John G Walker johngwalker at tiscali.co.uk
Fri Jun 1 13:05:34 UTC 2007

On Fri, 1 Jun 2007 13:47:52 +0100 (BST) Jason Clifford
<jason at ukfsn.org> wrote:

> On Fri, 1 Jun 2007, paul at ma1.se wrote:
> > why?
> > 
> > I think ageist job advertising is as offensive as "no blacks or 
> > coloureds" on guest house front windows back in the 1950's
> Exactly in what way did "no blacks or no irish (this carried on long
> after no blacks was stopped" represent a genuine aspect of the job?
> The fact is that there are jobs that are well suited to people who
> are younger or less experienced due to the nature of the job. You
> will note that the actual posting causing this stated young OR less
> experienced.
> Similarly there are jobs that are better suited to older or more 
> experienced people. Should those be required to be advertised in a 
> misleading manner to?
> I think I'd rather see ads that honestly reflect the job rather than
> ones that pander to stupid PC interpretations.

This makes the assumption that "young" and "less experienced" are
synonymous or in some way comparable.

If you're looking for a less experienced job applicant, say so. Why
complicate matters by including irrelevant criteria? It's in the nature
of things that most applicants for such a job will be young, but it's
by no means certain. And it's presumably not necessary, so don't say it,

 All the best,
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk

More information about the GLLUG mailing list