Search results for Employers retiring employees at 65 at risk of age discrimination
Subjects
Formats
Services
Did you mean to type: Employers retiring employees at W at risk of age discrimination? (17 results)
58 results found showing 1 - 20
-
Employers retiring employees at 65 at risk of age discrimination
© Workplace Law Group 2008 All rights reserved Employers retiring employees at 65 at risk of age discrimination Employers retiring employees at 65 at risk of age discrimination The Age Concern Heyday challenge to the UK's statutory retirement age of 65 has been heard by European judges this month after the High Court referred the case the European Court of Justice in July 2007. The case raises many importan...
News analysis | 21 Jul 2008
-
Employers retiring employees at 65 at risk of age discrimination
...to retire at the normal retirement age, providing that age is not less than 65. An enforced retirement at this age is a "fair" reason for dismissal and providing this is the reason there will be a good defence in an employment tribunal. Hence 65 is known as the default retirement age (DRA) and many employers believe that using this DRA as an opportunity to say "goodbye" means that they do not have to justify a dismissal at a later point when the individual ceases (perhaps) to be as useful or competent as they might want them to be. Of course this is very narrow and misconceived as many older employe...
Comment | 29 Jul 2008
-
Employers retiring employees at 65 at risk of age discrimination
In regards to this issue I have recently gone through a "tick box" interview and been informed by my manager that I will have to take a month off work inbetween returning as a casual employee on reaching retirement at 65. I am full time employed at the moment. Is there a statutory reason why i have to take a month off work before returning?
Comment | 27 Jul 2008
-
Employers retiring employees at 65 at risk of age discrimination
Many thanks Chris for your comments I agree fully that the employer is loosing out on employees experience. I also know that in the past unions thought the retirement of employees was a good idea as it ensured a person was taken on and this reduced the number of unemployed i dont consider this is a reason anyone would openly agree to now. I will take up the option you suggest, once again many...
Comment | 31 Jul 2008
-
SMEs still failing to comply with age discrimination legislation
... ban age discrimination in terms of recruitment, promotion and training; ban unjustified retirement ages of below 65; remove the current age limit for unfair dismissal and redundancy rights; introduce a right for employees to request working beyond retirement age and a duty on employers to consider that request; and require employers to give at least six months notice to employees about their intended retirement date so that individuals can plan better for retirement, and be confident that "retirement" is not being used as cover for unfair dismissal. Of those businesses ...
News | 2 Apr 2007
-
Compulsory retirement at 65 must be justified, says EAT
...tion laws:"The fact that this matter has been referred back to the tribunal does not necessarily mean that a different decision will be reached. However, the fact that the EAT were not prepared to accept that there is a general presumption that performance tails of at 65 is a timely reminder to all employers about the risks of making stereotypical assumptions about employees be it because of age or any other factor."Reproduced from out-law.com with kind permission
Case | 7 Jan 2009
-
New age discrimination laws begin to kick in – financially!
...s shows that age discrimination is having an immediate impact on the UK workplace, a trend further supported by statistics from the DTI which state that approximately 600 age claims have been made to date. BLP’s findings that so many companies are already in receipt of age claims, means that UK employers are likely to face hefty financial penalties (in the region of £12m if based on DTI’s statistics stating 600 age claims to date). Employment Tribunal figures show that the average compensation awarded under disability discrimination legislation (where employees face similar obstacles in findin...
News | 3 Jul 2007
-
Is Heyday’s age discrimination court challenge on shaky ground?
...have implications for retirement group Heyday’s similar challenge, which is currently waiting to be heard by the European Court of Justice (ECJ). As Workplace Law Network previously reported, Heyday claims that the Mandatory Retirement Age clause in the new Age Discrimination Regulations allows employers to force employees to retire at or after 65, and enables employers to refuse to recruit anyone over the age of 65; because of this It claims that the Government has incorrectly implemented the European Equal Treatment Directive that outlaws age discrimination. Currently under the new law the defa...
News | 15 Feb 2007
-
Age discrimination rife in the workplace
...taken seriously by organisations." "When the new laws come into force they will seek to ensure equal treatment for all employees irrespective of their age, unless an employer can justify different treatment. The regulations are going to have a dramatic effect on the recruitment processes of most employers. "The new proposed retirement procedures will also undoubtedly trip up a lot of companies, resulting in claims of automatic unfair dismissal. If businesses do not adapt their practices to cover the new provisions they risk paying out substantial fines if an employee takes them to an employment ...
News | 6 Mar 2006
-
Age discrimination: how will it affect recruitment?
...Outlaw harassment and victimisation on the grounds of age (if the way in which sex and race discrimination legislation has taken effect is any guide, organisations are likely to start banning teasing, however affectionately meant, about “grey hair” or “young whippersnappers”). Require employers who set their retirement age below the default age of 65 to justify or change it. Introduce a new duty on employers to consider an employee’s request to continue working beyond retirement. Require employers to inform employees in writing, and at least 6 months in advance, of their int...
News | 29 Jul 2005
-
Employers warned of risks of neglecting older workers
A new survey from the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) has suggested that older workers are often neglected when it comes to training and performance management. The CIPD has called on employers to ensure they are managing the performance of all employees effectively, particularly before the final phase out of the Default Retirement Age (DRA). From October, employers will no longer be able to require employees to retire at a certain age, except in certain limited circumstances. The '...
News | 20 Jun 2011
-
Age discrimination in the downturn
...n arising from their introduction are possibly of more relevance for older workers, particularly their retirement age. A dismissal before the age of 65 cannot be described as 'retirement' and is a fair dismissal only if it is for another prescribed reason, such as capability or conduct. Neither are employers allowed to make choices about recruitment of new employees by using age as the sole criterion. But there is a second, much broader, question here, and this is about whether employers are fulfilling the potential of their older workers, and thereby making the most of their contribution to the busine...
News analysis | 11 Mar 2009
-
Age discrimination - EAT tackles redundancy schemes again
...e same test is applied. This is because a measure based directly on age will have a greater discriminatory effect than one which is only indirectly discriminatory. The more serious the discriminatory effect, the more cogent must be the justification for it.CommentThe EAT's analysis is helpful for employers trying to ensure that redundancy benefits fairly reflect the loss that different groups of employees are likely to suffer as a consequence of redundancy. It seems clear, however, that employers will find it easier to justify reduced benefits if they have a fixed retirement age. Although the Age Reg...
Case | 4 Aug 2008
-
Age discrimination – are you taking it seriously enough?
...new age discrimination? They’re not. They're going to have to deal with their first retirals under the new system from 1 October and the scheme envisaged in the draft regulations requires preparing for that exercise between 6 months and 12 months before the regulation comes around. Very few employers have started to even try to map out their expectations. The regulations are not in their final form and when they are I think they will have changed somewhat because the way that they are currently framed is almost an invitation to employers to just get rid of everyone at age 65, to avoid the compl...
News | 27 Jan 2006
-
New Age Discrimination laws 2006: Just how prepared are you?
...ngle most important development in discrimination law in the last 30 years. The findings of our survey bear out the impression we have been getting from clients that while there is a high level of awareness about the Regulations, considerable uncertainty exists about the detail and implications for employers and the majority are failing to prepare by reviewing policies." It is essential for employers to identify aspects of their employment policies that might create a compliance risk so that necessary changes can be made in good time. We recommend policy audits are not put off or employers run the ri...
News | 4 Oct 2005
-
Rise in age-related tribunal cases
...12,697, compared to £6,892 for religion / belief discrimination and £6,142 for disability discrimination. It is likely that the number of age discrimination claims will continue to rise in 2011/12. The transitional period for the abolition of the default retirement age comes to an end in October. Employers who wish to continue to require employees to retire at a set age, whether 65 or otherwise, will need to be able to objectively justify operating a retirement age as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. This will not be easy, leading to uncertainty and the risk of legal action for em...
News analysis | 9 Sep 2011
-
Concern about employers’ preparedness for DRA abolition
A new survey by the London Chamber of Commerce and Industry (LCCI) and Penningtons Solicitors LLP suggests that some employers are ill-prepared to deal with the implications that the abolition of the default retirement age (DRA) may have for managing their workforce. The report, entitled 'Tackling the age-old problem of retirement', found that 57% of those surveyed are not prepared for the DRA and 26% did not feel wel...
News | 1 Jun 2011
-
Pension and retirement rules could lead to less SME jobs
...lt Retirement Age (DRA) is likely to lead to a drop in the number of permanent jobs being provided by small to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and an increase in the use of temporary staff and self-employed labour. Additionally, the Forum is arguing that the Government's decision to remove an employers' ability to retire workers as part of its abolition of the DRA will act as an extra disincentive for small employers to recruit. In response to a recent consultation on the issue, which closed this month, the FPB warned that the removal of key retirement options could leave business owners ...
News | 1 Nov 2010
-
Curb on Age Discrimination Slips in the Back Door
The recession has started to affect you. Your profits are down. You decide that you need to cut costs. One of your employees is older than the others, he’s 66. He’s still performing reasonably well but he’s a bit long in the tooth for the image that you like to present. You decide that now would be an ideal time to let him go and you can say that it’s a redundancy situation. You’d better just check the pro...
Case | 3 Sep 2002
-
Reform of the retirement system
... retirement with the age at which they can draw a pension. In addition, many employees may wish to carry on working indefinitely, following the removal of a default (and some would say compulsory) retirement age. This inevitable likelihood of an ageing workforce, conjures up a number of factors for employers to consider. Increased salary costs In many businesses, it is the older employees that receive the highest salaries. If employers lose the option of compelling employees to retire at the age of 65 years (an option that in practice many employers choose to avail themselves of), many employers will ...
News analysis | 15 Jul 2010
