header-logo header-logo

04 September 2014
Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Discrimination by Generation Y

Generation Y employees (those under 35 years old) are the age group most likely to discriminate against older employees and those who work flexibly, a report has revealed.

They are also the group most likely to feel they have suffered sex discrimination. However, their support for employment rights does not always extend to those with young families, employees in their 60s or flexible workers, according to a study of 1,000 workers by employment law solicitors Doyle Clayton

The report, Age Before Beauty?, conducted by Censuswide Research,  notes that the negative and discriminatory attitude of many Generation Y employees is particularly important as they form a large element of the workforce and are often frontline managers involved in appraising, monitoring and recruiting staff.

Tina Wisener, partner at Doyle Clayton, says: “It is surprising that Generation Y has the most negative attitude towards flexible working and are most likely to see older colleagues and those who work from home or part-time as less committed to their jobs. 

“Generation Y are characterised as needing to be treated with kid gloves, on the other hand they are the very people whose attitudes make them likely to object to, and perhaps even thwart, initiatives to include working mums and older workers—the people who most appreciate being able to work flexibly. People in their 50s and 60s applying for a job have a lower chance of a fair hearing when interviewed or appraised by Generation Y.”

Wisener advises businesses to ensure appropriate training and coaching for managers, and to provide support to them to ensure part-time and home-workers are included as much as possible and not excluded from training and team activities.

She suggests businesses monitor the workforce to make sure part-time and home workers are not systematically being excluded from training and promotions.

 

Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ling Ong, London Market FOIL

NLJ Career Profile: Ling Ong, London Market FOIL

Ling Ong, partner at Weightmans and president of London Market FOIL, discusses her biggest inspirations, the challenges of AI and the importance of tackling unconscious bias

DWF—Imogen Francis

DWF—Imogen Francis

Director and head of IP team joins in Birmingham

Penningtons Manches Cooper—five promotions

Penningtons Manches Cooper—five promotions

Firm boosts partnership and costs practice with five senior promotions

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll