Page 250 - Discrimination at Work The Psychological and Organizational Bases

SHORE AND GOLDBERG
218
layoff decisions was acceptable, even though it disparately impacts older
workers. The aging of the workforce along with the trend toward early
retirement may represent a large loss in human capital that may be diffi­
cult for organizations to replace. A study done by the Conference Board
(reported in Estabrook, 1993) based on interviews with 400 senior human
resource executives showed that 40% of companies have offered early re­
tirement incentives as part of downsizing. By the year 2005, one out of every
seven workers will be age 55 or older (Estabrook, 1993), suggesting poten­
tial problems with labor shortages. Thus, it behooves organizations and
society more generally to consider ways to keep people in the labor force.
CONCLUSIONS

There are a number of implications of our review and model. One implica­
tion is that many forces are at work when considering the opportunities of
older workers. However, it is clear that being older than others, whether
relative to the immediate manager, the workgroup, or job level, works to
the disadvantage of individuals for most employment opportunities. In ad­
dition, although there is limited evidence that age stereotypes have direct
effects on employment opportunities, more work clearly needs to be done
in this area, particularly in light of the strong and consistent effects involv­
ing age comparisons. That is, research needs to further explore the cognitive
mechanisms that underlie age comparisons, including the potential role of
age stereotypes. Finally, more research needs to examine ways in which
older workers themselves may contribute to employment opportunities.
Maurer (2001) has suggested self-efficacy for learning as one potential in­
fluence on training opportunities for older workers. There may be other
factors, especially when one considers that the ageism inherent in many as­
pects of western culture may negatively affect employee self-perceptions.
Older employees may be given subtle cues about their limited value to the
organization creating a self-fulfilling prophecy for these individuals.
Based on the perspective that social comparison plays a major role in
age discrimination, Figure 9.2 is a model depicting some of the elements
that are likely important in evaluations of employees. Building on Muss-
weiler's (2003) ideas, Fig. 9.2 contains three key steps in evaluation of
employees based on age comparisons. Step 1 involves the selection of the
standard used for comparison purposes. We have discussed the potential
importance of the many different standards of age comparison that are
available when evaluating the employee, including occupational, organi­
zational, industrial, workgroup (coworkers and subordinates), and societal
norms. Although we suspect that the direct manager's age may most likely