4 ms·

What if they were targeting older workers as part of a diversity program?

bluGill 8y ago
That is discrimination against younger workers. Diversity programs are a double edged sword, there are groups that are under represented. However every time you target them you lose the larger group that you didn't target, and that group has great people.
- rohansingh 8y ago
  Not making a judgement either way, but just a heads-up— there's actually no federal prohibition against discriminating on the basis of youth. Age discrimination laws only work in one direction.
  - MaxBarraclough 8y ago
    Interesting. Here in the UK, the law can work both ways, with exceptions where there is good reason. https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/law-and-courts/discrimination/protected-characteristics/age-discrimination/ https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/law-and-courts/discriminat... , https://www.ageuk.org.uk/information-advice/work-learning/discrimination-rights/the-equality-act/ https://www.ageuk.org.uk/information-advice/work-learning/di...
- gowld 8y ago
  So which group should we prefer, if we don't put our heads in the sand and pretend we are unbiased?
- lightedman 8y ago
  "That is discrimination against younger workers." Such thing does not exist in Federal law. Only after the age of 40 do age discrimination protections kick in. You can absolutely be too young to work an industry (e.g. a place that has the primary service of alcohol or other age-regulated vice) that you won't find much in the way of winning discrimination cases based on being too young.
MaxBarraclough 8y ago
Again, I'm not all that knowledgeable of the law, but I believe the intent of it is to oppose ageism in either direction. Shouldn't it be?
- autokad 8y ago
  But what if there are demographics A, B, C, and D and C is under-represented in their workforce. I get why a company would want to target C. Whether that is right or wrong, I have mixed feelings on. I can also see legitimate situations where you would not want to put adds in front of people who you have no intention of offering a position to. For instance, if you need to fill a Senior position, why show it to a fresh graduate or an internsip/co-op to someone with 10 years experience. again, I have mixed feelings but I can see why a company would want to do it
- stevenwoo 8y ago
  We could argue all day about the intent of the US law, but the wording of the law lists protected classes and older workers is a protected class, and younger workers is not - discriminating against older workers purely on the basis of age is illegal and discriminating against younger workers is legal. The article clearly states the case is tried in San Francisco so US law is the only relevant law. I agree with your sentiment that no age discrimination is btter unless that is somehow relevant to the job.

That is discrimination against younger workers. Diversity programs are a double edged sword, there are groups that are under represented. However every time you target them you lose the larger group that you didn't target, and that group has great people.

rohansingh 8y ago
Not making a judgement either way, but just a heads-up— there's actually no federal prohibition against discriminating on the basis of youth. Age discrimination laws only work in one direction.
- MaxBarraclough 8y ago
  Interesting. Here in the UK, the law can work both ways, with exceptions where there is good reason. https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/law-and-courts/discrimination/protected-characteristics/age-discrimination/ https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/law-and-courts/discriminat... , https://www.ageuk.org.uk/information-advice/work-learning/discrimination-rights/the-equality-act/ https://www.ageuk.org.uk/information-advice/work-learning/di...
gowld 8y ago
So which group should we prefer, if we don't put our heads in the sand and pretend we are unbiased?
lightedman 8y ago
"That is discrimination against younger workers." Such thing does not exist in Federal law. Only after the age of 40 do age discrimination protections kick in. You can absolutely be too young to work an industry (e.g. a place that has the primary service of alcohol or other age-regulated vice) that you won't find much in the way of winning discrimination cases based on being too young.

MaxBarraclough 8y ago

Again, I'm not all that knowledgeable of the law, but I believe the intent of it is to oppose ageism in either direction. Shouldn't it be?

autokad 8y ago
But what if there are demographics A, B, C, and D and C is under-represented in their workforce. I get why a company would want to target C. Whether that is right or wrong, I have mixed feelings on. I can also see legitimate situations where you would not want to put adds in front of people who you have no intention of offering a position to. For instance, if you need to fill a Senior position, why show it to a fresh graduate or an internsip/co-op to someone with 10 years experience. again, I have mixed feelings but I can see why a company would want to do it
stevenwoo 8y ago
We could argue all day about the intent of the US law, but the wording of the law lists protected classes and older workers is a protected class, and younger workers is not - discriminating against older workers purely on the basis of age is illegal and discriminating against younger workers is legal. The article clearly states the case is tried in San Francisco so US law is the only relevant law. I agree with your sentiment that no age discrimination is btter unless that is somehow relevant to the job.