header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
20 April 2007 / Jonathan Swift
Issue: 7269 / Categories: Features , Discrimination , Terms&conditions , Employment
printer mail-detail

Pale, stale, male

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Can compulsory retirement ages survive the onslaught of equality legislation, asks Jonathan Swift

Is it a truth universally acknowledged that an older man in possession of a good fortune must be in want of a discrimination claim? The overwhelming majority of people who have sought the protection of the American Age Discrimination in Employment Act 1967 have been men of a certain age. Hence the rise of the ‘pale stale male’, the stereotype equivalent for discrimination lawyers of the ‘dead white European male’ beloved of social historians. This is not altogether surprising in the US since its Act only seeks to protect those aged 40 and over and, within that class, those with the most to lose have tended to be men in professional and managerial positions.

COMBATING DISCRIMINATION

The prohibition on age discrimination contained within Council Directive 2000/78/EC (the Directive) is of a different nature. It is not aimed simply at discrimination against the old. Instead it seeks to combat unlawful discrimination “on grounds of…age”: in principle providing protection for people

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

Bird & Bird—Gordon Moir

Bird & Bird—Gordon Moir

London tech and comms team boosted by telecoms and regulatory hires

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: 40 years on, has PACE lost its edge?
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
NLJ this week: Stress-testing the City
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
NLJ this week: How sure is ‘sure’ enough?
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
NLJ this week: A deferred prosecution reprieve
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
NLJ this week: Mandelson, Epstein & the court of popular opinion
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll