Material please!

Sep 5, 05:33 PM

,

Comment

1. Congratulations, Henry. This is great.

   I recently submitted the following letter to The Spark, the newsletter of OUBUCU (the OU branch of UCU). I’d welcome comments, and I’ll keep you informed of developments:

   Dear Editor,

   Your feature ‘AL retirement policy’ demonstrates well the damage being done to the University’s teaching programme by its decision to impose mandatory age-specific retirement on ALs. There can be little doubt that this has seriously damaged its reputation as a non-discriminatory organisation that is ‘open to all’.

   The decision however has much wider ramifications. (1) On grounds of age alone, it excludes suitably qualified people from seeking and obtaining income-generating employment: even if you have all the specified essentials and desirables, your application will be automatically rejected upon receipt. Is this compatible with the OU’s claims to be an equal opportunity employer? (2) Careers will be blighted if not curtailed: researchers such as myself, for example, now have to make a successful business case (not an academic one let it be noted) in order to be allowed to seek external funding, or to be employed through funds that we ourselves have secured. (3) The decision underpins and consolidates the institutional ageism of the university, and thereby the prejudices of the wider society. Inevitably learning and experience will be devalued as a consequence.

   It is strangely perverse that a university that prides itself in the educational opportunities it has offered older people over the last forty years, should now categorically deny older people any other role.

   Bill Bytheway

   — Bill Bytheway · Sep 6, 05:28 PM · #

2. Hi Bill,

   A courageous letter. I particularly like the point about reputation. Universities make much of equal opportunities in the usual areas but on the question of age there is just silence.

   Lets hear from HR departments about their attitude to this; lets see the pamphlets on “ending age discrimination in the work place”. HR should be reminded that that if they put a foot wrong now it will all come to haunt them when the tribunals get active again.

   When administrations are challenged there is a tendency to talk of “new blood”, “age distributions” etc. all ageist terms. Lets start to collect these terms and print them.

   Cheers,

   H

   — Henry · Sep 10, 11:05 AM · #

Commenting is closed for this article.