National Minimum Wage rate should not be age-related
David Woods, 22 August 2008
1
1 comment on this article.Young people want a single National Minimum Wage to be a top priority for the Government over the next year.
The British Youth Council (BYC), made up of young people aged between 14 and 25, has given evidence to the Government's Youth Commission that paying employees under 18 less than those over 22 for doing the same job is discriminatory.
Currently staff aged under 18, who are not in full-time education, receive £3.40 per hour as a minimum wage. This rises to £4.60 at age 18 and again to £5.52 when an employee turns 22. The council is lobbying with the Low Pay Commission to have the three-tier system removed.
The BYC is also campaigning for apprentices aged under 19 to be entitled to a National Minimum Wage as they currently are not. A report from the council shows that 90% of visitors to its website do not believe apprentices should be treated differently.
Eighteen-year-old Scott Forbes (pictured), campaigns volunteer at BYC, said: "I'm glad the BYC is committed to calling for an equal National Minimum Wage for everyone aged over 16. This is an issue that's important to the everyday lives of lots of young people."
He added: "Currently the system unnecessarily discriminates against young people based on their age. Equal work simply deserves equal pay".
Audrey Williams, partner in the human resources group at law firm Eversheds, said: "Age discrimination laws do not have an effect on Minimum Wage because it is carved out in statute, so the BYC does not have a legal case, however they have a social arguement. A 16 year old could put in the same amount of work as a 22 year old and get significantly different pay."
She added: "A lot of the time older workers and retirment ages are discussed when it comes to age discrimination but I dont sense the same level of provision for younger people."
To post comments please log in here
All Comments
Frank Hobson - 26 August 2008
While lower minimum rates for the young do reflect a lot of peoples’ conception of their relative contribution they are really there to serve a social purpose. It is in society’s interest that young people can get into paid employment rather than what they might otherwise be up to. Permitting a lower pay rate helps by making it affordable for employers to carry unskilled entry-level jobs and to overcome their natural tendency to prefer older recruits when all else is equal.
Obviously here are situations where younger and older staff make equal contributions but have different pay rates; especially as the 22-year old limit is approached. But do they outweigh the number of jobs that young people would no longer be offered if the BYC campaign succeeds? The law of unintended consequences is never far away.
Your Comment