THE 18 TOP firms - including British Airways, BT, Marks and Spencer and the Post Office - which have got together to launch a campaign to fight discrimination against employees on age grounds are quite right, even if the question of financial costs overshadows their concern for the workers.
For, though they may be realising that it generally costs more in redundancy and early-retirement pay-outs to axe the older members of the workforce, it seems they are waking up to another deficit when the over-50s depart.
This is that businesses lose vast amounts of experience and reliability in the process - qualities that have literally been years in the making.
Yet, so often, when cuts have to be made, it is the older workers who are the automatic choice.
And, conversely, when vacancies are created they are frequently excluded on age grounds.
This drive by leading firms, to both retain and tap this generally disregarded reserve of skills and dedication, sets an example for others to follow. One problem, however, is that example might not be enough.
Other countries, for instance, have found laws are necessary against age discrimination in the workplace.
And, perhaps, Britain might do well to legislate in this area too - not as an expression of political correctness, but for the sound commonsense reason of helping business to stay competitive and efficient.
Two instances reported today by the new high-powered Employers Forum on Age, which is behind today's campaign, show just how valid that point is.
They disclose that the B and Q store at Macclesfield in Cheshire, staffed entirely by older workers, is 18 per cent more profitable than other stores, whereas the W.H. Smith stores chain has found that workers in their twenties are four times as likely to leave as older colleagues.
But just one point: we note BT's membership of the anti-ageism forum.
Is this the same BT that, not so long ago, was getting rid of older workers by the thousand and dishing out golden handshakes of pools-win proportions?
If so, come back Busby, old fellow.
Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article