Letter: Economic nonsense of age discrimination

From Mr Roger Holloway

Sir: So Labour are to outlaw age bias at work (report, 7 September). Well, I will vote for that, being 56, and I am sure there are many fellow citizens, fit and healthy and wanting to work, but "over the hill", who feel as strongly as I do about this.

Apart from the total economic nonsense of having a vast army of "early retired" and unemployed over 50-year-olds, when the official retirement age for women is 60 and for men is 65, it is a violation of our human rights. We should be treated equally on merit as individuals and not categorised as being too old in such a mindless, wasteful and humiliating way.

Although now self-employed, I do occasionally see a job advertised in the Independent that catches my eye - "that's the job for me, I have the skill, experience and motivation" - then I read "The ideal candidate will be 25-35 years old"or "You should be between the ages of 23 and 55". This discrimination is serious for us all, not just those who are above a certain age.

Retiring from full-time work at 65 or 60 is no longer a realistic goal in the present climate, but the majority of pension schemes are geared to a full working life.

Those not yet affected by age discrimination should think about it - it's their turn next.

Yours faithfully,

Roger Holloway

Southsea,

Hampshire

7 September