Age discrimination
A study made, albeit many years ago, found that employers seeking stability and reliability in their employees would do well to look not at new graduates or inexperienced new hires but at a neglected sector—mature men and women.
Young recruits, the study said, are often restless and searching for new and alternative directions. Often, they will go through several jobs
before settling in one which they feel answers their yearning for challenge, material reward and, yes, a measure of stability.
But people in their 30s, 40s or 50s—even if some of the women had left the workforce some years back to raise their families—have far simpler demands of their jobs. All they want is security, enough money to help them support their families, and perhaps convivial relationships with their coworkers and superiors.
Ambition? Some might still nurse dreams of advancement, even a little competitive edge. But for the most part, mature workers would have realized many of their lifetime dreams and goals, or else have recognized that time is fast running out on them and would be content to do their jobs to the best of their abilities.
The fire of proving oneself, the desire to set an outstanding record may have dampened a bit by the time maturity sets in. But knowing the bias of employers and management against older employees and the pressure of new generations of graduates, older employees may even “try harder,” seeking to hone their skills or else put in more hours to keep themselves even more relevant in the challenging environment of the workplace.
So in many ways, mature employees may prove to be a boon to employers—stable, reliable, experienced, knowledgeable about human nature and foibles, loyal, and content with their lives. In short, they make for an ideal workforce, or at least have something to contribute to the overall success of a business or enterprise.
* * *
Given this, it comes as a surprise that the reluctance of local companies to hire people over 30 years old has been blamed for the increasing numbers of “older” Filipinos leaving the country to seek employment abroad.
In a news report, Susan Ople of the Ople Policy Center said the reason older workers have been leaving for abroad is that “no matter how skilled they are, regardless of their work ethic, many find themselves unable to land a job simply because they are above 30 years old.”
Is it the competition offered by growing numbers of twentysomethings (and maybe even younger) that prevents employers from taking a closer look at the potential of older workers?
After all, many may be lured by the temptations offered by a young, energetic workforce raring to conquer the world. But the sad reality is that, after a few years, many of those new young hires may have already left for greener pastures, or left the workplace altogether perhaps to start families or venture into entrepreneurship or pursue an artistic calling. But, as I said before, an older workforce would provide the stability and regularity that every business needs.
* * *
Ople, daughter of the late Labor Secretary Blas Ople who presided over much of the labor export program under the Marcos administration in the late 1970s, asserts that age discrimination in the country must be considered by a Senate panel that is set to review the country’s migration policies.
She explains that with the passage of 40 years since the country adopted the overseas employment policy, “the world has vastly changed… and our workers overseas face multiple risks due to political, economic and security issues as well as climate and technology changes beyond their control.
“Are our laws, policies and bureaucratic structures for overseas employment still relevant and effective today as they were 40 years ago? It would take several committee hearings to arrive at the right answer.”
Another concern aired by Ople: how to improve the protection of OFWs in Saudi Arabia, still a major destination for our workers, once the Saudi government implements its “mega-recruitment” policy. The policy, she said, would make it difficult for the government to monitor the hiring of OFWs and ensure their protection and safety since it bypasses government procedures and allows accredited recruitment consortiums to directly hire foreign workers.
* * *
Also a way of “protecting” not just our overseas workers but also the younger generation of Filipinos is the proposal to raise the legal age for buying cigarettes from 18 to 21 years, mainly to cut the prevalence of smoking among Filipino youth.
Though teeners even below 18 still manage to score cigarettes, Emer Rojas, of the antismoking group New Vois Association of the Philippines (NVAP), says that passing a law raising the minimum age for the legal purchase of cigarettes “would save lives in the long run.”
The NVAP is composed of former smokers who have lost their voice boxes or other body parts that allow for speech due to cancer or other factors related to smoking.
Rojas says the proposed law would at least hinder tobacco companies from marketing to young people who are increasingly being targeted to take the place of smokers who had died or gotten sick from tobacco use.
“Raising the age of those given access to cigarettes will certainly be a good measure to further reduce smoking prevalence, especially among the youth,” says Rojas.
The experience of other countries, he adds, shows that raising the minimum age for buying cigarettes slashed the national smoking rate by roughly 12 percent.
