R U OK with ageist hiring attitudes?

Australians are well informed with the RUOK clarion call to check in with colleagues and friends mental health by asking how they are really faring. And today 12th September is the movement’s official RUOK Day.

The RUOK cause and message is a critical one focussing on wellbeing, mental health and suicide prevention. These are some of the most pressing issues of our times impacting all ages, cultures and genders.

There is a plethora of research and evidence on the impact of mental health issues, suicide rates and depression impacting quality of life. And quality of life crosses both the personal and professional with men’s rates of suicide incredibly disturbing.

It’s fair to say that for many, and certainly in the finance and accounting professions, the links are immeasurably intertwined between the personal and professional. After all, a sizeable chunk of self esteem derives from financial, family and meaningful work contributions.

So my question today is a fearless and much needed one: RUOK with ageist hiring attitudes?

It will be a hard question for many to reflect upon as recruiters, partners, HR and hiring managers. It’s never asked and a deep dive may reveal a sad trail of the negative impacts of biased attitudes.

Whilst the accounting and finance sector is enjoying a robust increase of job roles, there is a dearth of female applicants at entry levels. And ageism will be definitely impacting the under 25 and over 50 cohort of professionals.

There will not be a person or recruiter reading this who has not been impacted, directly or indirectly by mental health issues and recruitment process damage.

Ageism & World Health Organisation

Ageism is one of the most destructive and widespread biases in hiring. Even more erroneous than sexism and racism, it impacts everyone at some stage.

And it’s often an intersectional issue that candidates face. Nonsense and unfounded biases and stereotypes cause untold harm, none more than when it comes to finding work and financial stability.

The World Health Organisations Report in 2021 stated ‘Ageism leads to poorer health, social isolation, earlier deaths and cost economies billions: report calls for swift action to implement effective anti-ageism strategies.’

But there is a piece missing around organisations, firms and recruiters in taking responsibility for the harm ageism and stereotypes cause. Whilst there is no specific data on industry depression and suicides rates there is direct correlation to lengthy unemployment, and especially after redundancies and business closures.

In 2024 with the skyrocketing and unrelenting costs of living, the stresses candidates face have been significantly magnified.

AHRI/Human Rights Survey

The 2023 Employing & Retaining Older Workers Survey is compelling reading for all professions and certainly in accounting where the impact reaches across clients and ESG (environmental, social & governance) objectives.

It was reported that over half (56 per cent) of HR professionals say that they are open to recruiting people aged between 50 and 64 “to a large extent”.

Whilst at the same time, just under 18 per cent say that they would be open to recruiting from the same age cohort either “to a small extent” or “not at all”.

In comparison, an overwhelming majority of HR professionals say that they are open to hiring from younger labour pools “to a large extent”, including people aged between 35 and 49 (85 per cent) and people aged between 18 and 34 (82 per cent).

Previously in 2021, their surveys found over two-thirds of organisations seldom or never undertake bias training and of those that do, only 50 per cent include age bias’. This has not moved much, if at all, since.

The report also found that the reluctance by some HR professionals to recruit older workers contradicted the lived experience of employing them, with many reporting no difference between older and younger workers in terms of job performance, concentration, ability to adapt to change, energy levels and creativity.

There is no doubt that these attitudes permeate strongly in the talent attraction within accounting.

It also has a clear impact on retention attitudes with the tacit knowledge that multinational accounting firms in Australia mandate partners retire at 58 or 60 (unless the CEO makes an exception)

How harm is evidenced

There will not be a person who doesn’t relate to at least one of the following directly or indirectly:

• The best friend who cannot face another dismissive rejection.
• The parent who is feeling depressed due to not being able to get interviews because they are over 50 and feel they cannot support their family.
• The spouse who is being discriminated against unfairly and feels so demoralised
• The son or daughter under 25 who faces rejection and loses all interest in life and home
• The ex-colleague who was given an unwanted redundancy at 55 and cannot get back into another job.
• The uncle or aunt who, despite decades of study and experience, is treated like a second-class citizen.
• The single woman over 55 who cannot survive on super and needs to work. She faces a mix of biases with her age and gender, which causes great angst on every level.
• The whippet smart C suite executive who keeps getting rejected and told they are overqualified, which is code for ‘we don’t hire your age’.
• The young university graduate who feels cultural pressure to work but never gets a chance

Reducing harm

1. Embed gratitude and curiosity within every recruitment touchpoint.
2. Check any cultural or individual hiring mindset of ‘ master (almighty employer or recruiter) vs slave (candidate at our beck and call)
3. Check your own bias scotomas. Apply an open mind and teachable spirit to each applicant. .
4. Set up respectful and kindly worded emails acknowledging receipt applications. Automated ones are initially fine. But always have good email systems.
5. Ensure candidates who have been interviewed are communicated with regularly, even if there is no news or decision.
6. Interviews - treat them as equality driven two-way business discussions. Be mindful of discrimination (confirmation biases) by asking unrelated questions.
7. Contact unsuccessful candidates immediately once a decision has been made. Call them and share reasons with empathy and value added feedback.
8. Never ever ghost candidates after interviews and contact.

Apart from the human benefits of caring and responsible recruitment processes there are another benefits here. The positive impact on PR and business brand trust can be immense.

Candidates are connected to others and may be potential clients and referral opportunities The way you treat them can have a marked impact on your reputation and growth.

So I ask again, RUOK with ageist hiring attitudes?

Sue Parker owner of DARE Group Australia is a communications, job search and career specialist.