> The relationship between age and job performance for Air Traffic Control Specialists (ATCSs) is an issue that has been revisited many times over the past few decades (Trites, 1961; Trites & Cobb, 1962; Cobb, 1968; VanDeventer & Baxter, 1984). Researchers have consistently found a negative relationship between controller age and performance across studies that have used different ATCS options (enroute, terminal), career stages (age at entry into training,current age on the job), and criterion measures (on-the-job ratings, academy performance) (Trites, 1961;Trites & Cobb, 1962; Cobb, 1968; VanDeventer & Baxter, 1984).
I don’t really see a problem with discrimination like this in this context as long as there is a well published scientific background of studies demonstrating why it makes sense, and there aren’t confounding variables (like a history of discrimination) that would skew the results. In this case it looks legitimate and well studied.
My only beef/complaint otherwise is that these papers should be front and center on the application page explaining why only 30 and unders are accepted.
In one of my jobs I was responsible for a tank of Acrolein which if it vented to atmosphere would kill 150,000 people in New a Orleans.
As a safety precaution.
Explosion was the desirable alternative because the products of combustion were far less harmful.
This is pretty true across all sorts of industries.
Like guess where a lot of product recalls come from. Or consider some of the reasons that structures fail.
This is the dumbest distinguishing point you could think of. Have you heard of hospitals?
https://undark.org/2020/06/24/mandatory-screening-older-phys...