demographic change and the pressures population ageing will place on skills and talent resources in companies and organisations.
TAEN's view briefly, is that mere compliance with the law is only the first step. By the look of it - and on the evidence of this news item - we haven't remotely reached this first base yet!
Chris Ball - Chief Executive TAEN
Chris.Ball@taen.org.uk
www.taen.org.uk
Rate this!
Chris Ball
Member - 2 posts
There is no doubt that Equal Pay law is not fit for purpose. The tragedy is that it has taken this activity by 'no win - no fee' solicitors to expose one of the weaknesses of the law - that it fails in distinguishing between a workable, practicable mechanism and a blunderbuss. We need a system which could address pay structures and pay systems rather than locate itself in all the contradictions and complications of individual pay comparisons. Our existing equal pay law operates without regard to the problems and issues facing organisations in the real world where affordability and job security have to be taken into consideration. Unions which have tried to take these issues into account in their collective bargaining are now in danger of being penalised for 'failing to consider the real interests of their members.' Equal pay could be achieved at the cost of jobs. Compromises are sometimes needed in this kind of situation but employment tribunals are not suited or equipped to achieve them.
Chris Ball
0 (0)
