Question

BDL Company is specialized in manufacturing shoes. The company‘s HR follows a recruitment strategy that excludes all new employees applications whose age is above 50 irrespective of their qualifications, experience or skills. While the company’s primary assumption revolves around their belief that young employees are likely to be more productive, flexible and cooperative. Is this considered discrimination? Why?

The company claims that it is following this strategy for its own benefits while it reserves the right to choose what is best ultimately for its shareholders. Does this right grant the company any ethical stance knowing that some studies have been published in the literature predicating the existence of a relationship between age progression and decrease of workers capabilities such as speed Verhaegen and Salthouse (1997).

Answer 1

This policy definitely constitutes ground for discrimination. Infact it may also be illegal under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967. The only ground for selection in a job should be competence and skill and any segregation based on age, gender or ethnic background prevents diversity and also could be based on a motive to prevent benefits from accruing to a certain section of society. This is blatant bias and is definitely unethical.

While there may be literature studies which has presented empirical evidence between productivity and age of employees, generalising the hypothesis and applying it to all applicants is not a good idea as it assumes that entire population is explained by these studies. So such a generalisation is not good and is also not ethical at all even when the company may be doing it to guard shareholder interest.