For years, older workers in the United States have been subject to epidemic, unaddressed age discrimination.
I recently wrote a book, Betrayed: The Legalization of Age Discrimination in the Workplace, which lays out the problem in graphic and undeniable detail. Older workers have far fewer rights under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act than do protected groups under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion and national origin. Also, the U.S. Congress and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission have virtually ignored an unprecedented rise in age discrimination complaints since the onset of the Great Recession.
To my knowledge, Betrayed: The Legalization of Age Discrimination in the Workplace is the first book to seriously examine the systemic nature of age discrimination in the workplace in modern times. It makes a compelling case for change. Yet, in recent weeks, I have contacted numerous officials at the organization that is widely believed to be the chief advocacy group for older Americans. Among others, I emailed the president of the AARP, the director of the AARP Foundation, and the head of the AARP Foundation Legal Section. I have received no response.
Given the overwhelming apathy toward age discrimination in the workplace in the United States, how can older workers create the necessary incentives to improve public policy and the law?
Two countries, Australia and Denmark, have taken a far more aggressive approach to age discrimination in employment than the United States.
Australia appointed its first Age Discrimination Commissioner on July 30, 2011 to a five-year term. Commissioner Susan Ryan recently commissioned the first “national prevalence survey” on age discrimination in the workplace. “[T]his new survey will provide the first national picture, reporting the experiences of people who have been discriminated against, and employers large and small … It will provide a strong basis for better policy and for more positive action by employers and government.” This type of survey is desperately needed in the United States, where age discrimination is hidden by catch-phrases like “long-term unemployment” and “early retirement.”
Another model worthy of examination exists in Denmark. The DaneAge Association is an independent, non-profit national membership organization founded in 1986 to provide advocacy “through an ongoing dialogue with the government and the public, promoting a society without age barriers and ageism.” DaneAge has 690,000 members in 217 Local chapters across Denmark, including 15,775 volunteers who engaged in local advocacy. Among other things, the organization, which has approximately 100 staff members, provides “free-of-charge and impartial legal advice and counsel” by lawyers and other professionals. Denmark is widely regarded as having the highest quality of life for its citizens in the world.
For years, older workers in America have been dumped into the quicksand of long-term unemployment, relegated to menial and poorly paid work and, finally, forced into a penurious and unwanted early retirement. This is because the ADEA was weak to begin with and has been eviscerated by the U.S. Supreme Court. Congress must insure that older workers at least have the same level of protection against employment discrimination that is afforded to protected groups under Title VII. An discrimination commissioner could champion the rights of older workers. By contrast, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission received more than 21,000 complaints of age discrimination last year and filed only SEVEN lawsuits with age discrimination claims. And older workers deserve to have an independent, non–profit advocacy group that will aggressively fight for the rights of older workers in the halls of Congress and across the nation.