# Basically told too old for a job



## jamieb (4 May 2011)

Hi

I applied for a job on jobs.ie and I received a call from a uk number today.  I called the gentleman back and he advised me it was in connection with my application.

The job was in shopping centres selling/promoting cosmetics and hair care products.  I work part time at the moment and have over the years kept my hand in promotions or exhibitions when they come up here and there.  However this would have been more long term and maybe something I would have given up my part time role for - who knows?

Anyway after Ali introduced himself and explained why he had called he asked me how old I am and I answered truthfully 46!!  I was surprised he asked and immediately I could hear the hesitation in his voice.  He had asked also where I lived in relation to Liffey Valley and we figured 30 minutes!  He then went on to say that he didnt have a problem with my age HOWEVER his boss wanted to employ people under 30.  I tell you now - my heart sank first of all and then I flipped.  I told him he was out of order legally and he had no right.  He tried to get out of it saying they liked people to live 20 minutes from the workplace but I told him he was backtracking and if I was under thirty with all the right attributes and abilities he would not refuse me for living an extra ten minutes away.!  He then said that the reason they wanted under 30s was because of long days worked!!!  Did you ever???? I mean a lot of forty somethings are far fitter than twenty somethings - who is he to make that decision.?  I look fine for 46 and in fact I am lucky that I do look younger - it was a case when I was in my twenties I always needed to carry id because I looked young even then which was a pain.  But I have to say I felt 100 years old today after the conversation with this man!!!


----------



## DrMoriarty (4 May 2011)

Their loss. Don't let it get you down. 

You could make a case (if you have evidence) and haul them before an equality tribunal, but to what end? (especially if it's a UK company)


----------



## jamieb (4 May 2011)

Yes I am trying to view it that way indeed!  I did call jobs.ie and spoke with their account manager to make a complaint and I have also sent an email to the company itself in their Contact section of the website.  They seem to have an Irish branch of the company and no I wouldnt be taking it as far as a tribunal but I do want to give them a fright!  The seem to have a concession for stand in quite a few Debenham here in Ireland, so I informed them this evening in my email that I would be contacting Debenhams to make them aware of this company's policies on age!!  Might get them thinking!


----------



## Leper (5 May 2011)

You want to give them a 'fright' only.  This is a great country for sacred cows.  Either take them to the cleaners or back off.

Personally, I'd take them to the cleaners . . . Wonder how long Ali will last in the job.


----------



## horusd (5 May 2011)

Well you  seem to have caught this company red-handed engaging in ageism. Is age a valid reason for denying someone a job? Not in my view. Apart from assuming that older people cannot perform as well ( a completely inaccurate assumption, and probably contrary to most people's experience) it is a rights issue. I would take em to a tribunal on it. The more people who do that, the less it's likely to happen. Altho it's probably true that some employers do use age as a criteria whilst not admitting to it. 

As it happens I was in both Woodies, the local garden centre and B&Q during the week. All three employ older people, and without fail I find them the most helpful, knowledgeable, informative and obliging. I also heard a report a few years ago, that on average older people perform better, take less sick leave etc  than their younger counterparts. If there was a case for ageism it should really be the other way round!.


----------



## elcato (5 May 2011)

Your problem will be proving this point. Did you record the call or did they state that they record them ? I would do as you have already and make their customers aware of their policy. Do you really want to work for a company as shabby as ringing you up and making such a basic mistake ?


----------



## JoeB (5 May 2011)

It's not quite as black and white in my opinion.

For example, if a Club 30 type holiday outfit wants representitives.. can they require younger poeple? I'd suggest that they can, and then it's a requirement that applicants are under 30. This is a requirement of the job, not discrimination.

The same applies to mature models... if you want to sell your clothes aimed at the 50+ market, then you need appropriate models.. i.e 50+. Is it age discrimination to list that as a requirement?


The same pplies to 'larger' clothes sizes... clearly you need larger models. Is this discrimination?


It could be a requirement of the promotional job that promoters are young, for whatever reason. Perhaps they're promoting a young persons product. This isn't cut and dried discrimination in my view.


I'm sorry OP for being a devils advocate.. I did feel very sad when you relayed the story, and I understood your frustration and dissapointment when you said that your heart sank. I think you just have to keep your head up and it is the companys loss.. you'll be alright in the end.

Do other people still think that ageism is always an offence, for all types of jobs,.. including childrens schoolwear for example? Clearly adults can't do that job, and that's not ageism.


----------



## boaber (5 May 2011)

There are 9 grounds on which discrimination is unlawful, age being one of these.

Maybe contact the Equality Authority to see if you have a case 



JoeBallantin said:


> Do other people still think that ageism is always an offence, for all types of jobs,.. including childrens schoolwear for example? Clearly adults can't do that job, and that's not ageism.


 Under the Equality Act 2004, an employer may set a minimum age, not exceeding 18 years, for recruitment to a post.


----------



## jamieb (5 May 2011)

Thank you for all your responses.  I found out that they do have an Irish branch - I checked solocheck.ie and they formed an Irish branch end of last year.  I was on to the Equality Authority and they have urged me to call the tribunal and fill out a complaint form. Incidentally I did tell Ali that often older people are found to be more reliable but he just stayed silent.  Regarding proof, no Im afraid I dont have any proof of the conversation.  My two boys were in the car with me at the time and heard my responses only.  However, it is my word against his and with all the support I have gotten from people like yourselves, I will take it a step further.  

And Woodies and places like that are fantastic for seeing the person and not the age.  And another shop I have seen this in is Supervalu and it is a pleasure to see.  Thanks again guys for all your support and please continue with your comments I really appreciate it.


----------



## horusd (5 May 2011)

JoeB and Boaber, some great points there. And the law seems clear enough, and the OP was talking about a job selling hair products and cosmetics, not a job that requires an age limit imo. Sometimes these silly rules need to be challenged. I don't think the OP or anyone here is into a fight for the sake of it, or being unreasonable or anything. But the company's position as jamieb describes it is denying her the right to compte with others and earn a living based on a spurious and wrong view of age. 

If we said that all male hairdressers had to have hair the silliness of the case is obvious by analogy. Hair and age aren't relevant to ability or capacity in either case. 

BTW I agree JobB that some discrimination might be reasonable in certain cases, but at least this should be made clear at the outset, and the rationle behind it open to challenge and capable of rational explanation.


----------



## Guest105 (5 May 2011)

A few months back on a telephone interview, I was asked not only how old I was I but if I was married as well

needless to say the call came to a very abrupt end.


----------



## thunder99 (5 May 2011)

I know I'm going to get shot down very quickly for this, but I think companies are perfectly entitled to select whoever they want and whatever age groups they choose.

At the end of the day, the business is the one paying the wage and they should be able to hire anyone they want. If they want to hire only 20 yo's with pink hairspikes, fine it's their business and their money. 

As for the claim that the company are denying her the right to earn a living... well that's just rubbish. Just because the job exists doesn't mean anyone has a right to it.


----------



## jamieb (5 May 2011)

Well Thunder 99 - My skills are perfect for this role - absolutely perfect.  Infact I did some demonstrations of a similar range of this cosmetic last year!!  So without them even seeing me or discussing my abilities which are perfectly matched to the role they have decided I'm too old.  So rather than me having a right to the job -I certainly have a right to be considered.  A very able skilled forty something as opposed to an under thirty something who isnt equipped with the correct skills.  So yes I would love to shoot you down, bad comment!!!!


----------



## monagt (5 May 2011)

thunder99 said:


> I know I'm going to get shot down very quickly for this, but I think companies are perfectly entitled to select whoever they want and whatever age groups they choose.



Afraid that Thunder99 is right. (Actually you are both right). I sympathise with you as I have been in your position  (jamieb) many times and this the way it is.

We are very ageist in Ireland which is wrong. But on the other side, 
If for example,  a college wants to sell college places to a certain demographic (age bracket/student) at an education fair then the employer would need people on the stand at the education fair that potential students could relate to. (He may have a different desk for adult/ return to education courses.)

Is is ageist, yes, unfair yes seems so, but is it really? So its life, the guy is trying to do his job, you would probably do the same in the same position, if you can come up with a better reason for him to hire you that makes sense, then great.

Years ago (30) , a business owner in Dublin said to me, to sell in Cork you need a Cork man and he was not being biased against Dublin or the rest of Ireland.

It important not to DWELL on it or get depressed by it, its not personal or biased (most of the time) so just keep going. (look forward, not back)


----------



## jamieb (5 May 2011)

I appreciate what you're saying Monagt, if this job is about selling cosmetics then is it about looking the part?  I have looked after myself and as cosmetics is about the face a lot of the time - I have looked after my skin and therefore being a sales person I know how to overcome objections and very quickly so to speak.  And if I am selling cosmetics I can use my age to my advantage BECAUSE I have looked after myself (not buying expensive items - I certainly cannot afford them) but just having a routine from a YOUNG age.  I myself commented on the lovely complexion of a sales assistant selling a product back in February.  She told me she used the product but used to have bad eczema until she used this product!!!  These are situations that arise when you are selling stuff and one needs to learn to use them in a positive way.  So yes I have years of experience of overcoming objections.  The job is effectively a sales job selling make up, I have done it (last year) I can do it but I have been denied the right of AN INTERVIEW based on my age!  Anyway,  I rang the Department store today and advised them and they were horrified and the equality authority weren't too impressed either, so I have in my hand a complaint form that I shall fill out and send away.  I am looking forward.


----------



## horusd (5 May 2011)

thunder99 said:


> I know I'm going to get shot down very quickly for this, but I think companies are perfectly entitled to select whoever they want and whatever age groups they choose.
> 
> *At the end of the day, the business is the one paying the wage and they should be able to hire anyone they want*. If they want to hire only 20 yo's with pink hairspikes, fine it's their business and their money.
> 
> As for the claim that the company are denying her the right to earn a living... well that's just rubbish. *Just because the job exists doesn't mean anyone has a right to it*.


 

Yer right,you will get shot down, and rightly so. We live in a fair society and business's cannot choose who they want without fair practice. Your comment would justify racsim,homophobia, and any other type of discrimination that you care to mention.  Imagine a reverse scenario using your logic:  The gov.t decides that as they are the majority purchaser of goods and services in the state, they can demand business's charge what the gov't decides is fair, and pick any supplier they like. The screams of injustice from IBEC would  raise the roof.

No one said that just because a job exists anyone has a right to it. The point is, that it's unfair to disciminate using criteria that have no bearing on the applicants ability to do the job.  No one has the right to it, but everyone has equality of opportunity based on fair assessments.

Fairness is at the heart of democratic society, and it cuts everyway. Your arguments dont stand up just because they miss this point.


----------



## monagt (5 May 2011)

horusd, 

"Your comment would justify racsim,homophobia, and any other type of discrimination that you care to mention." 
This a tad dramatic but you are correct. Unfortunately we live in an unfair world.

We discriminate all over the place, age of voting, age for applying for jobs, religious schools, gender based schools, age of retirement in some occupations, religion of police, minority education places when it suits, perhaps this is GOOD discrimination - but it depends on your position.

B&Q hire senior workers to assist DIY customers for their trade experience and how they relate to their major customers, do they discriminate in their selection process, I wonder?

If they want a person for stores/heavy lifting, do they hire a Senior? Probably not.

Probably they screen & shortlist for the job, position, duties required, etc. 

It does not make them a discriminatory employer, just practical.


----------



## horusd (5 May 2011)

Monagt, discrimination requires fair grounds. I haven't any problem with discrimination in insurance for instance. If discrimination is  rational then it will stand up to scrutiny. 

Voting age is based on the reasonable assumption of adulthood. Is it always correct? No. But we attempt to make it fair, and that's the point in an equal, fair society. We are attempting to level the playing field. Some discrimination is contenious,ie positive discimination on race grounds etc. I'm not sure I agree with it.

 I dont hold with gender or religious  based schools. In an egalitarian society there 
should be minimum values that apply regardless, and to all. So Church's shouldn't be allowed to opt out of equality legislation at all when they are employers.

Discimination on the grounds of age in the OP's case is arbitary and unjust, it cannot stand up to challenge. It has no bearing on ability. 

Those who oppose equality (not saying you're one) say that equality isn't practical. I would like to see anyone defend this argument in the OP 's cited case.


----------



## monagt (5 May 2011)

horusd, can't argue with you but life ain't fair. I think the OP should let it go and move on with a positive attitude.
Best of luck, OP.


----------



## Leper (6 May 2011)

Life ain't fair, but JamieB has been handed a golden opportunity to sue on grounds of ageism.  Opportunity knocks! Go for it.  Nothing like seeing men in expensive dark suits cringing at the pay-out.  Furthermore, an ageist company rep like Ali can get the boot too.

Can I have a ringside seat?


----------



## horusd (6 May 2011)

monagt said:


> horusd, can't argue with you but life ain't fair. *I think the OP should let it go and move on with a positive attitude.*
> Best of luck, OP.



Let's reverse the scenario and see whether posters would consider this fair. The cosmetics company operates in a business environment. They rightly expect that fair rational laws and a level playing field should apply to them, and rightly so, and they presumably would take legal action to vindicate these rights. 

Should they just forget about unfairness and move on, or should they seek that the courts would protect them? Equality and fairness  cut's in all directions or none , there isn't a middle ground here. What's sauce for the goose...


----------



## monagt (6 May 2011)

horusd, look at the rules.

People hire people who are like them. (in their estimation)
People buy from people who are like them.................so hire students to sell to students,.........
People befriend people who are like them.
etc.

Its life Jim, but not as we know it. (Spock)


----------



## horusd (6 May 2011)

monagt said:


> horusd, look at the rules.
> 
> People hire people who are like them. (in their estimation)
> People buy from people who are like them.................so hire students to sell to students,.........
> ...



So, _a priori_ it 's a fact, white people don't hire back people, black people don't have white or Asian friends ? blue-eyed people prefer other blue-eyed people?  So students won't buy from non students and straight people won't buy from gays? So young adults can't/won't be friends with older people? At the least a highly questionable argument, and not supported by experience. 

People are far more complex than this, and far more discerning. And remember this isn't about preferences, this is about fairness in a free society informed by reason.


----------



## monagt (6 May 2011)

*Rapport*



horusd said:


> So, _a priori_ it 's a fact, white people don't hire back people, black people don't have white or Asian friends ? blue-eyed people prefer other blue-eyed people?  So students won't buy from non students and straight people won't buy from gays? So young adults can't/won't be friends with older people? At the least a highly questionable argument, and not supported by experience.
> 
> People are far more complex than this, and far more discerning. And remember this isn't about preferences, this is about fairness in a free society informed by reason.



You have made my comments racist!!! You have inserted discrimination on sexual bias!! You have inserted Ageism!!.
My comments could be about a bunch of anglers, a ladies club, coin collectors, vintage car enthusiasts, insurance salesmen,etc.
You really have a hang up on some issues. I am very disappointed in this response.

And Yes, it is supported by experience, based on sales statistics. Its all about developing a Rapport with people.
http://www.persuasionone.com/how-to-persuade/creating-rapport.html


----------



## horusd (6 May 2011)

Monagt  I didn't insert anything or make you're comments anything. The logic of your argument did that, and we're not talking about a ladies club, or anglers or such like, we're talking about a legal requirement not to discriminate in a work contract where both business and the OP operate and which must conform to certain standards. This is governed by laws. The club rules you refer to seem to be about preferences for this or that, not equality in law, but you seem to be conflating the two. As you said to me before, take a chill pill and keep yer hair on!


----------



## Complainer (17 May 2011)

thunder99 said:


> I know I'm going to get shot down very quickly for this, but I think companies are perfectly entitled to select whoever they want and whatever age groups they choose.
> 
> At the end of the day, the business is the one paying the wage and they should be able to hire anyone they want. If they want to hire only 20 yo's with pink hairspikes, fine it's their business and their money.



Let me guess - you're white, male, under 45, straight, Irish and with no disability - right?

OP should set up a new profile on the website, make a fresh enquiry to Ali and record the phone call before getting onto the Equality Tribunal.


----------



## Purple (18 May 2011)

thunder99 said:


> I know I'm going to get shot down very quickly for this, but I think companies are perfectly entitled to select whoever they want and whatever age groups they choose.


You may think that but thankfully you are incorrect.
Society puts laws in place in order to curb our natural excesses and biases. It is fair and reasonable to legislate so that all citizens are treated equally. If that means that an employer doesn't get to indulge their ignorance or racism when employing people when all the better.
Would you find it acceptable if the prospective employer asked the OP what colour they were or if they were homosexual?
There is no situation where someone can automatically be deemed unsuitable for a job (a job for adults) simply because they are in their 40’s.



thunder99 said:


> At the end of the day, the business is the one paying the wage and they should be able to hire anyone they want. If they want to hire only 20 yo's with pink hairspikes, fine it's their business and their money.


So having power over others gives some of us an exemption from having to behave in a civilised manner? 




thunder99 said:


> As for the claim that the company are denying her the right to earn a living... well that's just rubbish. Just because the job exists doesn't mean anyone has a right to it.


No, it means that everyone has the right to be considered for it and the person or organisation offering it must comply with the Equality Act.


----------



## lff12 (24 May 2011)

thunder99 said:


> I know I'm going to get shot down very quickly for this, but I think companies are perfectly entitled to select whoever they want and whatever age groups they choose.


 
The law says otherwise.  Its legitimate for the company to pick whoever they feel is best for the job.  It is not legal for them to ask any questions that might enable them to select on the 9 grounds of discrimination.

In practice what would happen if the company wished to pick a particular social group such as a culture or youth etc, they would have to go to interview and assess from there.

A very flawed philosphy and pretty dumb TBO as in reality if you hire only youth, you're probably only selling to youth, and guess who is worst off after the recession?  You guessed it:youth.

People who discriminate against older people tend to forget that they are the ones with the cheque books these days.

That said, the law is the law, but nobody is forced to hire anybody they don't want.


----------



## alaskaonline (24 May 2011)

lff12 couldn't have said it better



> Its legitimate for the company to pick whoever they feel is best for  the job.  It is not legal for them to ask any questions that might  enable them to select on the 9 grounds of discrimination



The company made the huge mistake of denying her an interview based on age. If they invited her, talked to her and then decided that her appearance is not what they were looking for, I think they would have had a chance to survive a case. However as things stand, I think they will back paddle and regret that phone call. Why would you call someone up anyway to ask stupid questions? Just shows how unprofessional and naive this company is and personally I wouldn't want to work for a company like this. Who knows what they're up to once you are hired if they don't even know the common rules for hiring someone....

By the way - for all who support that ageism argument based on not giving someone an interview: There are people out there in their 20s who didn't look after themselves (e.g. smoking, drugs, tanning, 24h lifestyle etc.) and look like they're at the end of their 30s AND then you have people that are 40 and look much younger. My friend is 34 and is still being asked for ID when she's going out. What does that tell you about the age written on your birth cert???


----------



## Complainer (24 May 2011)

lff12 said:


> It is not legal for them to ask any questions that might enable them to select on the 9 grounds of discrimination.


There is nothing explicit in law that bans any particular questions or kinds of questions. THe law bans discrimination.

It is bad practice for an employer to ask such questions, because it opens up the possibility of a discrimination claim. If you don't ask the questions, you can't be accused of discriminating.


----------

