Australian Mandatory Retirement Challenged

Australia experienced declines in older workers' participation in the labor force similar to that of the United States during the 1970s, but it has taken more than 10 years to enact the same policy changes in age discrimination in employment. In order to promote a considered internationalism as opposed to parochialism in policy, this paper considers two questions about this case, namely, "Why did Australia take so long to change?" and "What has been learned from the North American experience?" On the first question, it is argued that Australians are beginning to move only slowly from a European view of retirement as leisure in "old age" towards the more active notions in North America and among its Asian neighbors. Elites in government are responding to a growing political consciousness among the seed seeking a new deal in rights of a access to work and other activities. On the second question, it is argued that the North American experience leads us to moderate strong claims about age discrimination and to be less optimistic about major improvements in older workers' participation arising from legislation outlawing age discrimination. This evidence has reduced the contentiousness of the issue in Australia and allowed focus on the more practical issues of how to make the legislation work to protect the rights of older people.