Age Discrimination at Google: A Corporate Social Responsibility Case

This case study examines age discrimination in the workplace, using Google's experience as a focal point. The analysis highlights the increasing trend of age discrimination, particularly impacting the baby boomer generation. It discusses Google's legal battles and settlements related to age discrimination, emphasizing the financial and legal costs associated with such practices. The study explores the role of leadership style and organizational culture in fostering or mitigating age discrimination, underscoring the importance of equitable treatment and diversity. It suggests practical solutions such as training programs, skill development, and mixed-age teams to promote a positive and inclusive work environment. The case also touches upon ethical considerations and the importance of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in addressing age-related issues, referencing relevant legal frameworks and the impact on employee morale, productivity, and brand image. The conclusion emphasizes the need for dynamic leadership and proactive measures to combat age discrimination, thereby fulfilling the organization's responsibility to its employees and the community.

CORPORATE SOCIAL
RESPONSIBILITY

Age discrimination have been increasing trend because of high number of talented baby
boomer generation. Although, the company face two profile cases in relation to age
discrimination. Since it was reported, that Google has settled class action, and discrimination
lawsuits. To fulfil the resulting consequences, Google paid a settlement of $11 million where
the organisation was forced to train management, employees, form age diversity, and age
related complaints, which are complied with settlement. Google is one of those companies,
who have accused of age discrimination. Negative organisational culture have contributed to
workplace, which finally lead to age discrimination. Google`s age discrimination indicates
that there are financial and legal costs to the employers when they are focuses in their
procedure (Williams, 2017). The leadership style of Google is quite biased as far as its
corporate culture is concerned. ADEA violations are not engaged properly but at the same
time, it is equally offensive in against to behaviour and cost of policies and procedures, which
ultimately have devastating impact on levels of company`s functioning such as finance,
marketing, operations, human resource, and management. Most importantly, with this type of
leadership, the brand image of the organisation will be tainted both externally and internally,
which has lowered company`s commitment, loss clients, customers, decreased profits and
further decreased efficiency related to lower morale. Employers amongst the age
discrimination may experience increasing organisational costs, and reducing organisational
productivity, which has translated decreasing profits. A leader should be dynamic, who treats
everyone equal at the same platform. He must motivate and encourage all the employees to
achieve goals of the organisation with the integrated efforts rather than discarding old people
from structure (Rahman, Serrano, & Lambkin, 2017).
According to the case study, workplace avails solution to minimise the age discrimination.
For instance- The organisation can offer regular on-site skills that updates the training
opportunities for employees regardless to tenure of the company. Furthermore, the company

create promotional tests, which had better reflect accumulated work experience and other
skills associated with skill development. It can help the workers to avoid skill obsolescence,
and finally promote better opportunities for retention. Old worker expertise has been valued
more than the fresh graduates have as it creates positive organisational culture. This is
because age discrimination issues, its fear, and then losing the job can create uncomfortable
workplace environment. Furthermore, morale may suffer and it can lead to workplace
depression, which carries over personal life (Prates, Avelar, & Lamb, 2019). Provide ongoing
training in regards to diversity and other aging issues for new hires at all level of
management. This consistent age sensitivity training can encourage change of organisational
culture, motivate effective decision-making, and finally create significant changes to the
organisational culture, which is purely associated with employee decision-making practices
(Sarvaiya, & Eweje, 2016).
Team leaders in the organisation can promote can appreciate employee diversity skill based
focus, from expertise, and other non-job based features. Organisational management can
encourage mixed age teams so that there can be a multi-purpose team amongst the employees
to be creative, talented, and strong ethical (Ali, Frynas, & Mahmood, 2017).
Employment related to discrimination is quite unethical issue. Discrimination on the basis of
age is different form of discrimination as it affects everyone. It is an unfair practise, lack in
empathy, and uncaring, which makes it vulnerable. It does not fulfil corporate social
responsibility. According to the utilitarian theory of ethics, it is seen that not every party
engaged in the actions in business must get hurt (Ho, 2017). Whereas, age discrimination has
become an issue, which has increased overtime and hurting the interest of employees in long
term as discriminating on the basis of age can undermine the abilities of a person.

Furthermore, older worker have strong work ethics experience as compared to youngsters.
This is because old experienced candidates are considered as expense, which will include
higher salary, benefit costs, and pensions. Many researches have shown that there is no
relationship between job performance and age. The authorities imply the introduction to age
discrimination law based on age. This law protects them from age discrimination. As a CSR
activity, it is the responsibility of the organisation to serve the people. As the age of
retirement have been extending, number of employees have also been increasing and reach 41
million by 2024 while comparing it to the 27 million in 2008. A business is responsible for
providing services to people who belong to the community, as it is the duty of the business to
serve people (Sarvaiya, & Eweje, 2016).

References
Ali, W., Frynas, J. G., & Mahmood, Z. (2017). Determinants of corporate social
responsibility (CSR) disclosure in developed and developing countries: A literature
review. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 24(4), 273-
294.
Ho, J. M. (2017). The Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Practice of Environmental
Sensitive Companies and Its Impacts on Corporate Financial Performance
(CFP) (Doctoral dissertation, Curtin University).
Prates, M. O., Avelar, P. H., & Lamb, L. C. (2019). Assessing gender bias in machine
translation: a case study with Google Translate. Neural Computing and Applications,
1-19.
Rahman, M., Rodríguez-Serrano, M. Á., & Lambkin, M. (2017). Corporate Social
Responsibility (CSR) and Marketing Performance: Role of Commitment to the
Customer Relationship. In Creating Marketing Magic and Innovative Future
Marketing Trends (pp. 667-671). Springer, Cham.
Sarvaiya, H., & Eweje, G. (2016). Gender equality and diversity in the workplace. Gender
Equality and Responsible Business: Expanding CSR Horizons, 135.
Williams, B. R. (2017). Disability in the Australian workplace: Corporate governance or CSR
issue?. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal.