Latest news with #ageism
The Guardian
3 hours ago
- Politics
- The Guardian
Just when the world desperately needs wise elders, its fate is in the hands of old and ruthless patriarchs
Let's attempt something delicate: talking about age without slipping into ageism. Never before in modern history have those with the fate of the world in their hands been so old. Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping are both 72. Narendra Modi is 74, Benjamin Netanyahu 75, Donald Trump 79, and Ali Khamenei is 86. Thanks to advances in medical science, people are able to lead longer, more active lives – but we are now also witnessing a frightening number of political leaders tightening their grip on power as they get older, often at the expense of their younger colleagues. This week, at their annual summit, the leaders of Nato – including Emmanuel Macron and Mette Frederiksen (both 47), Giorgia Meloni (48) and Pedro Sánchez (53) – were forced to swallow Trump's demand for increased military spending. The average age of Nato heads of state is 60. Germany's Friedrich Merz is 69, Turkey's Recep Tayyip Erdoğan is 71. All bowed to a new 5% defence spending target – an arbitrary figure, imposed without serious military reasoning or rational debate, let alone serious democratic debate at home. It was less policy, more deference to the whims of a grumpy patriarch. Nato's secretary general, Mark Rutte – himself just 58 – went so far as to call Trump 'Daddy'. That's not diplomacy. That's submission. This generational clash plays out in other arenas. Ukraine's 47-year-old president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, is resisting the imperial ambitions of septuagenarian Putin. Septuagenarian Xi eyes a Taiwan led by a president seven years his junior. Netanyahu, three-quarters of a century old, is overseeing devastation in Gaza, where almost half the population is under 18. In Iran an 86 year old rules over a population with an average age of 32. Cameroon's Paul Biya, 92, has been in power since 1982 in a country where the median age is 18 and life expectancy just 62. There is no gerontocratic conspiracy at work here – no senior citizens' club bent on global domination. But there is something disturbing about a world being dismantled by the very people whose lives were defined by its postwar architecture. Khamenei was six when the second world war ended. Trump was born in 1946, the year the United Nations held its first general assembly. Netanyahu was born a year after Israel was founded. Modi was born in 1950, as India became a republic. Putin entered the world in October 1952, months before Stalin died. Xi in June 1953, just after. And Erdoğan was born in 1954, two years after Turkey joined Nato. These men are the children of the postwar world – and as they near the end of their lives, they seem determined to tear it down. It almost looks like revenge. Dylan Thomas urged us to 'Rage, rage against the dying of the light'. Rarely has the line felt so literal. Yes, the rules-based international order was always messier in practice than on paper. But at least the ideal existed. There was a shared moral framework – shaky, yes, but sincere – built on the conviction that humanity must never repeat the atrocities of the first half of the 20th century and that dialogue and diplomacy were better. That conviction has now evaporated, not least in the minds of those who should cherish it most. This is an unprecedented moment. The architects of the previous global disorder – Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Mao – were all in their 30s or 40s when they rose to power. A new generation built a new world, and lived with its consequences. Today, that new world is being unmade by an old generation – one that will not live to see the wreckage it leaves behind. It's easier to shout 'drill, baby, drill' when you're statistically unlikely to experience the worst of climate collapse. Après nous le déluge, as the French say. You might think that a generation so fortunate to benefit from longevity would leave behind a legacy of care, gratitude and global stewardship. Instead, we are witnessing the worst resurgence of repression, violence, genocide, ecocide and contempt for international law in decades – waged, more often than not, by ruthless septuagenarians and octogenarians who appear more interested in escaping prosecution than preserving peace. But it doesn't have to be this way. After leaving office, Nelson Mandela founded the Elders, a network of former world leaders working to promote peace, justice and human rights. Inspired by African traditions of consensus and elder wisdom, the Elders are an example of how age can bring clarity, compassion and conscience – not just clout. The problem isn't old age. It's how some have chosen to wield it. The world doesn't need more ageing strongmen clinging to power. It needs elders who are willing to let go – and guide. The kind who think about legacy not as personal glory, but as the world they leave behind. In this age of age, what we need is not domination, but wisdom. And that, in the end, is what separates a ruler from a leader. David Van Reybrouck is philosopher laureate for the Netherlands and Flanders. His books include Revolusi: Indonesia and the Birth of the Modern World and Congo: The Epic History of a People Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
The Guardian
10 hours ago
- Politics
- The Guardian
Just when the world desperately needs wise elders, its fate is in the hands of old and ruthless patriarchs
Let's attempt something delicate: talking about age without slipping into ageism. Never before in modern history have those with the fate of the world in their hands been so old. Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping are both 72. Narendra Modi is 74, Benjamin Netanyahu 75, Donald Trump 79, and Ali Khamenei is 86. Thanks to advances in medical science, people are able to lead longer, more active lives – but we are now also witnessing a frightening number of political leaders tightening their grip on power as they get older, often at the expense of their younger colleagues. This week, at their annual summit, the leaders of Nato – including Emmanuel Macron and Mette Frederiksen (both 47), Giorgia Meloni (48) and Pedro Sánchez (53) – were forced to swallow Trump's demand for increased military spending. The average age of Nato heads of state is 60. Germany's Friedrich Merz is 69, Turkey's Recep Tayyip Erdoğan is 71. All bowed to a new 5% defence spending target – an arbitrary figure, imposed without serious military reasoning or rational debate, let alone serious democratic debate at home. It was less policy, more deference to the whims of a grumpy patriarch. Nato's secretary general, Mark Rutte – himself just 58 – went so far as to call Trump 'Daddy'. That's not diplomacy. That's submission. This generational clash plays out in other arenas. Ukraine's 47-year-old president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, is resisting the imperial ambitions of septuagenarian Putin. Septuagenarian Xi eyes a Taiwan led by a president seven years his junior. Netanyahu, three-quarters of a century old, is overseeing devastation in Gaza, where almost half the population is under 18. In Iran an 86 year old rules over a population with an average age of 32. Cameroon's Paul Biya, 92, has been in power since 1982 in a country where the median age is 18 and life expectancy just 62. There is no gerontocratic conspiracy at work here – no senior citizens' club bent on global domination. But there is something disturbing about a world being dismantled by the very people whose lives were defined by its postwar architecture. Khamenei was six when the second world war ended. Trump was born in 1946, the year the United Nations held its first general assembly. Netanyahu was born a year after Israel was founded. Modi was born in 1950, as India became a republic. Putin entered the world in October 1952, months before Stalin died. Xi in June 1953, just after. And Erdoğan was born in 1954, two years after Turkey joined Nato. These men are the children of the postwar world – and as they near the end of their lives, they seem determined to tear it down. It almost looks like revenge. Dylan Thomas urged us to 'Rage, rage against the dying of the light'. Rarely has the line felt so literal. Yes, the rules-based international order was always messier in practice than on paper. But at least the ideal existed. There was a shared moral framework – shaky, yes, but sincere – built on the conviction that humanity must never repeat the atrocities of the first half of the 20th century and that dialogue and diplomacy were better. That conviction has now evaporated, not least in the minds of those who should cherish it most. This is an unprecedented moment. The architects of the previous global disorder – Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Mao – were all in their 30s or 40s when they rose to power. A new generation built a new world, and lived with its consequences. Today, that new world is being unmade by an old generation – one that will not live to see the wreckage it leaves behind. It's easier to shout 'drill, baby, drill' when you're statistically unlikely to experience the worst of climate collapse. Après nous le déluge, as the French say. You might think that a generation so fortunate to benefit from longevity would leave behind a legacy of care, gratitude and global stewardship. Instead, we are witnessing the worst resurgence of repression, violence, genocide, ecocide and contempt for international law in decades – waged, more often than not, by ruthless septuagenarians and octogenarians who appear more interested in escaping prosecution than preserving peace. But it doesn't have to be this way. After leaving office, Nelson Mandela founded the Elders, a network of former world leaders working to promote peace, justice and human rights. Inspired by African traditions of consensus and elder wisdom, the Elders are an example of how age can bring clarity, compassion and conscience – not just clout. The problem isn't old age. It's how some have chosen to wield it. The world doesn't need more ageing strongmen clinging to power. It needs elders who are willing to let go – and guide. The kind who think about legacy not as personal glory, but as the world they leave behind. In this age of age, what we need is not domination, but wisdom. And that, in the end, is what separates a ruler from a leader. David Van Reybrouck is philosopher laureate for the Netherlands and Flanders. His books include Revolusi: Indonesia and the Birth of the Modern World and Congo: The Epic History of a People
Daily Mail
13 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Calling a middle-aged white woman a 'Karen' is a 'borderline racist, sexist and ageist slur', employment tribunal says
Calling a middle-aged white woman a 'Karen' is 'borderline racist, sexist and ageist', an employment tribunal has found. The term – used to describe a female who is perceived as entitled or excessively demanding – is 'pejorative', a judge said. The ruling came in the case of black charity worker Sylvia Constance, 74, who accused her bosses of targeting her because of her race and age. In a complaint written on her behalf, female managers at Mencap were said to have acted like the stereotypical 'Karen', having 'weaponised their privilege and more powerful position against [her]'. But employment judge George Alliott said: 'We note [the use of] the slang term "Karen", which is a pejorative and borderline racist, sexist and ageist term.' Referring to someone as a Karen began as an internet meme popularised during Covid. It suggests 'Karens' are the kind of women who demand to 'speak to the manager' to complain, and is also associated with excessive use of Facebook, being anti-vaccination and even a blonde bob haircut. The hearing in Watford was told Ms Constance joined Mencap as a support worker in Harpenden, Hertfordshire, in 2016. In 2021, Claire Wilson took over as boss of the residential home where she worked and faced 'open hostility' from Ms Constance. In October that year, Ms Wilson suspended Ms Constance over claims she had bullied residents and staff. A week later, the employee filed a grievance. The tribunal heard that in February 2022, the disciplinary process against her was terminated with no action taken. Ms Constance went off sick, and in April filed another grievance, written on her behalf by friend Christine Yates. The tribunal heard that Mencap repeatedly tried to hold a meeting into her grievance. Ms Constance refused to attend, and it was held in her absence in June. The grievance was dismissed. A year later, during which time she had not returned to work, she was sacked due to 'an irrevocable breakdown in the relationship' with Mencap. Ms Constance sued the charity for unfair dismissal, race and age discrimination and victimisation. However, all her claims were dismissed. The judge said: 'We find that the complaints levelled against [Ms Constance] were legitimate and did not constitute a targeted racist campaign against her.'
Times
20 hours ago
- Times
Calling white middle-aged women Karen ‘borders on racism'
Describing a middle-aged white woman as a 'Karen' is borderline unlawful, a judge has said amid a bitter row at a mental health charity. The slang term, used increasingly since the pandemic, refers to middle-aged white women who angrily rebuke those they view as socially inferior. Sitting in an employment tribunal, a judge has now said that the term is pejorative because it implies the woman is excessively and unreasonably demanding. Use of the term started as an internet meme. It is also associated with excessive use of Facebook, opposition to vaccinations and having a blonde bob haircut. Judge George Alliott made his remarks in a ruling on a claim brought by Sylvia Constance, a 74-year-old black charity worker who has accused bosses of targeting her because of her race and age. In what was described at a tribunal hearing in Watford as a 'trenchant' complaint, female managers at Mencap were accused of acting 'like the stereotypical Karen' by having 'weaponised their privilege and more powerful position' against Constance. 'There is also something very sordid about the way in which white, female management have facilitated racism … [and given] a misogynistic, racist view of the black complainant,' the grievance said. Alliott said the tribunal noted that Karen was 'a pejorative and borderline racist, sexist and ageist term'. Constance, who described herself as black British, joined the charity as a support worker for adults with learning disabilities in Harpenden, Hertfordshire, in 2016. She was based at a residential home that provided individual flats to 11 residents. Five years later, Claire Wilson took over as manager. The tribunal heard that on her arrival Wilson faced 'open hostility' from Constance, who 'sighed' at her, responded with one-word answers and on one occasion shouted at Wilson for 'hassling' her. The pair clashed on several occasions. The manager accused Constance of having 'blinkers on' and being 'too loud'. Wilson suspended Constance in 2021 over claims she had bullied residents and staff. A week later, while an investigation was under way, Constance filed a grievance. By the next year, Mencap managers had dropped the disciplinary process and took no action against Constance. Constance then went on sick leave and filed another grievance, written on her behalf by her friend, Christine Yates. 'The language used by Christine Yates in the document is trenchant,' the tribunal said, citing the reference to the term 'Karen'. The complaint went on to say that 'despite being reinstated', Constance had 'a significant loss of trust and confidence in Harpenden Mencap's current management structure'. It alleged that there was 'clearly a hostile environment for black staff' at the home, which made it 'unsafe' for Constance 'to return to face further victimisation'. The tribunal heard that over subsequent months managers repeatedly attempted to arrange a meeting to discuss the grievance with Constance. However, she refused to attend. A meeting was held in her absence and the grievance was rejected. Constance had failed to return to work after a year and was sacked because of 'an irrevocable breakdown in the relationship' with her bosses. That prompted legal proceedings for unfair dismissal, race and age discrimination and victimisation. The judge has now dismissed all the claims against the charity, saying that there was 'no suggestion that any of the actions of Claire Wilson were prompted by a racist sentiment'.
Forbes
a day ago
- Business
- Forbes
Talent Sustainability: 10 Leadership Moves To Build A Workforce That Lasts
The paradox of simultaneous labor shortages and widespread job seeker rejection underscores the ... More pressing need for leaders to reassess and refine their talent acquisition and sustainability strategies. Here are 10 first steps. Despite employer complaints of unfilled vacancies, millions of qualified candidates—especially recent college graduates and those over 50—struggle to land interviews, let alone offers. This paradox underscores the pressing need for leaders to reassess and refine their talent acquisition and sustainability strategies. 'The unemployment rate for college graduates ages 22 to 27 jumped to 5.3 percent in the past six months ending in May, up from 4.4 percent for the same period a year earlier,' according to a recent Washington Post analysis of Bureau of Labor Statistics data. While college graduates in that age range typically have lower unemployment rates than workers without degrees, this advantage is smaller today than it has been in 30 years. For older workers who also face ageist assumptions when seeking employment, research has found that nearly half of recruiters believe that applicants are too old to consider for a job by age 57. The results of the survey demonstrate that 'millions of older people risk being overlooked for jobs because of entrenched ageism in recruitment, despite companies facing a significant shortage of skilled workers.' Moreover, two in five recruiters reported being pressured by their bosses to hire younger candidates, while nearly two-thirds of HR professionals admitted to making assumptions about candidates based on their age. The most successful leaders–and businesses–will be those focused on talent sustainability across the age spectrum. That requires rethinking how to source for talent and how they are evaluated. Talent Sustainability Blind Spots Companies today face two significant blind spots that hinder their ability to attract and retain top talent. Firstly, most talent strategies ignore the global demographic reality. Secondly, most workforce strategies focus disproportionately on the mythical age sweet spot for hires. Across the globe, countries report increased longevity, combined with decades-long declines in birth rates–a demographic duo that challenges every company's talent sustainability strategy. To offset the decreasing talent pipeline and knowledge drain, leaders must pivot policies, procedures and workplace culture to facilitate the new whole-life career model and benefit from the longevity advantage. 'In the last 100 years, the 65+ age group has grown five times faster than the rest of the population. What's even more surprising are projections that people aged 75+ will constitute the fastest-growing age band in the civilian workforce between now and 2030,' Stephanie Henkenius, principal at Mercer writes. Outdated recruiting strategies and age-based assumptions result in limited talent pools with candidates who are all within the same age range. This highlights the ageism timeline, depicting a mythical sweet spot that excludes talent on both sides of the age spectrum. Younger workers are excluded from workplace opportunities because they lack experience, completely discounting demonstrated potential to learn and adapt. Older workers are often denied opportunities due to age stereotypes and assumptions that overlook their experiences and career aspirations. The ageism timeline shows how age bias and stereotyping hurts talent sustainability at both ends of ... More the age spectrum. As the ageism timeline suggests, both younger and older candidates are often excluded from hiring, development and promotional opportunities. Younger workers eventually move into the mythical sweet spot but then hit the age where exclusion becomes long-lasting or indefinite. Workplace Strategy: What Leaders Can Do Now Talent sustainability is a key leadership strategy. Proactive leaders who understand and respond to these talent blind spots will come out ahead. Below are 10 first steps that leaders can take now to strengthen talent sustainability of all ages. Creating a strong talent sustainability strategy requires ongoing, proactive management. Leaders model the whole-life career model when practices and policies make it clear that employees are valued for their skills, abilities and potential– regardless of age or life stage.
