This op-ed was originally published in The Straits Times on 24 October 2022.
One in two workers in Singapore said he or she has experienced workplace discrimination in the past five years, according to a survey of 1,000 workers by gender advocacy group the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) and consumer research company Milieu Insight.
Of this group, 35 per cent said they had been discriminated against on the basis of age – the second-most common reason cited, after race (41 per cent).
In view of Singapore’s ageing population, rising life expectancy and low fertility rate, how we address age discrimination in the workforce will have an impact in the coming decades.
How young is too old?
Who is considered “old” in the workplace? Both international and local research suggests that workers begin to experience age-based discrimination in their 40s, when they find themselves being offered fewer training opportunities, overlooked for promotions and targeted for redundancy.
Experiencing age-based discrimination in one’s 40s is remarkably early, given that the retirement age in Singapore is 63, and workers can be offered re-employment until they turn 67. It is even more concerning when we consider that Singapore’s retirement and re-employment ages are set to be raised to 65 and 70, respectively, by 2030.
If workplace ageism is not adequately tackled, older workers may be at risk of discrimination for nearly half their working lives. This should not sit well with a country that is trying to promote active ageing.
Negative stereotypes
Tackling it will require addressing mindsets, with a view to fairness and compassion, and recognising that older workers, with their institutional knowledge and experience, are invaluable to the workplace.
Indeed, ageism is largely driven by prejudices that employers and colleagues have against older workers being stubborn and less adaptable, as well as lacking physical capabilities and technological competence. Whether consciously or unconsciously, employers and colleagues use these stereotypes to justify discriminatory behaviour.
The economic losses of such behaviour can be substantial: A study in the United States found that economic activity lost by older Americans’ inability to find work, change careers or earn promotions due to ageism cost the economy US$850 billion (S$1.2 trillion) in lost gross domestic product in 2018.
According to the Aware-Milieu survey, the most common discrimination scenarios faced by workers aged 45 and above involved them being disadvantaged by company policies or practices due to their age and other characteristics; being subjected to discriminatory employment practices in relation to performance appraisal and promotion; and experiencing workplace harassment.
One woman who sought help at Aware’s Workplace Harassment and Discrimination Advisory was given a poor performance appraisal at work just before she reached the eligible age for re-employment. Although she had performed well during her time at the company prior to this, her service was terminated shortly after the appraisal without feedback or discussion regarding her performance.
At a focus group discussion organised by the Singapore Alliance for Women in Ageing in June this year, one participant spoke about younger colleagues telling her she should retire as she is already above 60, even though she is still able and willing to work.
Other participants said they were made to feel guilty for standing in the way of younger colleagues who could not move up to more senior job positions.
These tensions can create an unconducive and sometimes hostile work environment for older workers.Notably, the Aware-Milieu survey found that the top reason cited by those aged 55 and above for not reporting their experience was fear of professional retaliation, such as sustaining damage to their reputation or receiving negative testimonials.
While this is a common fear that victim-survivors of workplace discrimination have, retaliation from employers can be particularly detrimental to older workers, as their chances of securing a new job are often already slimmer compared with younger workers.
How to tackle the issue
The survey also asked discrimination victims who did not file official reports to describe their ideal hypothetical outcome of reporting. Nearly 30 per cent said they hoped to see the “enactment of a clear anti-discrimination and grievance handling policy within the company” – which suggests an absence of such policies or lack of effective policy communication in companies at present.
This can be easily rectified if companies implement well-defined anti-discrimination policies that cover ageism.
Employees should also be trained to recognise and report discrimination, as well as support colleagues who might be experiencing discrimination.
There are hopeful signs. At last year’s National Day Rally, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong announced that the Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices would soon be enshrined in law. We hope that this law will also clearly define direct and indirect forms of discrimination, as well as discrimination-based harassment.
The list of protected characteristics should include age and gender, and workers should be protected against discrimination throughout the full employment cycle. This way, we hope ageism at work can reach its long overdue expiry date, sooner rather than later.
Ong Soh Chin
Ong Soh Chin is president of Aware, which is a member of the Singapore Alliance for Women in Ageing.
