Since I have just celebrated my 61st birthday I thought I would investigate the different services that could be available to me for my days off from work.
I looked at John Braithwaite, but quite frankly I felt the programs were a bit pricey for me so I went up to Silver Harbour Center.
I have been there in the past and have always been impressed by the Receptionist, a beautiful, glamorous, classy and respectful woman named Roberta. I was shocked to hear that Roberta was being laid off along with one other worker. Both Roberta and the other worker are over the age of 65.
We know the law was changed as of Jan 1, 2008 and it is now illegal to fire/lay off based on age, but I gather these workers were given their notices at the end of 2007.
As one who has struggled against age discrimination in the workplace, my question is how big an issue is this in North Vancouver. How many people over the age of 60 are on the payroll of both the City and District of North Vancouver?
Sue Cook
Friday, January 25, 2008
Age Discrimination in the City of North Vancouver
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
57 opinions/comments:
Sue for Mayor!
Sue for MLA!
Sue for federal Green Party candidate!
I haven't got stats for you but certainly a BIG problem at District hall when dealing with Staff is that there has been a BIG turnover among senior staff in the last 2-3 years with this expected to continue in the next 2-3 as the tidal wave of staffers hired in the mid-1970s are leaving.
Obviously some departments are more affected than others but it's a serious problem particularly as District in addition to retirements several key staffers have been 'headhunted' away. James Ridge, Donna Howes, Robyn Newton have all left and I've heard one more section manager is about to leave for employment with the provincial government.
An employer cannot make age an issue or advertise for a certain age when hiring. An ad must not say “only mature people need apply”
or “young people wanted.” An employer cannot refuse an older applicant because “the job requires a lot of energy and enthusiasm and the company is looking for someone with career potential.”
When hiring, an employer can ask someone if they are legal working age, but cannot ask anything that could reveal age. After hiring,
an employer might legitimately need to know the employee’s age for a purpose like enrolment in a pension or benefits plan.
As of Jan. 1, 2008, mandatory retirement is no longer allowed in British Columbia (with some exceptions). The choice about when to retire is up to the employee. Early retirement benefits can be offered to all employees as an
incentive to retire, but an employee cannot be forced to retire.
Why would a senior's community centre discriminate against seniors?
Does Sue have the facts right here?
Were they given layoff notices?
Anyone can be laid off.
A friend of mine has been age discriminated (older person) and has been bouncing from one job to another, because every three months the employers decide they do not want to pay benefits, so older people and young people seem to be expendable.
Cheap b-ggers those employers who may, or may not, be reading this blog, also.
As a young person in the 70's, I experienced the same kind of employment abuse. A group of us young people, experienced with working in the lithographic business seemed to move around like a group of nomads, from one printing company to the next, every three months!
It was a strange experience to work for a different company, boss, etc. yet work with the same group of employees...with no benefits.
It doesn't look like much has changed. How do these employers get away with such employment abuse? Adding insult to injury, you may see the same companies advertising over and over again regularly for the same position every three months...
Sue for School Board!
Sue for Green Party MLA!
Sue, it appears that you are a popular person. It might be good to keep the door open just slightly for a possible run at Council. It appears that no one would fault you for changing your mind if circumstances were to change.
Sue for Council and School Board!
The Olympic Gold Council!!!!!
City Council 2008 - 2011
Mayor:
Rod Clark
Councillors: (in order of finish)
1. Sue Cook
2. Pam Bookham
3. Bob Fearnley
4. Bob Heywood
5. Roger Bassem
6. Jason Kanigan
---------------
7. Craig Keating
8. Barbara Perrault
9. Sam Schechter
10. George Pringle
another 20 or so more
The retirements and head hunting of senior public sector staff is not peculiar to the District.
Phone any municipal HR manager in the lower mainland and you'll get the same story.
Major shortage of experienced senior personnel is driving the competition for the "good ones" ever higher.
Their salaries and benefits need to be market competitive to attract/retain top quality management.
No one should be allowed to make as much as the senior City employees do while the real workers can't afford to live here.
Weird logic.
You may not know it but the cost of prime real estate isn't connected to the type and location of employment that one chooses.
The "real" workers can choose to live and work wherever they like.
So the overpaid senior managers should have to go with them.
The oldest staff are the most expensive.Force them into retirement!
Anonymous 12:58, why do you think municipal senior staff are overpaid?
Let's get back to the issue of age discrimination in the workplace because it is going on and I believe both extremes of the age spectrum are being affected.
I have said before the difficulties I had in obtaining employment since my mid/late 50's and am so grateful that I finally have a job that I love.
This is the interesting thing - when I went for my first interview there was a concern about my age as there is a fair amount of physical work involved. Fortunately my managers like me and decided to take a chance. I must admit that the main issue I had was learning the computer program, but other that that the job is a piece of cake.
Since I have been there (10 months now) they have gone through 9 people (all younger then myself) why? Because they refused to do the physical work.
The company have finally hired another person for the weekends and we are a perfect team. We both like the physcial work and the high standards in our work place - his age 63!!!
Our managers went back to Sri Langra for 6 weeks for Christmas and we had 2 floaters. Want to know what the 25 year old male did? Spent hours on Facebook looking up girls, hours talking to the phone to his friends, hours disappearning somewhere (probably to look at himself in the mirror!!) My 63 year old work partner and myself had to twice the work because this 25 year old was too lazy and thought he should get paid $25.00 an hour to do the work involved.
Much to be said about the older generation regarding work ethics, customer service and respect.
Sue Cook
Were they working on contracts that expired? That is the modern day work around.
I'm still mixed on the issue anyways. If I was an employer and had a mediocre 60+ employee that was becoming tougher and tougher to accomodate in their current role, under the current system I might bide my time and wait for them to retire at 65. Under the new rules I will be documenting every little screw up they make so that I can build a papertrail to one day fire them for incompetance. When you are fired with cause (incompetance), what happens to you pension?
5:51 what makes you think you have to replace an older worker? I am proving that in my workplace that we older workers are being the successful ones.
We are not on contract we are all employees that are paid by the hour. The reason I called them floaters is because they fill in at different sites while people are away.
In terms of Silver Harbour I was told by the person they just laid of that both she and another employee had been given their layoff notices in 2007 (before the new act was passed). Roberta is one of the classiest, professional receptionist I have come across for a very long time. I would like to know a lot more about what happened at Silver Harbour.
You have your choice - take a good look at the older workers and I guarantee you will be hard pressed to find workers that are more loyal, hardworking, have integrity and high work standards. I will admit we may be a bit slow with computers and some of the new technologies but we can and will learn.
Sue Cook
Sue-
Your point re older workers being good value can be true on a case by case basis.
Older workers have life experience and skills, they've had their kids so no parental leave and fill-in staff necessary, don't always insist on full time hours, lots have the old fashioned work ethic.
McDonalds, WalMart, and Home Depot don't seem to have a problem hiring older workers.
On the other hand, some positions are better served by younger, quicker, change friendly, highly computer savvy workers.
I'm OK with job specific testing to ensure that the worker can actually do the job - I don't like the idea of someone "owning" a job because they've been there a long time.
Perhaps we should change the way that we seek employees for positions. Instead of interviews (which I think can be a waste of time) there could be a small job related test for about an hour - similar to testing done by employment agencies. That way employers can have a fairly accurate view of how capable a person will be on the job site.
I am finding it very discouraging the reaction to older workers even on this site. Why don't you think older workers are worth hiring - please be honest as it would be good to know.
As to Sue for MLA, etc, etc, how about Sue for a semi-retired grandma.....
Sue Cook
Sue - you share a comon situation with the majority of north shore residents, including don bell and local mlas.
We cannot stop the clock, politicians share a common problem that with life becoming increasingly expensive, people MUST keep working longer.
Don Bell our local MP has bills to pay that will not be covered by simply taking a pension, or relying on RRSP's he has invested in during his time as mayor of the district.
This in itself has skewed the despiration for elected politicians to hang onto what they have.
This includes Walton and Harris, currently making enough to cover the payments but nothing for their senior years.
We will see in the next local government increasing pressure to modify "pension" plans for elected officials allowing them to recieve the same pensions as the police and fire department personel.
This in itself is not wrong as long as the shareholders of the district are made aware of the fact that the elected officials will require these extended payments.
Ford Motor Company today announced that 95,000 hourly employees will be given the chance for early retirement, this allows Ford to employ a less expensive staff, with no company retirement plan.
The District is no different but on a smaller scale.
We as the share holders should elect politicians that consider politics as a calling, and are sufficiently self reliant on on out of politics income to not be swayed by trips to China or perks offered by Developers.
November is fast approaching, the tide is turning and all local officials should look at what they have accomplished in their tunure.
This includes the treatment of the people who have been affected by the landslide on the north shore and the residents who live in land and slide effected zones.
David Dixon
Sue, it would be interesting to see this issue get some local perspective and coverage in the NS News and NS outlook. Have you thought about taking this issue to the local community press as a story idea?
That kind of media attention would also bring about some awareness from employers who discrimate without even being aware that they are doing it.
I still want to hear the details of what happened at Silver Harbour. I have written to Mayor and Council of both the City and the District as both of them do some funding of Silver Harbour. I have heard from a few of the members that I know that people at Silver Harbour are not happy about this, but I have no proof.
The only person I have heard back from was Robin Hicks who is on the board, and quite frankly, I was not impressed by his reply.
When I spoke to Roberta she said that she had to work. This is something we must realize, there are many of us who will probably have to work until the day we die. If we are in good health and mentally alert why should we be denied this right?
We baby boomers are about to take over in terms of the senior issues - would it not be better to keep us in the work world where we can be independent then having the younger generation responsible for us?
So far I have only found one place that tries to help people over 55 in the job market and that is out in New West - are ANY of our politicians taking this issue seriously?
Again I ask the question - how many people over the age of 55 have been HIRED in either the District or the City in the past 12 months?
Sue Cook
Of course Robin Hicks is up to speed on Silver Harbor - his good friend (and 2005 Campaign Manager) Bob McCormack heads their board. I believe (don't quote me on this as I'm not positive) he is their treasurer as well.
I don't know the details of what he said to you but he certainly knows the inner doings of Silver Harbor better than any current or recent member of District Council.
I'm one who thinks the end to mandatory retirement isn't a good thing and my concern is that there are jobs where safety is a critical part of the job and those where it's less critical.
My concern is that in the first class of jobs there needs to be better monitoring of critical aspects of the job. In some jobs that's in place now - for instance a cab driver or bus driver who fails the medical for the class 3 or 4 licence is effectively off the road. But what about the logger who uses a chain saw? No certification exists for those who operate this type of equipment - and in the wrong hands such a person can be a deadly menace to both himself and those around him.
In a non-lethal but still devastating vein I once employed a senior who did a FANTASTIC job in the mornings but everyone hated being around him in the afternoons - nothing anyone could say could persuade him to leave his highly potent garlic salads (which he stored in a tupperware container before lunch) at home with the obvious results! (He insisted it was the main reason he never got colds)
Doing a dismissal for cause would have been MOST unfortunate as he did great work in the mornings and as long as we kept him away from customers did excellent work in the afternoons BUT the garlic...!
BC Forest Saftey Council
Faller Cerification Process
Unsafe is Unacceptable
Do these employees like Sue taking their personal business public?
Retiring mandatory retirement
Last Updated December 12, 2006
CBC News
Effective Dec. 12, 2006, employees in Ontario are no longer required to quit working at age 65.
This amendment to the Ontario Human Rights Code prevents seniors from facing age discrimination at work and makes mandatory retirement illegal in the province.
The Ontario legislature passed the amendment in December 2005, but gave employers a one-year transition period that ended Dec. 12, 2006.
The province estimates about 4,000 of the 100,000 Ontario residents turning 65 each year will take advantage of the new law.
Ontario joins Alberta, Manitoba, Quebec, Prince Edward Island, Nunavut, the Yukon and the Northwest Territories in banning mandatory retirement.
Bankers love the concept of mandatory retirement, or any other form of retirement. It means big money for the banks, who regularly fire up ads such as, "What are you doing after work?" And, "You're 20, you should be thinking of retirement."
The big season for bankers is the February run-up to the deadline for RRSPs, when they try to scare the daylights out of people by warning them if they don't have $800,000 - or $500,000, or $1 million - socked away when they turn 65 they soon will be pushing their worldly goods ahead of them in a cart or living in a walk-up, eating cat food.
Retirement is big business for banks. Bankers believe people hate their jobs as much as bankers hate theirs, so they set out to convince people that retirement - Freedom 55 … Take This Job and Shove It - is the solution to worry and the road to happiness.
And yet, and yet … many people enjoy their jobs and dread being forced out of them merely because they have turned 65, which is a lot younger than 65 used to be in the 1920s, when pensions began. Someone turning 65 today is expected to live another 20 years.
It has been shown that those with the most education tend to enjoy their work and are reluctant to be turfed out at 65. Do you think for a moment that when Margaret Atwood turned 65 - on Nov. 18, 2004 - someone told the illustrious Canadian writer, "Jig's up, Atwood. No more novels for you."
"But… "
"Sorry, Peg, you've been at this game a long time. We need to make room for younger writers."
Regional breakdown of retirement rules Province or territory Retirement rules
Nunavut No mandatory retirement age.
Northwest Territories No mandatory retirement age.
Yukon No mandatory retirement age.
British Columbia Mandatory retirement at age 65 if required by employer.
Alberta No mandatory retirement age.
Saskatchewan Mandatory retirement at age 65 if required by employer.
Manitoba No mandatory retirement age.
Ontario In June 2005, Queen's Park was planning to end mandatory retirement at age 65.
Quebec No mandatory retirement age.
New Brunswick In June 2005, the Lord government was planning to outlaw mandatory retirement except in jobs where public health and safety are concerned.
Nova Scotia There is mandatory retirement at age 65 if required by employer. However, the employer must treat all employees equally.
Prince Edward Island No mandatory retirement age.
Newfoundland and Labrador Retirement age can be set under terms of a retirement or pension plan. Where no such agreement exists, mandatory retirement cannot be enforced until age 65.
The concept of retirement, especially mandatory retirement, is fairly new. It began in the early decades of the 20th century. The first old-age pension in Canada began in 1927, financed by the federal and provincial governments, but administered by the provinces. It was available to Canadian citizens 70 years or older. The pension amounted to $20 a month, a munificent $240 a year, but only if the Canadian citizen passed a strict and demeaning means test.
This was the situation for nearly 25 years.
In 1951, Ottawa introduced the Old Age Security Act, which was administered by the federal government to all Canadians 70 and over – without a means test. Accompanying this legislation was the Old Age Assistance Act, a cost-shared program between Ottawa and the provinces, which made pensions available to Canadians aged 65 to 69, but with a means test.
By 1964, the old-age pension rose to $75 a month, which everyone admitted was inadequate. This led to the Canada Pension Plan, introduced in 1965. The CPP requires workers and employers to contribute to a social insurance plan that provides a wage-related pension on retirement at the age of 65. Next came the Guaranteed Income Supplement program in 1966, which paid up to $30 a month extra to pensioners with little income other than their Old Age Security pensions. The age for receiving Old Age Security was also lowered from 70 to 65.
There has been a sea change in attitudes to public pensions and the very concept of retirement, both mandatory retirement and early retirement. When the age of 70 was selected in the early 20th century as the age of eligibility for a government pension, life expectancy was between 60 and 65.
Because people live so much longer, and retire so much earlier, Ottawa has demanded higher contributions to the Canada Pension Plan so it won't dry up. There will be increased demands to raise CPP contributions in coming years as the parade of boomers opt out of the work force.
Compulsory retirement is especially hard on women, many of whom chose to stay home to be with their children in the early years, then entered the work force in their late 20s or early 30s. Because they were, and often still are, paid significantly less than men, women aren't able to put away as much money as men. And it gets worse down the line, as women live six, seven years longer than men.
According to Canada's Urban Futures Institute, some 9.8 million Canadian baby boomers are approaching retirement. By 2020, the number of Canadians retiring each year will be 425,000.
Today there are six workers in Canada for every retired person. By 2020, there will be three workers for every retired person. The ratio will sink further without a dramatic increase in immigration, preferably people with lots of money and excellent job prospects.
This demographic shift is already making an impact in the United States, where the retirement age has been raised to 67 for those born after 1960 and is expected to be raised again, probably until it reaches 70 (which more accurately reflects the demographics and life expectancies of the near future).
We are an aging society and our aging population is accelerating rapidly. In 1973, only seven per cent of Canadians were 65 or older. By 2005, about 13 per cent were over 65. By 2023, 20 per cent of Canadians will be over 65. And by 2041, 23 per cent will be seniors. Increasingly, the worry is a shrinking work force.
Some companies are coping with this workforce shortage by instituting plans such as "retirees on call" and "phased retirement." These plans address the arguments of employers who favour compulsory retirement because it unloads workers who are at the peak of their earnings, allowing the companies in some cases to hire two young workers for the price of one older worker.
For years Larry Folliott worked for IBM Canada Ltd. as a mergers and acquisitions expert. He retired at 57 to become an "IBM retiree on call," which means he can "goof off" to Maui for weeks at a time with his wife, play golf with his male buddies in South Carolina, but be ready to head back to the office anytime IBM needs an extra hand with mergers and acquisitions.
Another company encourages retired CEOs to return to work for less pay and less authority, working for people who used to be their underlings, but bringing with them vital experience, smarts and coaching expertise. One man who took advantage of this arrangement said it finally answered for him the question, What is happiness? "Happiness," he said, "is working at a job you enjoy for which you are vastly overqualified."
Bankers are correct in assuming most people don't like their jobs and want to retire if they can afford to. Only six per cent of workers continue to work full-time after the age of 65. The average age of retirement in Canada is 62. But the six per cent who want to keep working do so for a variety of reasons, including office camaraderie, job satisfaction, a sense of purpose and destination – and sometimes economic survival.
The geography of a country like Canada also comes into play. If public pensions total, say, $15,000 – the amount can vary widely, depending on extra benefits – it makes considerable difference whether these pensioners live in Toronto or Portage la Prairie, Man. You could almost make it on $15,000 a year in Portage, but in Toronto $15,000 might keep you going three, four months.
Many overestimate the joys of retirement. After a summer or two of playing golf or watching birds or afternoon soaps, they come to appreciate what Shakespeare meant when he wrote, "If all the year were playing holidays, to sport would be as tedious as to work."
Sue, if you ran in the next federal election, you could bring some much-needed attention to this highly ignored issue.
Now that we know all about Ontario non-mandatory rights at age 65, will the next participant on this blog, just give us the link to British Columbia?
Just to answer to a couple of questions:
Yes I did ask Roberta if she wanted me to take action regarding her layoff she thanked me for it. It is important to show respect for people you want to defend.
The second point is that I do NOT believe that rich immigration is the answer to our problems. If anything I believe it will make matters worse, as our wages are far too low already to allow us even simple housing. Why throw more competition and the opportunity to fail in our faces? I think we need to be enouraging our young people to start families, we need to provide affordable family friendly housing in family friendly communities that is building parks, schools etc.
Let's start think about building instead of tearing things down, including our basic social structure which is becoming more and more exclusive.
Sue Cook
Yeah, we all know you want to stop "new canadians" from coming here.
Nice code word.
Why don't you press for a public poll on immigration? You may find out very quickly that I am far from being alone.
Give me 5 good reasons why we should be encouraging "wealthy" immigration when you now have to make $140,000.00 a year to purchase a home? Do you want to see the average worker on the street?
How open and equal is our immigration system? How thorough is it in making sure we do not have hardened criminals coming into Canada?
I do not believe being "poltically
correct" is being intellegent as much as it is an easy way of just being one of the sheep.
We need to encourage our children to have children, and we need to make our communities affordable to families.
The way our system is now immigration is NOT being inclusive at all rather it is creating even more discrimination.
Sue Cook
I get really annoyed when the various "anons" do 'drive-by shootings' on those who choose to identify themselves.
Now Sue has had the race card played on her in a discussion that has no racial angle that I can see.
As for the anon who referred to "Freedom 55" that's a London Life slogan - they're an insurance company not a bank!
Sue, you may be on to something here. With the current labour shortage going on, I am frequently being served by 14-year-olds who seem to have very little understanding or maturity towards the concept of proper customer service. I was recently waiting with my young children at a pizza shop and heard nothing but foul language out of the mouths of the employees swearing at each other with vey loud, obnoxious hip-hop music (also full of foul language) playing in the background. Suffice to say, I won't be back at that pizza shop. Employers keep griping about employee shortages, so why don't they fill the gaps with age 60+ workers? There seems to be a lot of them around. I also think that immigrants assist greatly in filling the demands for service industry jobs that many Canadians refuse to do, so I strongly disagree with your rants against immigrantion. Concentrate more on senior workers rights and less on anti-immigration.
This is much ado about nothing.
There aren't very many 60+ people looking for jobs, and if they are, they aren't looking for full time work, let alone $10/hour pizza shack jobs.
Sue has had no trouble finding work, I believe she has been hired three times this year and quit twice.
Correct me if I'm wrong Sue, but your problems have not been because of discrimination against you. They've been because you couldn't feel comfortable in those work environments.
Jason/George are wrong again as usual.
Why don't you look for facts before you jump in - perhaps you could try by contacting the 45 plus job club for starts.
I have ALWAYS worked even when I was at school or collecting EI but they were part time jobs that paid $8.00 an hour. Contrary to your comments about me in the past I actually LOVE to be working.
There are many of us who not only like to work we NEED to work and there is huge discrimination against older workers. Again do you own work on this - how many people between 50 - 65 were HIRED by either the district or the city in the last year. That would include rec centers, libraires, etc. Then ask their HR people if indeed people in that age group did appply.)
As to myself you have no idea how stressed the last 5 years have been, but I was talked out of suicide a couple of times from my very wonderful friends.
Until you have walked in my shoes (or anyone elses for that matter) keep your opinions to yourself.
Sue Cook
The acceptance of older employees being better and / or more experienced is completely false.
They just get better at falsifying their resumes to cover up the fact that if they were half as smart as they thought, financially they would not have to work after 65.
As my pappy said your can do the same thing for 40 years and never realise its been the same wrong way.
Take our standout politician, DB, university drop out, failed camera store owner, couldn't keep a Safeway handout, yet shines at politics, where performance is never measured, but with enough voters eating at the same trough has beat hands down every contender.
Experience, no look at Billary, same age same experience yet going down to a 46 year old master of the new universe, where accountablity / integrity matter.
DB sell you accumulated land, take the money and RETIRE WITH DIGNITY.
Lead or follow, just get out on my way.
Sounds like Saxton is quite afraid of running against Don Bell.
6:03 - the arrogant voice of youth.
There are many of us who will probably have to work well past the age of general retirement and many of us who simply do not want to retire.
One of the groups will be people such as myself who were single mothers without university or college degrees (which were not stressed for women when I was growing up). Many of the "careers" we choose are no longer even in existence (the switchboard that I once worked at is in the City Museum!) I think what most of us were trained to be was wives and mothers. Too bad that idea is no longer in vogue as it is a very valuble job.
You are not only arrogant you are also very ignorant, as you have no facts at all to base your words on.
As for Don Bell, have you ever thought that he has finally found the place that he belongs in, and that is in politics?
My father was practicing law until 2 days before he died, and he was certainly more qualified and intelligent then you appear to be.
Sue Cook
Just listening to the City Council meeting and all the hiring they have just done - again how many of those new hires are over the age of 50?
Sue Cook
Could the Green Party's Sue Cook be ready to endorse Don Bell in the next federal election campaign?
The two of them go way back to when they worked at Woodwards together in their early youth. Sue is not a great fan of Dion, but I doubt she would feel comfortable with all the country club people that Saxton surrounds himself with. So, unless she goes Green, there is the possibility that Bell might be getting the Sue Cook boost (worth a lot of votes in Lower Lonsdale).
There is NO way in the world I would vote for a North Vancouver Conservative after the disgusting way they treat anyone who dares to think as an individual.
Heaven forbid anyone who is a Christian, does not believe in abortion or dares to question gay marriages - what else will they forbid as times go on?
Sue Cook
So, will it be Green or Don Bell?
Good Grief!
Did Sue do better in Lower Lonsdale than other parts of the City?
Sue will be forming a West Lower Lonsdale Commuinty Association that will be endorsing candidates that are committed to helping the plight of residents from the less desirable part of town.
To Anon @ Saturday, January 26, 2008 1:50:00 PM:
Would THIS be what you're looking for?
BC Employment Standards Act - Mandatory Retirement?
I wonder why the BC provincial web site that Lyle has directed us to with his link, shows two people, male and female, both, nowhere near age 65.
Want to work past age 65 is from the one that Lyle has given us, bottom, way down at the bottom.
Hi Lyle
The problem is the government can pass as many laws as they want people will always find a way to work the system based on their own discrimination. And EVERYBODY discriminates in one way or another.
The questions I have asked is how many people has either the City or District HIRED over the agte of 55 in the past 12 months?
If they have not then why not. My other concern is for the employees like Roberta that suddenly find themselves out of work. What are her real chances of getting another job at the age of 67 even though she is highly qualified?
We really need to get off our politically correct perches and examine why discrimination is still so rampant in our society.
Sue Cook
Fair enough - just so long as we also ask how many over age 55 have actually applied.
Saying "oh they'll never take me" is one of the biggest mistakes a lot of people make.
My sister-in-law within the last 10 years got a resume from an 80 year old ex-Battle of Britain pilot who she would have loved to have interviewed just to talk to him but he didn't have the skill set for the particular job - but she definitely kept his resume on hand for future positions as the energy just dripped from the page!
Sue for Jesus!
Post a Comment