Vol. 463 No. 3
24 Dr. Woods asked the Minister for Equality and Law Reform the plans, if any, he has to tackle the discriminatory practice of excluding suitable employees from interviews, jobs or promotion on the grounds of the applicant's age; and if he will ensure that experienced older job applicants will be entitled to achieve their rightful place in the workforce. [6329/96]
I hope to publish shortly an Employment Equality Bill that will prohibit discrimination in employment on a wide range of grounds. The Bill will outlaw, among other grounds, discrimination on the grounds of age in employment, subject to certain conditions, including discrimination in relation to recruitment and promotion.
In the Programme for Economic and Social Progress a commitment was given by the then Government to a policy of substantially raising recruitment age limits throughout the public service. Since early 1991, upper age limits in open competitions for posts in the Civil Service have reflected that commitment. This has meant that posts in general service grades, which had previously been advertised with upper age limits ranging from 20 to 30, have been advertised with an upper age limit of 50. Upper age limits for recruitment to most posts in the health boards and local authorities have also been raised to 50.
I am glad the Minister hopes to eliminate the serious upper age limit discrimination in the Employment Equality Bill. I was approached recently by a man of 51, who is extremely fit, healthy with good qualifications, vis-à-vis an advertisement published in the careers opportunities section of the Sunday Independent of 25 February last for a post within the local government service, requiring applicants to have a pass leaving certificate. Since this man has an honours leaving certificate, that would present no difficulty in his case but the advertisement also stipulated that applicants must have been born between 2 March 1946 and 1 January 1980 which he considers very discriminatory. He could apply for a post as, say, manager of the relevant local authority in respect of which there is no age limit, at a considerably higher salary — £70,000 per annum — as against that of a clerical officer beginning at £9,000 rising to £15,500. Since these jobs are being advertised and interviews being held can the Minister ensure that applicants aged, say, 51, 52 or 53, who are fit and healthy, may apply?
The post to which Deputy Woods referred appears to fall within the responsibility of another Minister, to whom the Deputy might table a parliamentary question. The matter of age discrimination will be addressed in the Employment Equality Bill but, even within that context, there cannot be an absolute prohibition on discrimination on age grounds in any circumstances; there must be some flexibility. To take one example, if a candidate for a position that involved a lengthy period of training was close to retirement age, the possibility of undertaking extensive lengthy training would have to be allowed. Considerations such as that have to be taken into account in the legislation and that is just one example of the kind of flexibility and complexity that exists in connection with legislation of this type. All these factors must be provided for and dealt with carefully in the legislation.
Is the Minister aware that Age Action Ireland stated to a Dáil committee recently that too much stress should not be placed on differences based on chronological age. Younger and older people have the same social and economic needs, not least in challenging ageism. It pointed out that over the next 30 years the number of people over the age of 60 will increase by 67 per cent, so there will be a substantial increase in the upper age groups whereas the numbers between the ages of 20 and 59 will increase by only 2.7 per cent. There is a change which needs to be accommodated but, even more important, is the change in relation to work. Contract type work is becoming more common throughout society as a whole and employees need to be able to combine different aspects of work over a career period to make up, say, an occupational pension. If people are not allowed back into the system from the age of 50, they will be unable to have an occupational pension. This matter is urgent because what is happening in our society is quite alarming. I accept the Minister's point about difficulties arising if one's health is not satisfactory but for the many people who are healthy he must be seen to press their case strongly and I ask him to have an active programme in that regard.
I agree with much of what Deputy Woods has said. Indeed, for that reason I decided to include the question of age discrimination as one of the discrimination grounds in the Employment Equality Bill in recognition of the fact that, all too often, arbitrary recruitment age limits are set without reasonable cause or without a reasonable base. It is my intention to address that question in a generalised way in the Bill but account will have to be taken in that legislation and a reasonable balance struck between the interests of employees and intending employees and the viability of the enterprises concerned. I will strike a reasonable balance in that legislation but we can discuss it in detail in the House.
I am a little concerned about certain undertones in the Minister's remarks which may originate from people in other Departments who are concerned about the position of employers. There is real change, employees do not have the security they had in the past and if the change is coming from industry and business, the Legislature must ensure that people have an opportunity to get back into the system. In the past — to our great discredit — we barred people from the public service and elsewhere for what were, in effect, curable disorders and diseases.
Or because they were married.
I ask the Minister not to be put off by Ministers in other Departments concerned with the business area who might want to keep the balance on the business side.
I assure Deputy Woods he can leave the matter very safely in my hands.
The time for dealing with questions nominated for priority has exhausted. We may deal with Questions Nos. 26 and 27 in the category of other questions.
