Anonymous

UK

Consultant

The law will not work.

Recruiters/agencies (Call them what you like, I prefer the word Pimp and shark), and Direct employers will simply use the words "Somebody more suited to the position who matched our requirements more was chosen".

This is the get out, as there is no proof a person was not discriminated against.

What should happen is where an applicant feels he has been discriminated against by virtue of age, but given that statement, they should have the right to appeal, and for the employer to prove that was the case.

That way, they can see that when two people, one 10 years younger than the other, with less experience, was rejected because the RIGHT candidate was chosen, as opposed to the youngest.

But where the person 10 years younger was chosen over the older person more suited to the job, then compensation should be payable to the rejected applicant, because the employer has broken the law.