Age Discrimination in the Workplace - Case Study Example

Age Discrimination in the Workplace November 5, Age discrimination in the public workenvironment is a reality. The research focuses on describing age discrimination policies. The research centers on the rights, laws, and remedies pertaining to age discrimination acts. Some management officers implement age discrimination acts. The discriminated employees can file case age discrimination acts against their employers in the United States courts of law. Evidently, the public administration and public personnel administration officers should augment their share to removing age discrimination acts within the United States workplace or public environment. Body: Introduction of Issue/problem: Problem statement: Age discrimination in the public work environment is a reality. Relevant Theories: First, research delves on management’s desire to choose younger employees. Second, job applicants of all ages need jobs. The research delves on describing age discrimination policies on the major stakeholders: employees, employers, labor unions, government, and community. The research delves on the rights, laws, and remedies pertaining to age discrimination acts. The public administration and personnel administration officers must contribute to the reduction of age discrimination acts within the United States workplace or public environment. Age discrimination in the public sector. A. Policy or Problem Identification/statement. Age discrimination is described as discriminating a person or employee because of one’s age. Age discrimination includes stating the individual is too young for the job or too old for the job. Companies often make decisions based on several factors. However, the United States law prohibits bypassing promotion due to one’s age. The research centers on gathering data that would bring out the reality of age discrimination in the public sector or workplace. B. Importance of the policy or problem. As employers and as workers, it is important for all of us to be aware of the subtle way in which age biased prejudices can influence our thinking. These stereotypical thoughts and actions reduce both the incomes and the self-confidence of millions of workers. An individual’s ability, not their age, should determine their qualifications for getting and keeping a job. The government and the public must favorably resolve age-discrimination issues to comply with United States discrimination requirements. The public, especially the government must intervene to reduce the employers’ current age discrimination polices. The public must remove age prejudices that will affect the public’s perception. The current age- discriminating employment policies translates to reduced take home pay and lower self confidence. The public should prioritize the individual’s capacity, expertise, and other qualifications in the hiring, training, and promoting of employees (Wiener, 2010). Analysis of the Problem (Assumptions of the age discrimination policies). The United States Congress approved Title 7 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the ADEA to prevent current and future age discrimination acts. The law includes penalizing the employer for retaliatory acts on employees who file age discrimination charges (Hulett, 2011). The two laws grant the aggrieved employees the right to file age discrimination charges in the United States courts of law. The courts will penalize employers who step over or violate any age discrimination tenets. One tribunal affirmed Indian tribe Chief’s decision complainant Gossett was not discriminated based on her age (Johnson, 2009). Further, Rita Jing-Ann Chou and Namkee Choi made a research on age discrimination within the United States (Chour R., N Choi, 2011). The research focused on 420 employees. The selected employees belonged to the 50 and above age group. The findings show that 81 percent of the respondents had experienced age discrimination incidences. The research shows that companies prefer to train and promote younger employees. Of 2,518 employees within 45 or older age group, ten percent felt discriminated. In addition, Margaret Thornton and Trish Luker conducted their separate age discrimination research (Thornton M., T Luker, 2010). The researchers found that age discrimination is a reality. Companies preferred to hire the younger less mature and less experienced workers, when compared to the older employees. The companies did not prioritize the older workers’ job expertise and maturity in their hiring and promotion human resource policies. The companies have discarded the older employees’ loyalty to the company, when compared to hiring the greenhorn and neophyte new employee. To add emphasis, another research centered on the age discrimination in terms of IT wages (Quan J., Dattero R., Galup, S., 2008). The researchers found that the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission reported that there is an increasing rise in age discrimination complaints filed. The government commission found that many companies prioritize the training, hiring, and promotion of the younger employees. Compared to the younger employees, the commission announced that the older employees received lower salaries, lower, ranks, and lower status. The companies pegged their age discrimination acts on the concept that as employees grow older, they former capacity dwindles. The concept states that older employees cannot think and work as quickly as effectively as their younger counterparts. Other negative concepts include the older employees’ refusal to accept new technologies or work itineraries. In addition, Roscigno et al. conducted a separate age discrimination study (Roscigno et al., 2007). The research findings indicate companies prefer to replace the older workers with younger ones. The companies’ main objective is to reduce employment costs. C. Stakeholders and potential opposing perspectives. Public Organizations. The public will bear the brunt of age discrimination charges filed by the complaining employees or individuals. The workers’ interpretation of certain management acts may create an impression on the hapless workers that their age was the reason for their unfair labor practice. The age-related unfair labor practice may include including salary issues, work condition issues, and promotion matters. The company’s preference for younger but less experienced workers may precipitate to lower quality customer services and product quality. Management’s normal concept lacks the expertise on new work technologies or processes. Management normally feels that the older employees will not be able on equal functionality levels as the quicker moving and quicker thinking younger employees. Management’s concept includes the younger workers lack the work maturity skill. Young employees. It is normal for young employees to feel discriminated. The newly hired young employees often receive low starting salaries, when compared to the employees who have served for two or more years. The management saves money by paying low salaries to the new inexperienced employees. Management has a concept that the average neophyte employee lacks the maturity of older or tenured employees. Old employees. Some older employees feel they are discriminated because of their age. Management feels the older workers lack the agility and speed of the younger employees. In addition, management feels that the older employees are not have expertise in the new technologies. Further, management’s normal concept is that older employees often resist changes in the work processes. D. Relevance to Public Personnel Administration specifically and to Public Administration in general. The research on age discrimination will enhance the job of the public personnel administration members and public administration, in general. The research will contribute to the knowledge of the public personnel administration members and public administration, in terms of the rights, legal provisions, and remedies that are pertinent to each unique age discrimination case. Rationale and Analysis of age discrimination Policy or issue which includes discussion of political influences and other external factors that shape the agency’s policies or affect the problem. Rights. The government implements laws that ensure the employees have the right to feel an age discrimination case against the employers. The employees can show evidences of their discrimination. The companies must do their best to avoid being charged by employees for employment discrimination, including age discrimination. Law provisions on Age discrimination. The United States Congress approves laws that will prohibit age discrimination. For clarity, the Gross v FBL Financial Services (2009) case shows that the 54 year old employee filed an age discrimination case against the employer. The complaint stemmed from the employer’s demoting the complainant, violating the age discrimination provision of the Age Discrimination and Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA). The Supreme Court took cognizance of the United States Congress’ intentions in framing the United States Civil Rights Act of 1991. The Supreme Court specified employers must not hire or discharge any person on the basis of one’s age. Recommendations to improve the policy or solve the problem (Implications of the policies) (Remedies against age discrimination). The above case shows that employees can file an age discrimination case against the employer. Management should not implement age discrimination acts. The United States courts penalize age discrimination acts. The age discrimination remedies include seeking the court’s help to penalize the companies for their misdeed. Other factors or trends relevant to the policy or problem. The labor laws discourage age discrimination. The penalties imposed will prevent the employers from engaging in age discrimination acts. The aggrieved employees’ filing of cases will discourage employers from discriminating a person due to one’s age. Management Position on the issue/problem. Management prefers to hire younger workers. Older workers refuse work processes changes. Younger workers prefer work changes. Younger workers prefer lower wages, when compared to older more experienced workers (Mathis, 2011). Managers’ assumptions and implications for management. Management prefers younger workers because they are more energetic, when compared to older workers. More energy equates to more products made and more services done. Consequently, the company generates higher revenues and profits. The age discrimination law forces companies to hire slow working elderly persons to work in a fast-paced work environment. Younger workers are less prone to medical visits, reducing the company’s healthcare expenses. The age discrimination law forces the companies to accept old, slow, and sickly applicants to fill jobs, increasing the companies’ employee expenses (Mathis, 2011). Conclusion Summarizing the above discussion, Age discrimination in the public work environment is a significant issue. Some companies implement age discrimination acts. The discriminated employees can file case age discrimination acts against their employers. Evidently, the public administration and public personnel administration officers must contribute to eliminating age discrimination acts within the United States workplace or public environment. REFERENCES: Roscigno et al.,. (2007). Age Discrimination, Social Closure and Employment. Social Forces , 86 (1), 313-334. Chou R., N Choi. (2011). Prevalance and Correlates of Perceived Workplace Discrimination Among Older Workers in the United States of America. Ageing and Society , 31 (6), 1051 -1070. Hulett, J. (2011). Age Discrimination: An Epidemic in America Affecting Poeple of All Ages. New York: AuthorHouse Press. Johnson, J. (2009). Does the Age Discrimination in Employment Act Apply to the Employment Activities of the American Indian Tribes? Southern Journal of Business and Ethics, 1, 57 -70. Quan J., Dattero R., Galup, S. (2008). An Exploratory Study of Age Discrimination in IT Wages. Information Resources , 21 (3), 24-38. Mathis, R. (2011). Human Resources Management . New York: Cengage Learning Press. Thornton M., T Luker. (2010). Age Discrimination in Turbulent Times. Griffith Law Review , 19 (2), 141-171. Wiener, R. (2010). Disability and Aging Discrimination . New York: Springer Press. Read More