ONCE again, the outrageously ageist 'Graduates into Industry' scheme is being advertised (LET, August 13)

Given a choice, employers almost always opt for younger graduates anyway.

To illustrate my point, an adjoining advertisement for a sales correspondent in the same issue specified a graduate under 30, although, as far as I can see, there is no reason why a person of 70 should not be able to do the job as described.

I am against the 'Graduates into Industry' scheme for the following reasons:

It is ageist

It distorts the job market for other graduates

People like myself doing temporary/casual work actually subsidise this scheme through our taxes.

Presumably, the scheme is open to people with 'joke' degrees such as Women's Studies, Media Studies, etc.

The scheme is justified because of the allegedly high unemployment levels among the under 27s. I would like to know the graduate unemployment levels in the 45 to 55 and 55 to 65 age ranges; a lot higher than the under 27s, I suspect!

This country is rife with institutionalised ageism. What percentage of people employed by Lancashire Evening Telegraph over the last 12 months were over 40? I shall be amazed if you dare answer this question!

I ROWLEY, Lower Mead Drive, Burnley.

FOOTNOTE: Our policy is to recruit the best person for the job, regardless of age. Like most companies, we take on young people as trainees, but when we are looking for experienced staff that is the only criteria - experience. I employed a 63-year-old journalist recently - Editor.

Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.