Is this an ageist statement in job posting?

[measureofmydreams]

A senior level colleague posted about a job vacancy our company has. One of the benefits he listed was working with a 'young' dynamic team. The inference is that the applicant will be similar.

What relevance is it what the age of the team is, or any other characteristic.

What are your views please? do you consider this discriminatory language?

Could he have meant that the team (rather than the people in it) was young?

I would read that as the team is young / new and getting established. I wouldn't assume it related to the team members ages.

Possibly... Equally they could be using young to mean the team is relatively newly formed?

I don't think it sounds discriminatory, it's just giving a snapshot of what the culture is like.

I've applied for similarly advertised jobs (though usually in the context of being start-ups) even though I was in my 40s / 50s, I didn't think they were excluding older people by the way they worded it. More saying 'we are not staid and boring'.

The wording is ambiguous. But the combination of young and dynamic suggests that the person putting the advert together was hoping for a young person. The advert will put off experienced candidates.

This would be my first thought too. I know this is an unpopular view but even if it was describing the people, I'd rather know the vibe they're going for and what they're seeking before wasting time applying.

It's not wording I would use on a job advert or use to promote a role.

The EHRC agrees that 'young' and 'dynamic' could be viewed as discriminatory.
https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/guidance/guidance-discriminatory-adverts

How does this affect you op?

I would read that and think they were trying to get someone cheap rather than experienced. I’d much prefer it if job ads clearly showed all the discriminatory views that the employer had. That way you wouldn’t have to waste your time applying.

I also read it as it’s a newly formed team, rather than the people in the team are young.

It’s pretty common terminology among start ups. But if it’s not a start up or a newly form term it’s an odd thing to say.

Thank you for your views, there's an interesting balance of perspectives to consider. The team is not newly established.

I'd apply for the job if I wanted it. I get along with young people & I like the idea of a dynamic environment.

I would read this as referring to the team members, 100%. No-one refers to a team as Young in an advert - new, newly-formed perhaps but not young. And Yes, the inference is "we want more young dynamic people" as why else mention this at all!
It really annoys me that mature/experienced people are assumed not to be dynamic!

Yes, it’s definitely ageist.

Yes, it is clear ageism.

Probably ageist even if unconsciously but like others have said I would prefer to know this upfront and not waste my time. (Even when I was younger I avoided jobs that mentioned dynamic teams, social clubs, team bonding away days, etc as I knew that wouldn't be my vibe)

As a middle aged woman if I read in a job add something about a 'young, dynamic' team I would not apply because I would assume they purposely put this in to attract younger workers and to deter older ones, so not the type of organisation I would want to work for.

Using 'dynamic' is fine but why the need to add 'young'? it could be described instead as 'newly-formed' or 'new' if the purpose was to convey in the ad that this is recently created team in the organisations structure.

So yeah, dodgy and ageist as far as I am concerned.

Yes - wouldn't be compliant where I work to use that

It's ageist to imply that only the young can be dynamic.

But, also, what happened to the idea of diversity? A team made up solely of 'young & dynamic' does not seem a good idea.

Yes it's inappropriate and poorly written. We have new guidance to try to encourage more neutral language, particularly in terms of gender stereotypes, job adverts have traditionally favoured masculine celebrated traits eg "strong", we're being encouraged to value the softer skills that women are more tended to demonstrate such as being empathetic. Language matters, I suspect the author knew that tbh, it's why they do it, he knows what he wants and isn't looking to be inclusive.

It’s discriminatory. Either:

The hiring manager knows what they want (young, dynamic) and doesn’t care / hasn’t thought about the fact it’s ageist

The hiring manager is fully aware it’s discriminatory and has written it down such that if anyone challenges it they can say oh no I meant the TEAM are young / new / dynamic…

@RupertCampbellsBack Thank you that's really helpful. It was posted by a senior level colleague on social media re a vacancy in our company on their team. We are in professional services and not a start up.

I agree. No way would I interpret it to refer to the length of time the team has been in existence. They want someone young. It's ageist.