Vacancies that set an age limit are discriminatory

Vacancies that set an age limit are discriminatory

  • Although companies think about economic profitability, they forget that while doing so they exclude.

  • The SCJN determined that the requirement is discriminatory in 2014, but it continues to be perpetuated today.

When looking for a job on traditional platforms or ads, it is common to read an age limit. This, supported by stereotypes or stigmas associated with age, in the case of young people refers to little professional experience; meanwhile, the elderly have on their foreheads the sign of little adaptation to digitization, changes or flexibility; However, all contractual requirements are linked to economic profitability, but companies forget that the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) determined that placing an age limit on vacancies makes them discriminatory.

Despite the fact that the review protection was granted in 2014, the companies continue with bad practices.

The origin of the determination dates back to 2007 when a person published vacancies for the restaurant industry in the newspaper and three people filed lawsuits for moral damages, considering that the age ranges were discriminatory. Given the fact, a Civil Judge of the Superior Court of Justice of the Federal District did not grant the protection because the company only set the contracting parameters.

Faced with a resolution that did not take into account the right to non-discrimination and the right to free access to employment, the actors filed an appeal and this was confirmed until February 2013.

And it is that the age limit “It blatantly violates the dignity of people, by promoting exclusion based on age thus generating a vulnerable group”, says Mr. Héctor Musalem Oliver in his chronicle “Age as a factor of discrimination in the labor market”.

That, among other points of defense, made the Collegiate Court in Civil Matters of the First Circuit pass sentence, but again the amparo was denied. Between appeals and review resources, the complainants never gave up until the hiring principle was confronted with the principle of equality in the field of employment.

Read:  The Mexican consumer with environmental responsibility

By majority vote On November 12, 2014, the appeal for review was resolved in favor of the complainants.

Despite being discriminatory, vacancies with age limits are still present

The world of work has evolved to such an extent that equality, equity and inclusion are a key point for the development and growth of the business. In this scenario, the condition of the person does not matter as long as they meet the competencies and can perform effectively.

However, vacancies continue to perpetuate age-discriminatory requirements with the profitability of your company in mind.

It is easy to find the perpetuation of discrimination in job boards, for example, in Indeed, by entering the keyword “lawyer”, the vacancy for Counselor and Information Advisor of the company US Live Digital Marketing LLC is revealed and in the complete job description can be read: age 25 to 50 years. Although it takes a wide age range, this should not exist according to the determination of the SCJN.

Read more: