Too Old at 35: How South Africa’s Opportunity Gap Fails Its Most Experienced Workers
In South Africa, turning 35 can quietly change the trajectory of your working life — not because of declining ability, but because of an invisible policy line. One day, you’re eligible for internships, learnerships, and government-funded training programmes; the next, you’re “too old” — regardless of your skills, drive, or circumstances.
This cut-off is rarely debated in public. It’s not splashed across headlines or dissected in Parliament with the same urgency as youth unemployment. Yet for many, it’s a silent disqualifier that arrives in mid-career, often at the very moment they need a lifeline.
The country’s youth unemployment crisis is real and urgent — 59.6% for those aged 15–24 in Q4 2024 — but the quiet sidelining of those over 35 is a policy blind spot with devastating consequences. It’s not just about fairness; it’s about economic logic, dignity, and the sustainability of our workforce.
The Policy Roots of Exclusion
The age cap didn’t appear by accident. In the years after apartheid, South Africa’s development agenda rightly prioritised youth empowerment. The National Youth Development Agency (NYDA), Sector Education and Training Authorities (SETAs), and other state-backed initiatives were designed to give young people a foothold in a competitive job market.
But the design came with a hard limit: most programmes defined “youth” as 18–35. The intention was to focus scarce resources where the crisis was most visible. Over time, however, this age limit hardened into a structural barrier.
Today, a 36-year-old retrenched mineworker in Rustenburg, a 40-year-old call centre agent whose job was automated, or a 42-year-old teacher seeking to pivot into tech all face the same reality: the majority of subsidised training, internships, and small business grants are closed to them.
Even though the Constitution prohibits unfair discrimination, the way many public and private programmes are designed effectively excludes a large segment of the working-age population. The law may not explicitly say “you can’t hire someone over 35,” but the funding rules, eligibility criteria, and recruitment pipelines often do the job indirectly.
The Reality for Over-35 Jobseekers
For those over 35, unemployment is not just a temporary setback — it’s a crisis with cascading effects.
Stats SA’s Q4 2024 data shows unemployment among 35–44-year-olds at 27.2%, and 45–54-year-olds at 21.8%. These are not marginal figures — they represent hundreds of thousands of households.
The lived reality is stark:
- Economic vulnerability: At this stage of life, many are servicing home loans, paying school fees, and supporting extended family.
- Family responsibilities: The “sandwich generation” — those caring for both children and ageing parents — is heavily represented in this age group.
- Reskilling barriers: When industries shift or jobs are lost, retraining options are often closed to them due to age restrictions.
A 39-year-old woman in Durban, retrenched from retail, recently described applying for a digital marketing learnership only to be told she was “over the age limit.” She had 15 years of customer service experience, but no formal digital skills — and no affordable way to acquire them.
Case Study: Elias Sello Ntsihlele vs Denel
The exclusion is not limited to entry-level or blue-collar work. In 2025, former Denel executive Elias Sello Ntsihlele took the state-owned arms manufacturer to the Labour Court, alleging unfair age discrimination.
Ntsihlele, who had previously served as interim CEO of Denel Vehicle Systems and chaired the board of Denel Dynamics, applied for two senior executive roles in 2024. He was initially shortlisted and praised for his qualifications, but was later told his age — he would turn 65 before the end of the five-year term — was a concern.
He argues that this criterion was never part of the job requirements and that his exclusion violated the Employment Equity Act. Ntsihlele is seeking over R22 million in damages and policy changes to prevent similar discrimination. His case could set a precedent for how age is treated in executive recruitment — proving that ageism in South Africa’s labour market cuts across all levels.
Why They Often Need Opportunities More
The irony is that over-35s are often in greater need of stable income than their younger counterparts. They carry heavier financial obligations, have fewer working years left to recover from unemployment, and their job loss can destabilise entire families.
A retrenched 40-year-old with two dependents and a bond is not just an individual statistic — they are the backbone of a household. When they fall out of the labour market, the impact ripples outward: children’s education is disrupted, medical aid is dropped, and extended family members lose a source of support.
In rural areas and smaller towns, the effect is amplified. Older workers often play a central role in community stability — running small businesses, mentoring younger workers, and contributing to local economies. When they are excluded from opportunity pipelines, the loss is felt far beyond their own households.
Case Study: Ageism in Gauteng’s Public Service
A 2022 University of the Witwatersrand research report by Catherine Nompumelelo Ramphomane documented the experiences of older professional employees in the Gauteng public service.
Through interviews with workers aged 50–65, the study found that many felt marginalised in training and promotion opportunities. Participants reported being overlooked for leadership roles in favour of younger colleagues, despite having more experience.
The research concluded that institutional ageism — embedded in workplace culture and policy — eroded self-worth and wasted valuable professional knowledge. It recommended targeted support and policy reform to integrate older professionals more effectively.
The Social and Economic Cost of Exclusion
Leaving experienced workers out of opportunity pipelines is not just unjust — it’s economically reckless.
- Wasted human capital: Decades of skills, networks, and institutional knowledge go unused.
- Increased reliance on social grants: This strains an already stretched welfare system.
- Mental health toll: Prolonged unemployment erodes self-worth and community stability.
- Intergenerational poverty: Children in these households face reduced access to education and opportunity.
Economists warn that sidelining mid-career workers reduces overall productivity. Businesses lose out on employees who can combine technical skill with lived experience, while the state loses tax revenue from a group that should be in its peak earning years.
The Counterargument — and the Rebuttal
Policymakers often argue that resources must be concentrated where the crisis is most acute — among the youth. This is valid, but it assumes a zero-sum game.
The truth is, opportunity design can be inclusive without diluting youth programmes. Removing arbitrary age caps, creating multi-generational training cohorts, and incentivising employers to hire older workers can strengthen the economy for all.
Countries like Germany and Singapore have shown that lifelong learning models — where workers of all ages can access subsidised training — lead to higher productivity and lower long-term unemployment. South Africa could adapt these models to its own context.
Case Study: The Legal Gap
South Africa’s Constitution and the Employment Equity Act prohibit unfair discrimination based on age. Yet, age caps in recruitment and training programmes remain common.
The South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) and the Equality Court have the power to investigate and remedy such cases, but many older workers never lodge complaints — often because they are unaware of their rights or fear retaliation.
This gap between legal protection and lived reality means that systemic exclusion can persist largely unchallenged. Without proactive enforcement and public awareness, the law remains a paper shield.
A Way Forward
- Policy reform: Eliminate age-based exclusions in public training and funding schemes.
- Employer incentives: Offer tax breaks or subsidies for hiring and retaining over-35s.
- Lifelong learning culture: Make upskilling accessible at every career stage.
- Public awareness: Challenge stereotypes about older workers’ adaptability and productivity.
These changes would not only restore fairness but also strengthen the economy by keeping experienced workers active and engaged.
Conclusion: A Call for Inclusive Growth
South Africa cannot afford to waste the skills, experience, and resilience of its over-35 workforce. Age should not be a barrier to opportunity in a country that values equality.
If we continue to sideline this group, we risk deepening poverty, weakening families, and undermining our economic resilience. The choice is clear: build an economy that works for all working-age citizens — or accept the cost of leaving our most experienced people behind.
