If employers here think they need what I call pale, male and stale employees, they're going to be disappointed.
It's interesting that Stephen Bevan should refer in such a negative way to older, white, male workers. First, most of the employers he is appealing to are themselves going to fit within this category. Is he hoping that they won't twig to the fact that in attacking the older, white, male category of their workforce that he is spitting in their eye as well?
Second, I note that The Work Foundation has on its website the following statement:
With our emphasis on promoting respect and dignity within every organisation as a means of boosting performance, The Work Foundation is way ahead of the game on people management.
Respect and dignity? Not for everyone it seems.
Third, for a case study in grand hypocrisy take a look at the directors of The Work Foundation. Every single one "pale" and "stale" and all but one "male" as well. Maybe they should be the first to step aside for the younger, female, multi-ethnic workforce they are so keen to promote (for other people, just not for themselves).