Report on Publicly Invited Research

（Publicly Invited Research 2001-2002）
Research on Age Discrimination against Women
Representative for research:
Hideo OKAMOTO (Professor, Department of Sociology, Faculty of Humanities, Sophia University)
Nami OOTSUKI (Researcher at National Women’s Education Center, Japan)

1. Purpose of the Research

Recently, the institutional framework has been improved for working women and explicit discrimination against women is decreasing. In employment, however, many women face age discrimination, experiencing difficulties in changing jobs and getting reemployed.

Today as Japanese traditional employment system is undergoing drastic changes, age limits are also eroding. While this can be considered as a chance to increase women’s employment opportunities, relaxed age limit is discussed only in the context of unemployment and reemployment of middle-aged and older men.

The objective of this research is to clarify how women’s employment opportunities are reduced by age discrimination. Is the basis of age discrimination against women different from that against men? What kind of gender concepts cause such differences? We aim to identify these issues, and get a clearer picture of age discrimination through analysis and examination of the survey results.

2. Questionnaire Survey

Subject: Women aged between 25 and 54 living in Nerima-ward, Tokyo, as of January
1, 2002
(Nerima-ward was selected from a comprehensive perspective including sampling benefits due to its similarity of women age distribution compared with the whole of Tokyo, and easier posting procedure of Basic Resident Register.)
Sampling: Random sampling with equal interval from Basic Resident Register (systematic random sampling)
Distribution method: Mailing (distributed in March 2002), one reminder card was sent.
Number of distributed questionnaires: 2046
Valid response: 1043 (valid response rate 50.1%)

The survey showed that about 30 percent of ordinary women living in a big city experienced age discrimination in job offer/employment. Since the target was not limited to those who had experience of job hunting, the proportion would become larger if survey is conducted only on people who have experience of job hunting. In addition, respondents, both regular and non-regular employees, were asked their age limit experiences at the youngest age once. This means we used the most conservative estimate of age limit experiences to survey age discrimination experiences, therefore it can be said that about 30% of the respondents experienced age discrimination.

Chart 1: Percentage of people who experienced age limits in job offer/employment (%)


Asked if “elimination of age limit in employment” was “necessary for you,” about 90% of the respondents replied “necessary” (great extent plus some extent). In particular, among those who are currently unemployed and searching for jobs, the percentage of people who replied that elimination was necessary was the highest. This indicates that age limits are a serious concern and obstacle for people who are looking for employment. Also, about 90% of respondents have the feeling that age discrimination exists, and this possibly discourages women’s willingness to participate in the labor market. Even though women want to get reemployed or change jobs, they tend to give up trying because they fully realize there is deep-rooted age discrimination.

Chart 2: How necessary is the “elimination of age limit” to you?


Secondly, with respect to the concept of age limits, the survey showed that respondents had different concept of age limit of men and women. While about 95% of them thought that age discrimination against men aged between 25 and 35 was “ridiculous,” when it came to discrimination against women of same age, less respondents thought so. Another finding was that whereas more respondents aged over the age in question replied “ridiculous,” less respondents aged under the age in question replied so. In other words, respondents who did not think age limit “ridiculous” were found at age limits set at younger for women than men, and more respondents who were under the age limit did not think it “ridiculous.” Although we have estimated that women’s age limits were accepted at a younger age than men’s age limits, the survey also revealed that more women younger than age limit accepted age limits.

Chart 3: Percentage of respondents who think it “ridiculous” if the following person is denied employment/reemployment on the basis of age (by age group of respondents)


Thirdly, if we examine the results of age discrimination and gender discrimination, while about 30% of the respondents experienced age discrimination, about 20% experienced gender discrimination. Looking at this from work arrangements, although among regular employees the percentages of those who experienced age discrimination and gender discrimination were almost same, among non-regular employees, the proportion who experienced age discrimination was higher than those that experienced gender discrimination. Regardless of work arrangements, age discrimination occurred almost only in job offer/employment situations, and virtually none in promotion, retirement, training, and job assignment situations. Gender discrimination, on the other hand, was experienced in job offer/employment, and about one third of respondents (regular and non-regular employees) replied that they experienced gender discrimination in job assignments. Among regular employees, one-third and one-fourth of them were discriminated against in promotion and training, respectively.

Women tend to face age discrimination in job offer/employment, whether for regular positions or non-regular positions. After employment, women in permanent positions are likely to be discriminated in promotion, training, and job assignment. Moreover, women are more likely to experience age discrimination than men. In the present situation, close linkage between gender discrimination and age discrimination is one of the key factors that reduce employment opportunities for women. This issue needs closer examination.

Chart 4: Percentage of respondents who experienced age and gender discrimination in all six items (%)


Fourthly, although the survey was conducted only on women’s age discrimination experiences, an attitude survey on age for both men and women is necessary because men and women may view age differently. For example, the survey revealed that about 25% of women aged 25 to 34 responded “women’s attractiveness is their youth,” but in older age group the percentage dropped. We need to examine the results we get from asking the same question to men. To the question asking if women’s attractiveness of service industry workers is their youth, almost 30% of respondents replied “yes,” and asked if men’s attractiveness of service industry workers is their youth, almost 20% of them replied “yes.” Compared with other professions, these figures are higher. Further research needs to be done on both men and women, focusing more specifically on the relationship between profession and the attractiveness of age.

3. Interview Survey

(1) Conduct interviews about age limit imposed on people who seek jobs or want to change jobs
We interviewed seven women and one man who were seeking another job or changing jobs about their experiences of age limits and their idea about such limits.

(2) Conduct of interviews of companies
We interviewed five companies.
There are two types of age discrimination, in a broad sense: 1) job application is denied because age limit is set, 2) people are denied employment on the grounds of age even though their age is not contrary to the job requirements. From the interview it was revealed that people in their late 20s to early 30s already had experiences of not being able to apply for permanent positions. Also, people aged 30 and over thought that they were rejected because of their age. Usually, when companies reject applicants, they do not give reasons. The interviewees, however, thought age was the reason judging from the impression they had at a telephone inquiry or interview, or the words used by personnel staff who called them to tell of their unsuccessfulness. We found that age limits were stricter for temporary employees.

Interviews of corporations showed that when they hire permanent employees, they avoid people who will reverse the existing age structure of their organizations. Although they think it is inevitable that position and age do not go parallel through promotions, they tend to avoid causing such phenomena from the beginning. In addition, as a business strategy, they hire people of same age group as that of target market.

One thing that became evident in the process of selecting corporations to interview was that few companies hire mid-career people as permanent employees due to the ongoing recession. Only a limited number of businesses do so. Consequently, many people who cannot find permanent jobs work as temporary workers, allowing corporations to secure non-regular workers easily. Companies that employ non-regular workers prefer “young” people. Further interviews need to be done to identify the reasons behind such tendency.

4. Summary

Age is not decided by nature like gender, and everybody gets old equally. Therefore, unlike gender discrimination, which clearly goes against the principles of modern society, different treatment on the ground of age has been tolerated to some extent. This is a problem. As we discussed earlier, age discrimination, in effect, leads to gender discrimination. Although both men and women are discriminated against on the grounds of age, women are more severely affected by age discrimination, which contributes to continued gender discrimination. There are many factors causing substantial gender discrimination, and age discrimination is a crucial one among them.