In the context of employment, age isn’t merely a figure

At the age of 91, Alf Dubs is guided by two key factors when deciding whether to continue in his role as a Labour peer in the United Kingdom’s House of Lords. Firstly, he contemplates whether his experience, particularly in refugee matters, enables him to make a meaningful contribution. His passion for these issues stems from his own past, as he escaped Czechoslovakia on a Kindertransport in 1939 to find safety in Britain.

His second gauge is the opinion of his family and colleagues on his mental competence. He openly invites them to notify him if they perceive any decline in his cognitive abilities. In his experience, he has witnessed elderly peers in the House of Lords appearing utterly disoriented – a situation he would prefer to avoid.

There are speculations that the incoming Labour government might enforce mandatory retirement for peers at the culmination of the parliamentary term during which they hit 80 years. Dubs, however, isn’t phased by this notion, saying “I’m not sulking.”

Last week, in the King’s speech, an immediate plan to phase out hereditary peers was put forth by Labour. However Dubs has a more ambitious vision, arguing for the implementation of an elected second chamber. He cautions against dismissing one’s contribution based purely on age, pointing out that peers like Neil Kinnock (82) and Michael Heseltine (91) have a lot to offer. He suggests, instead, considering the length of their tenure as a more valid yardstick.

This dilemma on one’s eligibility for service based on age is not just prevalent in the UK, but has emerged in the United States as well, especially following the attack on Republican Presidential contender Donald Trump. Debates over whether President Joe Biden, at the age of 81, is competent enough for a second term or even capable of effective public appearances have surfaced after several mishaps, including a gaffe where he mistook Volodymyr Zelenskiy, the Ukrainian President, for “President Putin” during a recent NATO summit.

These discussions about Biden’s competence and his age are reflective of a broader societal discussion on ageism. As put forth by writer, Fintan O’Toole, “Biden, rightly or wrongly, has become the focal point of deep generational grievances” which stem from the idea that older generations are monopolising jobs and wealth.

Around the globe, both Biden and Trump, who is now 78, constitute a minor population. As per the Pew Research, it was discovered on May 1st that the average age of world leaders is 62.

‘Customers feel they’re not getting their money’s worth’ – A complaint frequent in Ireland’s hospitality industry

The majority of world leaders (34%) are in their sixties. Approximately 22% are in their fifties, 19% in their seventies, and 16% in their forties. Biden is within the 5% of leaders who are in their eighties. The present British Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, aged 61, succeeded 44-year-old Rishi Sunak.

As the age of retirement and lifespan continues to increase, so does the likelihood of working late in life. According to Andrew Scott in his work, The Longevity Imperative, due to current birth rates, companies would find themselves competing for a reduced pool of younger workers and turning more towards older ones.

Overcoming age discrimination to achieve this would be necessary. Although this issue has been made worse by Biden and the House of Lords, it’s a continual challenge. In his 1974 publication, Working, Studs Terkel claimed that despite advancements in medical science increasing our lifespan, employers were not keeping pace. He criticised the business world’s negative outlook on ageing workers.

John Coleman, a Labour economist referenced by Terkel, experienced feelings of dejection after taking up – and subsequently losing – several blue-collar jobs during his study. He mentioned that it gave him an insight into what professionals his age must feel after losing their jobs and confidence. He was 51 years old at the time.

Emily Andrews, deputy director of work at the Centre for Ageing Better, insists that rather than just considering workers in terms of their age, the capacity to perform job responsibilities holds more weight. Scott concurs that for senior positions like this, demonstrating one’s cognitive prowess and suitability for the role is essential.

“The desire is not to demand it solely from those above, say 80. While some aspects, like health and cognition, might be declining with age, some like experience, are augmenting,” he adds.

Scott believes that for the incorporation of vibrant squads and new capabilities, employers must stay progressive but simultaneously steer clear of age discrimination and “withholding opportunities and privileges from the elderly”. It’s vital to ensure that organisations modify and adapt to encompass all age groups.

This is not a question of making exceptions – even though the younger generation may not realise it yet, ageing is a universal process they’ll eventually experience too. – Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2024

Written by Ireland.la Staff

“Sudan Refugees Appeal for Safe Passage”

“Ex-Anglo Irish Banker Becomes Pepper CEO”