A grey day for Heyday? Not in the longer term.

And so the “Heyday” case has finally drawn to a conclusion with seemingly disappointing results. Even in its final battle Heyday was destined to be a loser and its (poorly chosen) name will thankfully fade away into history. Let’s hope the new merged charity sticks to its knitting and does not make the same mistakes again. However, that is another story – for another day.

On the surface the outcome of the Heyday case is unhelpful, certainly to those who have had age discrimination cases pending. Much has already been written in the press about the case and we don’t wish to go over this ground again. The judge took a particular standpoint based largely on a historical perspective and this has let the government off the hook, at least in the short term. However, moving forward, it will clear the air and allow fresh and proper thinking instead of continued attempts to justify the previously taken, and very weak, position.

The demographics are moving one way only. The financial concerns of our older citizens and of government are moving one way only. And the skills needs of industry, business and employers at large are moving one way only. The debate can, therefore, move in one direction only. Nevertheless, it has to remain top of the agenda and we applaud all of those organisations which are fighting and lobbying to bring about the necessary changes, sooner rather than later.

We, at in my prime, have a slightly different perspective. We are more concerned with the next phase. How are employers going to manage their older workforces? How are individuals of any age going to plan for the rest of their lives, find the right balance between work and non-work, and determine the necessary stepping stones? And how are employers, employees and government going to work together to find solutions which are in the best interests of all concerned?

The Heyday judgement is just a temporary setback – but nothing in this life worth having comes easy.

Not such a heyday

News of a long-predicted collapse that for once has nothing to do with the credit crunch. Heyday, launched as a rival to Saga in 2006 with £22m funding from Age Concern, is finally being wound up following a damning Charity Commission report on its governance. The report marked the final nail in the coffin for a venture which from the start was based on an “entirely flawed proposition” according to industry experts such as Kevin Lavery from specialist over-50s marketing agency Millennium. Quite rightly he commented that “you should never sell services to older people on the basis of age”.

Our own view from the outset was that not only is Heyday an appallingly twee name, but few individuals are likely to want to pay for something that is either already freely available through other sources (e.g. social networking and other websites) or already done far better by existing providers (e.g. Saga  and other commercial specialist interest magazines).

The most worrying aspect of the whole sorry debacle is the extent to which Age Concern who should, if anyone, possess a detailed understanding of the nature of the mature market, seemed completely oblivious to the fact that the over 50s do not – and never will – represent a single unified cohort . What appeals to one 50 year old will not necessarily appeal to another; what appeals to a 50 year old will not appeal to a 75 year old. People do not define themselves or their interests primarily on the basis of age.

The fact that Age Concern (newly amalgamated with Help the Aged) is in a hugely influential position in terms of providing policy and advice to government and other key bodies and yet can have such a blinkered and unrealistic view of its own customer base is deeply disturbing. What other misguided and fatally flawed initiatives are going to result?