Age discrimination occurs when a decision is made on the basis of a person’s age. In the workplace, these are most often decisions about being employed in the first place, winning promotions or being unfairly dismissed. Should discrimination against older workers be made illegal?
Older workers are generally just as capable as the young are. Since age is not necessarily an indication of lower ability, treating a person less favorably on the basis of their age alone is just as unreasonable and unfair as doing so on the basis of his or her sex, race or religion. It would also be inconsistent with the principles of equal treatment and non-discrimination, which are at the heart of the notion of individual rights, which most modern democracies espouse.
If a specific older worker truly has, say, less concentration or manual strength than a younger worker, and this objectively makes that candidate less qualified for the particular job, then employers could come to a determination regarding the employment decision in the case, based on relative lack of suitability for the job—rather than merely on age. Age by itself should never be a determinant.
There is nothing to indicate that older workers are not as productive and essential to the work place as younger workers. Indeed the contrary may be the case. The benefits of having a mixed-age work force, which better reflects the wider society, may bring a crucial competitive advantage to the employing organization. Older workers could take on a mentoring role for younger workers who may not have as wide a range of life skills and experiences as older workers may. Conversely, older workers may be able to benefit from the technical skills of younger workers who are more aware of innovative technologies.
Ultimately, any decision should be based on general principles concerning the rights of individuals to achieve their true potential, the needs of companies to meet the economic challenges ahead and the need for laws governing the rights of individuals to be consistent across all spheres of public life. Therefore, in my view, discrimination against older workers should definitely be made illegal.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 123, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Indeed,
...l to the work place as younger workers. Indeed the contrary may be the case. The benef...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, conversely, if, may, regarding, so, then, therefore, in my view
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.5418719212 142% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 6.10837438424 196% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 8.36945812808 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 5.94088669951 118% => OK
Pronoun: 10.0 20.9802955665 48% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 31.9359605911 125% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.75862068966 139% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1593.0 1207.87684729 132% => OK
No of words: 309.0 242.827586207 127% => OK
Chars per words: 5.15533980583 5.00649968141 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1926597562 3.92707691288 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.04563930385 2.71678728327 112% => OK
Unique words: 182.0 139.433497537 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.588996763754 0.580463131201 101% => OK
syllable_count: 513.9 379.143842365 136% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.57093596059 108% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.6157635468 22% => OK
Article: 2.0 1.56157635468 128% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.71428571429 117% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.931034482759 107% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 3.65517241379 55% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 20.5024630542 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 94.8976056366 50.4703680194 188% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.75 104.977214359 126% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.75 20.9669160288 123% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.75 7.25397266985 79% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 6.9802955665 72% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 2.75862068966 109% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 2.91625615764 137% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.206443888911 0.242375264174 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0827172717366 0.0925447433944 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0670902690521 0.071462118173 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.127508599476 0.151781067708 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0438516553446 0.0609392437508 72% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.7 12.6369458128 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 53.1260098522 71% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 10.9458128079 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 11.5310837438 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.17 8.32886699507 110% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 55.0591133005 153% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 9.94827586207 156% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.3980295567 115% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 10.5123152709 152% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 76.5 Out of 90
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.