The Voice of Much Older People

I’ve just caught up with reading Dame Joan Bakewell’s first Annual Report as the Voice of Older People. I like Joan and from what I read in the report it’s clear she’s putting a lot of effort into doing the best she can on a range of issues flagged up to her by, and relating to, “older people”.

However, as I initially suspected, these involve in the main, the concerns of the elderly – caring provision, health standards, sheltered housing, public loos. There is little in there representing the concerns of today’s average 50 to 70 year olds (apart from a section on retirement age). Yes, younger “older” people may have raised some of these issues but in relation to their parents or other “old” people, not themselves.

Dame Joan herself is aware of this anomaly and deals with it in the introduction to her report by stating “The term ‘older people’ is self defining. I believe that if you consider yourself to be ‘older’ then you are. It might be in your early fifties, it certainly applies to the over eighties.”  That’s a bit of an unhelpful explanation really. Of course if you’re in your early fifties you will see yourself as “older” than someone in their thirties or forties even though you may have similar interests and attitudes and not really look that much different. But do you consider yourself “older” in the same way as an eighty plus year old? I doubt it.

I have no issue with the good work that Joan is doing. I just wish she would adopt a more accurate title.

http://www.equalities.gov.uk/news/voice_of_older_people-_annual.aspx

In praise of older women

Writing in today’s Daily Mail, Vogue Editor Alexandra Shulman argues that mothers’ rights are making younger women unemployable.  She maintains that maternity leave (often multiple times) followed by requests for flexible working are creating huge problems amongst her workforce which she summarises as 90% female – of which 98% are women of childbearing age.

I will ignore the question of why 98% of her female workforce is under what must be around 50 or so (I don’t think I would want to hear whatever justification she chose to come up with). But therein lies the source of her problem – and the solution.  Not just replacing younger women with older women who no longer have childcare responsibilities, but ensuring there is a balance of ages.

Employers – Alexandra included – and society as a whole need to understand that today careers are made up of many different stages throughout which employees have different wants and needs and different levels to which they are able to commit to the organisation. Employers ignoring this do so at their peril and, yes, they will suffer the consequences.  Short-sightedness will lead to the demonisation of young women as it has already of older workers. All that will be left will be younger working men.  Back full circle to where we were a very long time ago.

All this on the same day as the Mail publishes another piece by Linda Kelsey on how being over 50 today is no longer old… Is it me or do we need some joined up thinking?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1226157/Vogue-editor-Alexandra-Shulman-asks-boss-hire-woman.html

Fairness, equality and the lifecourse

Last week we attended the third in a series of seminars presented by the Equality and Human Rights Commission and Age Concern / Help the Aged (for whom a new name is imminent). Entitled JustAgeing: fairness, equality and the lifecourse the programme focuses on inequality over the lifecourse with this particular seminar being held to examine the notion of inter-generational equity. In what was an interesting but fundamentally academic discussion, a number of contentious issues were raised not least the assumed ability of particular generations (in this case “baby boomers”) to manipulate resources to their own benefit and the detriment of others. What emerged yet again however is that we lack an adequate vocabulary to discuss meaningfully today’s ageing reality – as revealed by a clear demonstration that the generation we think of as “baby boomers” in the UK is in fact two different cohorts who have been subject to different social, economic and environmental influences relating to the different years they were born. 

But the real issue which quickly emerged from the heart of the session was the extent to which we, as a society or as providers of services, can or should expect to be able to achieve inter-generational equity and the extent to which this is either achievable or desirable.  After all, individuals always have been and will be different. As we have said so often before, why do we expect them then to suddenly become homogeneous simply because of a shared age?  It was an interesting theoretical discussion no doubt, but unfortunately there was not a great deal of practical use to take away.

McDonalds – we’re lovin’ it

New research from Lancaster University Business School has shown that employees aged over 60 have delivered a significant boost to business at McDonalds. Levels of customer service are reportedly 20% higher in restaurants with staff aged 60 or over with 69% of McDonalds’ managers saying older workers empathise and connect well with managers, 47% saying older workers go the extra mile to deliver the best possible service and 44% rating highly the role of mature workers in bringing mentoring skills to help develop younger staff.

McDonalds employs 1,000 people aged 60 or over. Of course, older workers aren’t perfect but this shows that those organisations who are prepared to recruit, develop and retain them can reap real bottom-line benefits. Like B&Q, Sainsburys, BT and other such organisations before them, they’re to be commended for recognising the strengths of an age-diverse workforce. We’ll really be lovin’ it when other mainstream employers do the same for white collar and managerial employees – and the notion of a truly multi-generational workforce is so commonplace as to no longer be newsworthy.

Too young to represent

The election last week of 27 year old Chloe Smith in the Norwich North by-election led to a flurry of media comment that she was “too young” for the job – a reminder once again of the injustice of ageism. Politics aside, the question of whether she is “too inexperienced”, “too ambitious” or even “too naive” might be valid. But what’s age per se got to do with it?  

Judgement of her performance as it becomes apparent also should be made in terms of benchmarks such as these rather than simply the number of years she has been on this planet. Anyway, she can’t make a much worse job of it than many of her older colleagues whose advanced years might imply they should be be wise, far-sighted and beyond reproach. 

As they have made all too apparent recently, they’re not.

Power to the (older) people

We note with interest and enthusiasm the development and recent publication of VotingAge, a manifesto for older people, by the charity Counsel and Care. Although lobby groups and political parties have sprung up to argue their cases over issues such as “Europe”, and concerns about the environment, little if anything has been attempted in this arena, certainly not in this country.

While we would not wish the whole political spectrum to be defined along age lines we do see, with the demographics moving clearly in our direction, and a huge voting pool of conscientious citizens well used to harnessing the power of the ballot box, that this could prove to be a very influential way to change opinions and get things done.

Recent events have resulted in MPs and established political parties being held in very low esteem and they must work hard to re-establish faith in themselves and the democratic processes. And there is also now plenty of scope for new influences to enter the resulting vacuum.

As individuals, older people may be thought of by some as weak, vulnerable, insignificant and even invisible. We disagree and certainly, enfranchised and acting en masse, who knows, anything is possible.

For more click below.

http://www.counselandcare.org.uk/influence/news/

http://www.counselandcare.org.uk/assets/library/documents/VotingAge_Manifesto_final.pdf

Age Diversity in the Downturn

Last Friday (20^th March) TAEN (the Age and Employment Network) and EHRC (the Equality and Human Rights Commission) held a conference on Age Diversity in the Downturn – the business benefits of creative approaches to age management. The conference was held to launch the publication of a new booklet by EFA (the Employers Forum on Age) and TAEN, called “Age matters in a downturn”.

Acronyms aside it was an excellent and inspiring conference with numerous interesting and practical presentations from academics, policy makers and HR practitioners from around the world. Although age in the workplace, particularly in a downturn, is a hugely complex issue, a few simple messages continue to hold sway:

1   The demographic issues and their implications are here to stay and will only get worse regardless of the economic situation.

2.  Age management is a strategic management problem, not just a tactical HR issue. As such, it needs to form part of ongoing management training.

3.  Age equality is a deep seated issue that must be embedded at the level of company values. Ultimately it’s all about human dignity, freedom of choice, and treating people decently.

4.  Age management requires an investment of money, time and effort. But that investment, if businesses get it right, can be repaid many, many times over – in hard financial figures as well as by increased worker commitment, engagement, satisfaction etc.

5.  Organizations should look more closely at what their customers want in terms of age matching. It’s an area which can generate considerable competitive advantage.

The bad news of course is that in the recession age-related initiatives are generally likely to take a back seat to more pressing matters. However those who are clear-sighted and brave enough to continue to devote effort to recruiting, retaining and developing their older talent are likely to emerge as winners in the coming decades.

Play it again Sam – all older people are not the same

I’ve been catching up on news reports about the European Court of Justice’s recent ruling that the UK’s default retirement age is legitimate.

John Cridland, Deputy Director of the CBI lauded the decision as “a victory for commonsense”, commenting that “Some people can happily work in their existing job beyond the age of 65, but this is not possible for all occupations”.

He went on to state that “companies with small numbers of staff have particular problems adapting jobs to the needs of older workers”.

This is a hugely disappointing and massively short-sighted reaction from an organization that should provide a better example and think more responsibly. For a start we now work in a largely service-based economy rather than one based on manufacturing and heavy manual labour. Even in the manufacturing sector, mechanisation means that aspects of many jobs can be far less physically arduous than in the past. So the “some” people he talks about as being able to happily work in their existing jobs is probably the majority. Second, what “needs of older workers” is he referring to? Yes, the minority of manual workers described above may have a need for lighter or supervisory work but the needs of most of the rest of us can be dealt with on an individual basis e.g. stronger spectacles for fading eyesight. Other problems we may have e.g. back trouble, tiredness, can occur in other individuals also, they are not the sole prerogative of those who are older.

The overarching need of many (but again, not all) over 65s - in increasing numbers – is simply the need to be able to continue to work to secure their financial future. What this means is a need to be treated equally with younger employees and a need to be trained and developed in order to be able to respond to opportunities and keep pace with workplace developments.

Yet again, sweeping statements are applied to a group which is not homogenous. It sounds like a typical “I’m alright Jack” statement by someone who ought to know better.