Ageism in the Australian Workplace

[Marisawright]

7 hours ago, welljock said:

How stupid is agism,  most employers must realise that employees these days only give you 5 years max, a 50 year old (with more experience) will probably go through to retirement.

True.  Employees don't stay long in jobs any more.   In fact when I stayed in one job for 7 years before moving on, recruitment agencies told me I'd "stayed too long" and employers would think I wasn't "hungry" enough.

It sounds absurd but the rationale is that big corporates want you to be so eager for promotion, you'll be willing to work unpaid overtime and dedicate every waking hour to the job. Whereas someone who is happy with the job they've got, might actually want to go home at 6 o'clock.

 

 

[Marisawright]

23 hours ago, Parley said:

They don't know how old you are until after the interview.

Though it does depend on how old you look.   No matter how many years you shave off your CV, if you turn up for your interview looking like you're 50, you won't get the job.

[Bulya]

1 hour ago, Marisawright said:

True.  Employees don't stay long in jobs any more.   In fact when I stayed in one job for 7 years before moving on, recruitment agencies told me I'd "stayed too long" and employers would think I wasn't "hungry" enough.

It sounds absurd but the rationale is that big corporates want you to be so eager for promotion, you'll be willing to work unpaid overtime and dedicate every waking hour to the job. Whereas someone who is happy with the job they've got, might actually want to go home at 6 o'clock.

 

 

Far too long.  Used to be 3 years to get ahead but I see Forbes now saying move every 2 years.  

[Bulya]

1 hour ago, Marisawright said:

Though it does depend on how old you look.   No matter how many years you shave off your CV, if you turn up for your interview looking like you're 50, you won't get the job.

Exactly. 

[Blue Flu]

19 hours ago, Bulya said:

Just like the U.K

Some similarities but not exactly the same. UK media far more inclined to call out misbehaviour. Would Robodebt have not been taken to task by The Guardian and Mirror for example? Disquiet here was again swept under the carpet for far too long.  

[Skani]

1 hour ago, Blue Flu said:

Some similarities but not exactly the same. UK media far more inclined to call out misbehaviour. Would Robodebt have not been taken to task by The Guardian and Mirror for example? Disquiet here was again swept under the carpet for far too long.  

Robodebt has been investigated and criticised  by Guardian Australia and the Saturday Paper continually since its inception.  It's not difficult to find articles from early 2017 - that's 6 years ago for those up the back - describing it as a "debacle" and "scandal" soon after it was announced to the public in December 2016.

The problem in Australia is that the media is dominated by News Corp which was a propaganda tool for the Liberal coalition and complicit in supporting its appalling behaviour.  Unfortunately, the other large media organisation, the Nine Entertainment/Fairfax outfit, was equally as fawning.   

[Parley]

6 hours ago, Marisawright said:

Though it does depend on how old you look.   No matter how many years you shave off your CV, if you turn up for your interview looking like you're 50, you won't get the job.

Well i have several times, so that is untrue.

[Parley]

2 hours ago, Skani said:

Robodebt has been investigated and criticised  by Guardian Australia and the Saturday Paper continually since its inception.  It's not difficult to find articles from early 2017 - that's 6 years ago for those up the back - describing it as a "debacle" and "scandal" soon after it was announced to the public in December 2016.

The problem in Australia is that the media is dominated by News Corp which was a propaganda tool for the Liberal coalition and complicit in supporting its appalling behaviour.  Unfortunately, the other large media organisation, the Nine Entertainment/Fairfax outfit, was equally as fawning.   

Guardian and Saturday Paper are both extremely left wing so obviously they criticise everything a Liberal government does.

 

[Skani]

3 hours ago, Parley said:

Guardian and Saturday Paper are both extremely left wing so obviously they criticise everything a Liberal government does.

 

They criticised Robodebt because it was obvious it was a rort - obvious to anyone who understood how the Centrelink payment system worked.  And you didn't have to be a genius to understand it.

[Bulya]

4 hours ago, Parley said:

Guardian and Saturday Paper are both extremely left wing so obviously they criticise everything a Liberal government does.

 

Are you saying you don’t understand Robodebt and how even though they knew it was illegal and wrong, they continued because they were scared of Morrison and repercussions?  You need to watch some of the RC, it’s bloody frightening…

[Blue Flu]

5 hours ago, Parley said:

Guardian and Saturday Paper are both extremely left wing so obviously they criticise everything a Liberal government does.

 

Just thank goodness a section of the media, regardless of its left leaning stance took up the issue. We have an awful paper in WA, that sees no wrong with ALP in this state. A total disgrace. 

[Blue Flu]

5 hours ago, Parley said:

Well i have several times, so that is untrue.

It is certainly true to the person experiencing it. You cannot deny another's truth, just say your experience differs. 

[Blue Flu]

7 hours ago, Skani said:

Robodebt has been investigated and criticised  by Guardian Australia and the Saturday Paper continually since its inception.  It's not difficult to find articles from early 2017 - that's 6 years ago for those up the back - describing it as a "debacle" and "scandal" soon after it was announced to the public in December 2016.

The problem in Australia is that the media is dominated by News Corp which was a propaganda tool for the Liberal coalition and complicit in supporting its appalling behaviour.  Unfortunately, the other large media organisation, the Nine Entertainment/Fairfax outfit, was equally as fawning.   

I know that but was thinking of reaction if in UK. Thank goodness we have The Guardian Australia and on line media like Crickey. 

[Marisawright]

5 hours ago, Parley said:

Well i have several times, so that is untrue.

What field are you in?  As Ausvisitor highlighted (and as I should have mentioned), it does vary in different occupations.  

[Ausvisitor]

9 hours ago, Marisawright said:

What field are you in?  As Ausvisitor highlighted (and as I should have mentioned), it does vary in different occupations.  

It does, but as some have suggested on here IT is supposedly one of those "bad ageist careers".

All I can say is that the behemoth IT suppliers (Accenture, TCS, Tata and the Big 4) are actively and aggressively recruiting older IT trained professionals.

Maybe the issue isn't with age, maybe it's the quality and ethics of the companies people are choosing to work for. I for one am disgusted that Telstra employees are openly saying that their company is ageist whilst Telstra is currently spending many millions on advertising to inform the Australian public about it's inclusion policies and telling all of us we should be trying harder - whilst all along not following their own advice it would seem

[Marisawright]

11 hours ago, Ausvisitor said:

Maybe the issue isn't with age, maybe it's the quality and ethics of the companies people are choosing to work for.

This is probably the essence of the issue.  In specialist occupations where skills are in short supply, employees get to pick and choose which companies they're prepared to work for, and therefore it's the companies who must be prepared to get over their prejudices and be more open to whom they will hire.   It's the opposite in industries where there's a good supply of candidates.