Is this age discrimination?

[MacD]

Im 50 and started work in a warehouse last september. All was fine for the first two months but since then they have been putting the pressure on to get more wok done. There is only so much a person can do in a given time but as with most companies, they want more done so they dont have to employ another person. Last week was the first time i didnt get everything done before the end of my shift and i was pulled to one side to explain myself. The fact that the main delivery came in late, was almost twice the size of a normal delivery, and the fact the boss pulled me out of the warehouse for an hour to cover someones dinner break, had no bearing on my performance according to the employer. He said this has happened before and other people have managed to get it all done; then he referred to specific people who are half my age. I can do my job, but i cant physically work at the same pace as someone half my age. When I took on the job there was no mention of targets or time limits.

Is it age discrimination that I am now expected to perform physically demanding tasks at the same pace as someone half my age? Ive tried my best to match their performance but its killing me, im now taking painkillers everyday because of the strain its putting on my body.

[mariefab]

No. It's the opposite of age discrimination.
I sympathise. I'm in my late fifties and certainly couldn't do a physically demanding job at the same rate as a 25 year old. But by treating you both the same they are not discriminating.

[MacD]

Thanks for clearing that up. I thought it may have come under this: "Indirect discrimination is when there's a practice, policy or rule which applies to everyone in the same way, but it has a worse effect on some people than others". Their work policies treat everyone the same, but have a worse effect on older people than on the younger ones.

[mariefab]

19 Indirect discrimination

(1)A person (A) discriminates against another (B) if A applies to B a provision, criterion or practice which is discriminatory in relation to a relevant protected characteristic of B's.

Relevant protected characteristic - Age.
PPC - The requirement that employees in a similar role perform the same amount of work.

(2)For the purposes of subsection (1), a provision, criterion or practice is discriminatory in relation to a relevant protected characteristic of B's if—

(a)A applies, or would apply, it to persons with whom B does not share the characteristic,

Yes. The PPC applies to everyone in the same way.

(b)it puts, or would put, persons with whom B shares the characteristic at a particular disadvantage when compared with persons with whom B does not share it,

This would be impossible to prove as people of all ages have infinitely variable physical abilities.

(c)it puts, or would put, B at that disadvantage, and

Before this section applies you'd have to prove (b)

(d)A cannot show it to be a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.

This is the knockout point even if you could tick Yes to a,b and c.
The legitimate aim would be getting the required amount of work done each day.
It would be impractical to expect employers to have take the age of each employee into consideration when distributing the required daily workload.
How would they do it? Employees in their 20s-100%, 30s-90%, 40s-80% etc.?