Move to outlaw 'ageism' at work
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.JAMES CUSICK
Legislation to outlaw "ageist" job advertisements which specify upper- age limits for applicants will be voted on in the Commons today.
David Winnick, Labour MP for Walsall North, is attempting through his Private Member's Bill, to break the "last barrier" of workplace discrimination. He said discrimination on the grounds of race, sex, and disability were now all illegal and that legislation was urgently needed to deal with age bias.
The Bill, which has its second reading today, aims to make it an offence to publish job advertisements "with an actual or preferred upper-age limit". Mr Winnick said that a defeat in the Commons would not end the matter, as the debate had "put down a marker for the future".
Ian McCartney, Labour's employment spokesman, echoed Mr Winnick's comment when he pledged that an incoming Labour government would introduce legislation to deal with age discrimination. Labour yesterday released figures which claimed that the number of workers aged between 25 and 49 unable to find employment within two years or more had doubled since 1990 from 158,600 to 316,600.
The Liberal Democrats are backing the Bill. Their social security spokeswoman, Liz Lynne, said it was "a step in the right direction". Despite support from Age Concern and the Institute of Management, the Bill is unlikely to receive backing from the government benches.
The Institute of Directors warned that the measure would have little impact and urged MPs to vote against it. "We are also concerned that this attempt to regulate employment contracts could lead to greater regulatory interference in matters which are best resolved between individual employers and employees," said Ruth Lea,head of the IoD's policy unit.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments