I sit down with Australia's Age Discrimination Commissioner, Robert Fitzgerald AM, to talk about what ageism looks like in the workforce, identifying self-directed ageism and how you can combat it.
You never think it will happen but its insidious. Ageism hit me in my mid 50s, ignored it for quite a few years but had enough by 60 and called it quits a few months ago. I could of perhaps worked a few more years, but to be honest felt myself losing interest as a result. Went out on a professional high though so feel very good about my decision. Nothing worse than being disgruntled in the workplace.
I get asked all the time when I'm retiring from colleagues! Interesting! I don't think it's meant in a negative way, but more out of curiosity. I'm in an industry that is facing more & more mental health challenges & increasing admin - not what I originally signed up for! I intend to keep on working, but 'retire' from this industry. Loved this episode! We have so many 'inclusive' things to adhere to in workplaces these days, maybe we need an 'age inclusive' or 'multicultural generations' thing too - which workplace/industry is going to be the first?!
Older employees sometimes have high profile reputations that are beneficial to the company. When they are discouraged from scaling back the work required to maintain that reputation, it’s a problem.
I’ve been enjoying contract work for the last 2 years and more recently on a part time basis. This has all been to my own choosing. However, no that I’ve reached two years contracting under Fair Work I’m no longer permitted to work on a contract basis and to continue need to be converted to a permanent basis. This does not suit me and I’m willing to continue on contract terms. So in this case ageism I feel is being driven by government policy not my employer. I feel I should have a choice.
I’m personally of the view that ageism is really only about direct cost - the BS of “too skilled” is the one that exposes that most readily. Why would a company not want someone with even more skills than required who is willing to work at the required rate offered? I do volunteer career coaching and see this issue all the time so it’s not just a few unlucky folks or people imagining that ageism was an issue just for them.
I am six months of turning 60 and fortunately little has changed (yet) with my employment. My employer does support Transition to Retirement and other flexible opportunities in an effort to retain the business knowledge. I do feel fortunate.
You never think it will happen but its insidious. Ageism hit me in my mid 50s, ignored it for quite a few years but had enough by 60 and called it quits a few months ago. I could of perhaps worked a few more years, but to be honest felt myself losing interest as a result. Went out on a professional high though so feel very good about my decision. Nothing worse than being disgruntled in the workplace.
I get asked all the time when I'm retiring from colleagues! Interesting! I don't think it's meant in a negative way, but more out of curiosity. I'm in an industry that is facing more & more mental health challenges & increasing admin - not what I originally signed up for! I intend to keep on working, but 'retire' from this industry. Loved this episode! We have so many 'inclusive' things to adhere to in workplaces these days, maybe we need an 'age inclusive' or 'multicultural generations' thing too - which workplace/industry is going to be the first?!
Older employees sometimes have high profile reputations that are beneficial to the company. When they are discouraged from scaling back the work required to maintain that reputation, it’s a problem.
I’ve been enjoying contract work for the last 2 years and more recently on a part time basis. This has all been to my own choosing. However, no that I’ve reached two years contracting under Fair Work I’m no longer permitted to work on a contract basis and to continue need to be converted to a permanent basis. This does not suit me and I’m willing to continue on contract terms. So in this case ageism I feel is being driven by government policy not my employer. I feel I should have a choice.
I’m personally of the view that ageism is really only about direct cost - the BS of “too skilled” is the one that exposes that most readily. Why would a company not want someone with even more skills than required who is willing to work at the required rate offered? I do volunteer career coaching and see this issue all the time so it’s not just a few unlucky folks or people imagining that ageism was an issue just for them.
I am six months of turning 60 and fortunately little has changed (yet) with my employment. My employer does support Transition to Retirement and other flexible opportunities in an effort to retain the business knowledge. I do feel fortunate.