Compulsory retirement and age discrimination

20th March 2020

Compulsory retirement and age discrimination

Use of a compulsory retirement age will give rise to a claim for direct age discrimination, unless it can be objectively justified.

An employer will have to show that the compulsory retirement age is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate business aim. In assessing whether a compulsory retirement age is justified, an employment tribunal will consider why it is necessary and appropriate, and whether there is any alternative to it. For example, using fitness or competency tests. They will also consider whether the compulsory retirement age actually achieves the legitimate business aim, and weigh up the effect of the legitimate aims with their discriminatory impact. In Ewart v University of Oxford, an employment tribunal considered whether the University could objectively justify its compulsory retirement age.

Professor Ewart was forced to retire at the age of 67 under the University’s compulsory retirement policy. The University said that it had legitimate business aims for the policy, which included: intergenerational fairness and facilitation of career progression for junior staff, facilitation of succession planning, and the promotion of equality and diversity (this was on the basis that staff who had been employed more recently were more diverse than existing, older employees). Professor Ewart brought claims for unfair dismissal and age discrimination.

The employment tribunal accepted that the University’s aims were legitimate. However, it held that the policy was not a proportionate means of achieving those aims. The retirement policy only created 2-4% per cent more vacancies, which, when compared with the discriminatory effect of the policy, was trivial. In relation to the facilitation of career progression, senior posts were in practice often filled externally, and not by junior members of staff. Furthermore, the University did not have any plan in place for the career progression of more junior members of staff. In relation to the aim of equality and diversity, the evidence showed that the retirement policy did little to contribute to the University’s attempts to diversify.

It’s important to remember that employment tribunal decisions are not binding on other courts or tribunals. In another case, an employment tribunal has found that the University’s retirement policy was justified. It is anticipated that the University will appeal this decision. Irrespective of what happens, this case demonstrates that it isn’t sufficient for an employer to have legitimate business aims; they must show that those aims have sufficient effect to justify the discriminatory impact. Employers that use compulsory retirement ages should consider whether it is really necessary in their business, and whether alternative methods can be utilised to assess the fitness of employees to continue in their work.

For more advice regarding retirement or any other employment law issues, contact Kimberley Clayton on 01473 298168 or email kimberley.clayton@gotelee.co.uk.

Blog Posts

EU Settlement Scheme – What you need to know as an Employer

25/11/2020

What is the EU Settlement Scheme? The EU Settlement Scheme (Scheme), which was introduced…

Read More
Upcoming Events

Supply Chain Supper Club – February 2020

05/02/2020

This event is invite only. If you would like to receive an invite, please…

Read More
News Posts

Gotelee Solicitors welcomes Matthew Swash to Criminal Law team

13/11/2020

The Partners and staff of Gotelee Solicitors are delighted to welcome Matthew Swash to…

Read More

Testimonials

"The ease that we could access and speak to Pat Smith - Thank you"

-

"I would like to say thank you for your help, support and guidance over the last two and a half years. Obviously should I need further assistance in the future I shall not hesitate to call you guys."

-

"Jade made the process of buying our first home quick, easy and took the stress out of a new chapter of our lives"

-

"“ This is the second time we have used Tracey for the conveyancing to buy our new home. She is always completely approachable, she has helped us along the way with advice and useful tips that has helped lessen the stress. We have complete confidence in her and would not hesitate to recommend her to our friends and family”.  - Peter Dawes, Cater Dawes Financial Planning "

-

"This is by far the go-to firm for any issues. You are made to feel valued from the outset and they are so confident in what they do. Wouldn't recommend any other. Thank you Hugh and Max."

- Ros Jones

"We found Rachel Dawson outstanding, polite, professional and caring."

-

"Jade Shelton was absolutely fantastic!! Professional and proactive at all times."

- JH

"We were very pleased to have Jade as our solicitor, the service was excellent and we felt kept in the loop which minimised stress"

- CT

"Prompt, helpful, polite and very professional service"

-

"Approachable, very efficient, always willing to take my calls and update me."

- SH

    Please select preferred method of contact

    * We will only contact you by telephone if you select this as primary form of contact. All web enquiries will be stored on our website for 30 days.