What is the true impact of “ageism”employment discrimination due to age in the Spanish labor market? In recent years, this term has focused numerous debates in the field of human resources, which is logical given the increasing weight of unemployed people in this age group and the difficulties they report in finding work. But even as these voices gain strength in the social and media sphere, their translation into the design of economic policies continues to support strategies that prove insufficient to tackle a growing problem. which already weighs heavily on the labor market, even in a context of job creation like the current one.
It is logical that the country with the highest unemployment rate in the European Union, 11.2% according to the latest data, sounds the alert on youth unemployment, which exceeds 26.9%, while that of over 45 years old barely reaches 9.2%. These shocking figures justify a “bridge culture” which considers that anticipating the departure of seniors allows juniors to enter the job market. But over the past decade, this vision has proven to be a profound error that has not only failed to help young people access quality employment, but also places our country before an unprecedented challenge due to his inability to maintainand create employment opportunities for veterans.
Over the last five years, the social debate has shifted towards them andMany people use figures from the Public Employment Service (SEPE) which reveal that 57.2% of registered unemployed people are over 45 years old. However, few authors point out that these data are biased by the fact that Young unemployed people have less incentive to register with employment agencies. This, despite the fact that the same documents reveal a paradox; even if seniors are the majority, they barely reach a little more than a third, 35.7%placement of job seekers. A gap of more than 20 points in employment opportunities which increasingly penalizes these workers.
Are the data from the agency dependent on the Ministry of Labor more reliable than those from the Labor Force Survey (EPA) which, as we have seen, shows unemployment rates which clearly penalize young people? The fact is that the two measures are not comparable: the SEPE indicates a percentage of unemployed in each age group only on the total unemployed, while the INE calculates its unemployment rates on the total active population. However, if we apply the same methodology (percentage of total unemployed) to the LFS data, we find a surprise: They don’t match either.
According to the EPA, the weight of unemployed people over 45 falls to 39.9% in unemployment figures compiled by the National Institute of Statistics, which many analysts consider more reliable. Figures which point to a diagnosis, it goes without saying, directly opposite to that of the SEPE. ¿This means that ageism is overrated in our country?
The main thing is that the SEPE publishes a register of people registered as job seekers who meet the conditions to be considered “unemployed” for statistical purposes (who are not working or do not have an employment relationship, are actively seeking a job and are available to join before an offer). The INE carries out a survey and, thanks to it, detects many unemployed people, particularly young people, who do not register with employment agencies.
But it also reveals that there are many “registered unemployed” over 45 years of age who are not classified as unemployed by the EPA, but as inactive, because in reality they have given up actively looking for a job and are not renewing their request only to receive an allowance. or a grant. Added to this are other cases such as permanent discontinuous workers during periods of inactivity who may appear unemployed or inactive depending on whether they are looking for another job. This means that, Even if the SEPE and INE figures seem similar, they hide profound differences in their composition. which should not be ignored. Especially when we’re talking about an issue like ageism.
That the possibility of receiving an allowance or not determines the registered unemployment data is a fact put forward for most economic analyzes to use EPA data, even if those of the SEPE are taken into account because they are monthly, while those of the INE are quarterly. These data explain why many experts consider that the lack of employment among young people remains a priority problem. Although these data also reveal that in recent years The weight of those aged over 45 and 50 in unemployment has increased, The explanation is demographic aging.
From the culture of relief to that of early retirement
The fact that the unemployment rate among seniors is lower than average supports the widely held idea that they are “hoarding” jobs and closing the door to young people. For years, especially during the financial crisis, many companies have used this idea to justify massive layoffs focused on their veteranswho also earn better wages, under regulatory collective bargaining agreements agreed by the unions (which they accepted due to the favorable conditions given to the laid-off workers).
But when activity resumes, there is no change: we are in the presence of a culture of “pre-retirement” which in no way punishes and does not benefit young people, who do not access vacant positions in the same conditions. In fact, until the 2021 labor reform and despite changes in 2012, the recovery from the Great Recession relied on temporary rather than permanent contracts. And the first consequence hit pension sustainabilitywhich, in addition to the “natural” effect of demographic aging, added a significant volume of early retirements that the new contributions from new workers could not cover.
Social security reforms have included raising the legal retirement age and encouraging voluntary delay. But here they come up against a harsh reality: the lack of job opportunities increases after the age of 45 and explains that many people have lost their jobs in their last 20 years careers end up “disappearing” from the job market and those who keep it are limited to “holding on” until they can retire, preferably early and with the best possible pension.
Added to this is the enormous weight of unemployment benefits. According to the SEPE, the group with the largest number of beneficiaries is those over 55, who “mostly” continue to receive a subsidy until they can retire. These people are considered registered unemployed, but in practice many are not because they have given up looking for work and are subsisting on aid and their savings. This explains the gap between the EPA and SEPE data in this age group.
The latest benefit reform did not dare to touch specific aid for those over 52, the conditions of which facilitate this de facto retirement, but it introduced incentives to encourage unemployment and benefits to be made compatible with employment. , as an incentive to “activate” “to these workers. The problem is the same as that of the pension reform: it is understood that working or it is not simply a question of the will of the unemployed.
In this debate, there is information published by the SEPE to which little attention is paid: the placements which are recorded each month. In practice, it is very similar to that of registered contracts, except that it classifies people who started a new job according to whether they were job seekers or not. This nuance is relevant because it shows that, even if those over 45 represent 57.4% of the unemployed They only receive 35.7% of placements from people registered with employment agencies.
Even if logic tells us that the distribution of job seekers’ placements should be proportional to their weight in registered unemployment, the truth is that it is the opposite. Indeed, even if there are fewer job seekers under 25, they obtain more placements than those over 55.
This casts a shadow of doubt on the effectiveness of active employment policies in finding jobs for older unemployed people. We are not only talking about job offers managed by public employment services, whose relevance in job creation, as we reported in elEconomista.es, is almost non-existent.
We are referring to measures such as training courses, incentives for hiring groups with difficult employability and measures that involve a high budget of more than 6 billion dollars per year and which, alongside young people, place those over 45 and beneficiaries of the 52. year old subsidy among its priority groups. However, the results they seem ineffective in the face of the challenge of promoting their employability: Despite the general improvement in employment, They continue to be the furthest behind.
Díaz declares war on ageism
This despite the fact that the Minister of Labor, Yolanda Díaz, demonstrated be very aware of the problem – in fact, she was the first minister to use the term “ageism” in her statements – and reinforced specific measures for “seniors”.
This lack of expectations does not only penalize the unemployed and is one of the reasons slowing down the dynamism of the Spanish labor market. This is often considered to be because older workers are less productive and less “active” than younger workers. but it is an idea that perhaps urgently needs to be banned in the face of demographic change. It is not very sustainable for a 50 year old, who still has 17 years before retirement, to not dare to think about new and better job opportunities. because he is more afraid than other professionals of not being able to re-enter the job market if things go wrong.
A fear that adds to other “disincentives” such as lose seniority or possible severance pay, even in a market where the possibilities of obtaining a permanent contract increased after the last labor reformL. It also reduces their power to negotiate salary increases.
This problem does not only concern workers and the unemployed. Companies moving away from “bidding” for seasoned talent, particularly for highly skilled positions, is contributing to the labor shortage problems plaguing many companies and contributing to widen the productivity gap with the countries around us, which are taking steps to address the challenge of labor shortages.
Faced with this scenario, Díaz has put on the table other proposals whose effectiveness is more doubtful. We are talking about making dismissal more expensive in cases where it is particularly detrimental to groups, with a focus on people over 50. But this idea raises fears that Its objective is to stop the hiring of more than 2 million unemployed 45-year-olds.
