How does Rest Less make money
We make money through advertising and commission from affiliate links, which enable us to offer Rest Less as a free service to our users. The content on this page may use affiliate links, which track traffic from our website to a third party provider and enable us to receive a commission or payment from any traffic we refer.
* Affiliate links on this page have an * next to them. We place enormous importance on our editorial independence and the integrity of our content which means that we will never change how we write about something as a result of an affiliate link.
While there’s plenty of great work happening to make the UK workplace more inclusive, ageism is still widespread – and nowhere is this more obvious than in hiring processes.
According to research from the Centre for Ageing Better, over a third (36%) of 50-69 year-olds feel disadvantaged applying for jobs because of their age.
Stats like these should prompt employers to scrutinise their hiring processes to ensure they’re age-inclusive. Beyond the clear social responsibility of creating equal opportunities for everyone, multigenerational workplaces are thought to boost business growth through better retention, productivity, and innovation. So organisations that don’t pay attention to age-inclusive recruitment could be missing out on a valuable pathway to success.
But what’s tricky is that while some examples of ageism are intentional and obvious, others are unconscious and covert – with the latter offering a unique challenge for companies wanting to be more age-inclusive.
To help employers identify these issues, Ian Wilkinson, our Sales Operations & Partnership Manager at Rest Less, recently shared his seven silent saboteurs of UK talent acquisition. We look at each below.
1. Capping years of experience
Most employers know that they can’t include overt age limits in job postings. However, to attract the most talented candidates, it’s important to pay close attention to the language used in any advert, to ensure it’s not biased towards certain age groups.
Ian warns employers against using words or phrases that filter out veteran CVs and suggest they’re looking exclusively for younger applicants – for example, ‘no more than five years of experience’. According to Age UK, other examples of this are ‘recent graduates’ or ‘enthusiastic young people’.
When writing job postings, employers should focus on the skills needed for the role, rather than years of experience. You can find more advice on how to do this in our article: 5 tips for creating age-inclusive job adverts.
2. The ‘digital native’ trap
Another mistake Ian says that employers make during the hiring process is assuming that older adults aren’t as ‘tech savvy’ as younger generations.
For example, recent research from the Centre for Ageing Better revealed that a third (32%) of UK residents thought that people become less competent at using technology as they get older – an assumption that simply isn’t true.
Ian says, “This is one of those persistent myths that really needs to be put to bed. The Centre for Ageing Better has done some brilliant work showing that digital literacy is actually a matter of exposure and opportunity, not the year you were born. In fact, many older workers have been using professional technology since the dawn of the personal computer.
“What’s more, the CIPD has pointed out that the real issue isn’t a lack of ability, but a lack of investment. Employers are statistically less likely to offer digital upskilling to staff over 50. But when you give older workers the same training as everyone else, that supposed tech gap virtually disappears.”
Another important point on this is that including the term ‘digital native’ in job descriptions is increasingly viewed as a form of ageism. Earlier this year, civil servants were instructed to stop using the phrase, and German courts recently ruled that employers using it in job postings could risk discriminating against older applicants. Again, this proves the importance of focusing on the skills and value applicants possess, rather than age.
3. The ‘overqualified’ rejection
Many older applicants are turned away from job opportunities because they’re seen as ‘overqualified’.
At times, this may be used as a veiled excuse for ageist stereotyping; at others, it might reflect an employer’s concern that someone with extensive experience won’t stay in the role long.
Either way, it’s a perception that needs to change. Older adults with a wealth of experience can bring plenty of benefits to organisations, Ian says, including the potential for intergenerational knowledge sharing.
“When you bring in someone with deep experience, you aren’t just filling a role: you’re gaining a built-in mentor for your more junior staff. It’s a boost to productivity that you just don’t get with a less experienced hire.”
And for employers concerned about overqualified employees leaving, it’s important to remember that research suggests hiring over-50s can positively affect retention. Multiple studies show that older workers are generally more satisfied at work and less likely to switch jobs than younger age groups.
“The experience over 50s offer is exactly what brings stability to a team,” Ian says. “These individuals have navigated dozens of crises and economic shifts before, which makes them incredibly resilient.”
4. The salary assumption
Aside from retention concerns, highly-experienced older applicants are often dismissed because hiring managers assume they’ll want a larger salary, Ian tells us.
Of course, it’s generally true that more experienced workers have higher salary expectations – and rightly so. But it’s worth remembering that it’s up to an employer to set the pay for a role, and for an applicant to decide whether it works for them. Every applicant is different, and while always important, salary might not be everyone’s top priority.
“They might be happy to trade a slightly higher salary for a shorter commute, more flexible hours, or the chance to work on a specific type of project,” Ian says. “By being open and having that conversation early on, companies often find that their budget and the candidate’s needs align perfectly. It’s about treating people as individuals rather than numbers on a spreadsheet.”
So, if employers are up front about salary expectations from the beginning and willing to have candid conversations throughout the hiring process, they might find themselves getting experienced candidates at a great value.
5. The ‘cultural fit’ excuse
Alongside being ‘overqualified’ and not being classed as a ‘digital native’, Ian points out that ‘cultural fit’ is sometimes used by employers to dismiss older applicants. He describes this as “using ‘vibes’ to exclude anyone who doesn’t match the office age average.”
He continues, “Cultural fit has unfortunately become a bit of a ‘legal mask’ for excluding people who don’t look or act like the rest of the team. The CIPD has been quite vocal about how dangerous this phrase can be, as it often leads to a workforce that’s far too similar. If ‘cultural fit’ just means everyone is the same age and goes to the same pub after work, you’re heading for a diversity crisis.
“Under the Equality Act 2010, using ‘fit’ as a reason to reject someone can actually be seen as indirect discrimination. We should be talking about ‘cultural add’ instead: i.e. looking for people who bring a new perspective or a different life experience that the company is currently missing.”
Ian’s attitude is backed up by research. Data shows that companies committed to diversity and inclusion perform significantly better than those that aren’t. Diverse teams lead to better morale, innovation, problem-solving, and general business success.
6. Exclusion from learning programmes
As Ian explains, even when older adults are hired, unfortunately, employers don’t always give them the best opportunities for success – especially when it comes to upskilling. In fact, research shows that older adults are less likely to be included in workplace training than other age groups.
For example, this study by City and Guilds Group found that only 53% of people aged 55+ took part in formal workplace training over five years, compared to 67% of 35-54 year olds and 83% of 18-34 year olds. This resulted in less than half of older workers involved in the study believing they had all the required skills to succeed at work.
With the rising retirement age and cost of living causing people to work longer, the old logic – that avoids using resources to upskill workers aged 50+ because they might retire soon – is outdated and useless in many modern cases. This is especially true considering older workers’ higher retention rates over younger generations.
The ‘you can’t teach an old dog new tricks’ stereotype is also outdated (not that it was ever true in the first place). Despite popular belief, we don’t suddenly lose our ability to learn new skills once we reach a certain age. This is not only supported by scientific research but also by anecdotal evidence. Here at Rest Less, we’ve showcased many stories of over-50s making career changes, going back to university, or generally succeeding at something completely new.
Therefore, as Kate Carr, Employment and Skills Manager at Business in the Community, says, “It is crucial that employers support all workers, regardless of age, to learn and develop in their roles. [… E]mployers who fail to invest in developing the skills of this crucial talent pool could be missing a trick.”
7. Redundancy selection bias
Ian’s final silent saboteur refers to retention rather than acquisition, but it’s no less important. While it’s against the law to make people redundant because of their age, he says that certain age groups may be at higher risk of redundancy than others.
“It often cuts both ways. During a restructure, some firms fall back on ‘last in, first out,’ which tends to unfairly hit younger workers. On the flip side, we often see older workers targeted because they’re on higher salaries and are seen as a ‘quick win’ for the balance sheet.”
Legal and General’s 2021 Working Late report, which looked at the experiences of UK over-50s for over a decade, saw that this demographic was 17% more likely to face redundancy than younger workers.
Five years on, we’re hopeful that this has changed for the better. But historic data like this serves as an important reminder that hiring isn’t the only workplace arena where ageism is present, and organisations should work to make every aspect of their business as age-inclusive as possible.
Final thoughts…
In an age where companies are taking strides to be more age-inclusive and reap the benefits of a multigenerational workforce, Ian assures us that paying attention to these ‘silent saboteurs’ can make a massive difference to the success of your organisation.
“These unconscious biases act as an invisible filter that drains talent out of a business before it even has a chance to shine. The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) is quite clear that even if a company has the best intentions, these underlying assumptions lead to discriminatory outcomes.
“If you aren’t actively looking for these biases, you risk making business decisions based on stereotypes rather than facts,” Ian continues. “And from a purely practical standpoint, ignoring these biases only worsens the skills shortage many UK firms are currently facing.”
We hope that these silent saboteurs not only give employers food for thought about how to make their businesses more age-inclusive, but also raise awareness about the challenges older workers face in the world of work – from navigating the job market to facing redundancy.
For further help and support on making your business more age-inclusive, you can email us at [email protected] or get in touch here.
Have any of these silent saboteurs resonated with you? Or do you have any more you’d like to share? We’re interested to hear from you in the comments.
Join the discussion
Read our full commenting terms and guidelines