USING EVIDENCE TO DEBUNK COMMON MYTHS AND ASSUMPTIONS

The ageing population has led to much public policy and debate about prolonging working lives to reduce welfare costs and respond to projected labour shortages as many workers retire. In this blog, Professor Philip Taylor of IER provides a myth-buster that draws on international evidence to challenge common misconceptions about ageing and work.

Myth #1: Age discrimination is only experienced by older people

Reality: Age discrimination can affect people across the life course

Age discrimination is characterised as a problem solely experienced by older people when, in fact, young people experience it, too (Taylor & Smith, 2017). Evidence shows that older jobseekers are likelier to report job-related discrimination than other older workers, whereas younger people in work are likelier to report it than younger job seekers (Wilkins et al., 2011). Some research also finds that younger people are more likely to report experiences of job-related discrimination than older ones (Taylor et al., 2018; Sweiry & Willitts, 2012). What’s more, studies also show that older people may also be perpetrators of age discrimination, including against other older people (Earl & Taylor, 2016).

Ultimately, we must focus on facilitating age inclusion—good employment practices with an age lens applied—throughout working life.

Myth #2: Generations have different orientations to work

Reality: The employee life stage (e.g., completing education, working parent, caring for older relatives to retirement) makes a big difference – not generation.

You may have heard claims that ‘Boomers’ are more loyal, ‘Millennials’ want immediate recognition, strongly desire to balance work and life, and are less willing to sacrifice their lives for the company's sake (Gursoy et al., 2013), or that individuals from different generations tend to have different communication styles (Gursoy et al., 2013). It is argued that awareness of those generational differences can help managers create a more pleasant and productive workplace (Gursoy et al., 2013).

However, generational constructs such as ‘Millennial’ or ‘Boomer’ might be better viewed as crude ageist caricatures with little validity, meaning that they provide a poor basis for making employment decisions.

Research fails to demonstrate the noted attributes of different generations. The field is limited by conceptual and methodological difficulties, which do not take account of national contexts and disregard issues of intersectionality (Parry & Urwin, 2011).

Organisations should be cautious about implementing strategies based on assumptions about people's capabilities, characteristics, wishes, needs and behaviours simply because they happen to be from a given generation. Generational differences may not be as big as managers think, and the costs of such an approach might outweigh the benefits (Becton et al., 2014).

Instead, providing age inclusion over the entire employee lifecycle is critical – from school leavers looking for their first work experience, people seeking to return to work after raising children, through to older workers looking to transition to take on a new employment challenge or to retirement.

Myth #3: Older people are a homogenous group

Reality: Older and younger people have intersectional parts of their identity that impact their work experience of inclusion and exclusion

People are not one-dimensional. Whether they are older or younger, it is how the multiple aspects of their identity – that is, their age, caring responsibilities, cultural background, disability, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, intersex status, and socio-economic background – intersect that impact how they experience inclusion and exclusion at work. This has led some to question the value of terms such as ‘older worker’ (Phillipson, 2019).

Myth #4: Older workers outperform younger ones in terms of their reliability, loyalty, work ethic and life experience

Reality: Performance is unrelated to age – except in rare instances

The business case promoted by those advocating for the rights of older workers has often referred to their supposed greater loyalty, reliability and experience compared to younger people. But in attempting to address ageism this way, advocates unwittingly draw on age stereotypes of both young and old (Taylor & Smith, 2017; Taylor & Earl, 2016; Taylor & Earl, 2023).

Such a muddling of the message is likely to confuse employers, overlook the phenomenon of ageism affecting young people, confirm rather than challenge societal views of ageing and may, consequently, undermine older people’s employment prospects.

The research is equivocal: chronological age does not predict job performance, although there appear to be small yet positive statistical relationships between age and some job attributes (Ng & Feldman, 2008).

In addition, research indicates that job performance often varies more between people of the same age than between people of different ages (Warr, 1993).

Thus, in performance terms, age may not matter much for most jobs, meaning that older is neither necessarily better nor worse than younger.

A better starting point for managers would be to assume that age and performance have little practical relationship. Consequently, age-based decision-making may not only be discriminatory but also confer no competitive advantages.

Myth #5: Older people have a lifetime of experience that managers should recognise

Reality: Relevant experience is more valuable than experience of itself

Common arguments for employing older workers that highlight their experience and that they are keepers of corporate memory risk confirm broader societal perceptions that they are of the past and, thus, less able to meet the demands of modern workplaces (Roberts, 2006).

Rather than relying on stereotypes about older workers as a group, it is better to consider what relevant experience older people have and what gaps may need to be filled. Ignoring this risks older people being mistrusted, considered irrelevant and only suitable for roles requiring ‘traditional’ skills.

Myth #6: Younger workers are more dynamic, entrepreneurial, and tech-savvy than older workers

Reality: Older people have a lot to offer the modern workplace

Just as negative age stereotypes apply to older people, equally, positive age stereotypes can be associated with youthfulness. For example, younger workers are valued for their enthusiasm, innovation, technological savvy, pacesetting, ambition, risk-taking, desire to learn, openness to change, collaboration, and understanding of social media and technology.

However, these stereotypes do not acknowledge that workers of similar ages may have different experiences, skills, and attributes. Conversely, workers of various ages may have similar experiences, skills, and attributes (Taylor & Earl, 2016).

People should not be assumed to have a given quality just because they are older or younger. Instead, workplace policies should be built on a foundation of age neutrality.

Myth #7: Younger workers feel entitled and won’t stick around

Reality: Younger workers are more likely to be in insecure employment and to experience unemployment

Research has found that age demonstrates little relationship with a person’s commitment to work (Hanlon, 1986).

What’s more, youth unemployment rates are often higher than those for older people (Taylor & Smith, 2017), and those younger people who are in work are constantly being told not to expect a job for life (McCrindle, 2014), and may find themselves in casualised and contract work.

Thus, while young people are sometimes characterised as lacking the work ethic compared to older workers, this is another example of an unfounded ageist stereotype.

Myth #8: Older people who stay on at work are taking jobs from younger people

Reality: Increasing the employment of older workers does not harm and may even benefit younger people’s employment prospects

Research demonstrates that, across the OECD countries, increases in older people’s employment rates are associated with higher youth employment rates or demonstrate no relationship at all.

While it is sometimes assumed that an economy must distribute a ‘lump of labour’ fairly, the number of jobs is not fixed, and older and younger workers might be better considered complements rather than substitutes in employment (OECD, 2013).

Therefore, while young and old are sometimes characterised as being in conflict, we are all in this together.