Mandatory Retirement Policies
One of the most clear-cut examples of institutional ageism is the presence of mandatory retirement policies in some industries. While the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) generally prohibits mandatory retirement at a certain age, there are some exceptions for roles with extremely high physical requirements, like airline pilots and some law enforcement officers. In practice, however, these policies can be used to legitimize the removal of older workers to make room for younger, often lower-paid, employees.
For example, former Vice President Al Gore stepped down from Apple's board due to the company's age-based restrictions for its directors, despite mandatory retirement being more the exception than the rule in most corporate America positions. Even without an explicit age-based policy, some companies may pressure or incentivize older employees to accept early retirement offers, a practice sometimes referred to as "forced retirement". The Urban Institute found that 55% of new retirees in 2014 felt "forced or partly forced" out of their last job.
Biased Hiring and Promotion Practices
Institutional ageism is pervasive in hiring and promotion, often stemming from unconscious biases and stereotypes about older and younger workers. Companies may use coded language in job descriptions, such as "digital native" or "energetic and fast-paced," to subtly signal a preference for younger candidates. Alternatively, they may overlook older candidates for roles, assuming they are less adaptable to new technology or unmotivated for career growth.
Research cited on LinkedIn indicates that 59% of job seekers aged 50 and older believe their age is an obstacle during hiring. A Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco study found that applicants aged 29 to 31 received 35% more callbacks than equally qualified applicants aged 64 to 66. Beyond hiring, older employees are often marginalized by being excluded from key meetings, denied training opportunities, or passed over for promotions in favor of less-experienced younger colleagues. This practice is sometimes intended to create an unwelcoming environment that encourages older employees to leave voluntarily.
Ageism in Healthcare Systems
Institutional ageism in healthcare can have serious consequences for a person's well-being. This can manifest through explicit policies or implicit biases that shape how medical care is administered. For example, during the COVID-19 pandemic, some states' crisis standards of care favored younger patients over older adults when allocating scarce resources like ventilators.
Another example is the exclusion of older adults from clinical trials. A 2023 study found that between 1998 and 2015, 30% of clinical trials published in top medical journals had an upper age limit, and 90% did not provide a justification. This underrepresentation of older adults in research means there is a lack of evidence for the safety and effectiveness of some medical interventions within this demographic, potentially leading to overtreatment or undertreatment later in life.
Comparison Table: Institutional Ageism in the Workplace vs. Healthcare
| Aspect | Workplace Ageism | Healthcare Ageism |
|---|---|---|
| Core Mechanism | Discriminatory policies and practices regarding employment terms, conditions, and privileges | Biased treatment and systemic practices that affect medical access and quality of care |
| Example Policies | Mandatory retirement, biased job descriptions, unequal access to training | Prioritizing younger patients during resource scarcity, excluding older patients from clinical trials |
| Implicit Bias | Assumptions that older workers are less tech-savvy, less adaptable, or unmotivated | Assumptions that health issues like joint pain are "normal aging" rather than treatable conditions |
| Negative Effects | Reduced financial security, unemployment, stress, depression, lack of career growth | Poorer physical and mental health outcomes, increased healthcare costs, decreased quality of life |
| Legal Protections | ADEA protects employees 40+ from discrimination | Age Discrimination Act of 1975 protects against age discrimination in federally-funded programs |
| Addressing Strategy | Standardized hiring, bias training, inclusive policies, reverse mentoring | Provider education, patient-centered care, policy reform, inclusive research |
Conclusion
Institutional ageism is not merely a collection of isolated, negative attitudes but rather a systemic issue built into the policies and practices of organizations and institutions. From mandatory retirement rules and coded job descriptions to biased medical treatment and exclusion from research, these forms of ageism harm individuals and perpetuate harmful stereotypes. Recognizing the subtle and overt ways ageism is legitimized within our systems is the first step toward dismantling these barriers and creating a more equitable society for all age groups. By promoting awareness, advocating for policy changes, and implementing inclusive practices, institutions can lead the way in fostering environments that value people for their contributions, not their age.
For more information on addressing age discrimination, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) offers resources and guidance. [https://www.eeoc.gov/age-discrimination]
