A measure of ageism

I've recently seen some targets for inclusion of various groups, and, when I read this, thought I would see what sort of targets could be developed to counter ageism.

From here, I've got some data on age groups. Now, the normal thing the ABS does with this data - quite rightly, in accordance with its purpose - is look at various distributions across the entire population. However, if we look at the distribution of age across the working population (not a clearcut definition), we possibly get an idea of what a representative age distribution in the workplace "should" look like.

If I assume people can start working some time in their late teens, and finish around 65 (which is no longer the case, but its a lot more work if I want to look at individual years), then a workplace "should" have:

• 9% of workers under 20;
• 47% of workers over 40; 
• 27% of workers over 50; and
• 8% of workers over 60.

The calculation summary is:

If I consider workplaces which require a degree, then a workplace "should" have:

• 12% of workers under 24;
• 52% of workers over 40; 
• 30% of workers over 50; and
• 9% of workers over 60.

The calculation summary is:

If your workplace doesn't meet these estimates in the upper and lower ranges, are you being ageist?

Food for thought . . . (and maybe more accurate analysis by experts / people with more time)