Mandatory Retirement Age Setback

24 September 2008

 

Media contact:      Ann Ferguson

Telephone:              07801 500 663

Out of hours:          07801 500 663 (press mobile)

Immediate release : 23rd September 2008

NEWS RELEASE

MANDATORY RETIREMENT AGE SETBACK

In response to the Advocate General's opinion on age discrimination  which was announced today David Manion, Chief Executive of Age Concern Scotland said:

"This is a set back, but it's not a disaster. Not having the Advocate General's support for our case is disappointing for us and for the many older workers in Scotland"

"The Advocate General's opinion confirms that the EU Directive requires age discrimination to be justified.  It's now up to the UK government to prove to the High Court that their social and employment policies are important enough to justify kicking people out of work at 65 purely on the grounds of age.   We are very disappointed that the UK Government has so far failed to support the right of people to work in later life"

"Millions of older workers in the EU will be fuming that the Advocate General thinks ageism counts for less than other forms of discrimination. This is not a minority issue. In the UK ageism is already the most commonly experienced form of prejudice and more than a million people are already working past state pension age."

"If the European Court confirms this opinion, the case would then have to go back to the High Court in London for a final decision. We hope the High Court would not want to remove the choice for people to work in later life if they wish to or if they need to."

""Denying people work because of their date of birth is grossly unfair, and in these tough times we expect more people will need to carry on working into ‘retirement' in order to make ends meet.  Also, many sectors in Scotland are already facing workforce shortages which will just be exacerbated if experienced workers continue to be forced to retire at 65".

End

Notes to Editors

  • 1. In 2006 Heyday ran the biggest ever consultation exercise of people in their 50s and 60s on a range of issues including work and retirement. Around 60,000 replied to the survey. 80 per cent of respondents believe there should be no mandatory retirement ages and around 60 per cent would like to work past the state pension age either on a full time or part time basis. Almost a quarter of all respondents said that they had already been forced to retire. People in their 50s and 60s said they want the right to work. The aim of the campaign is to force the UK Government to listen to their views.
  • 2. Heyday is taking the case for people who want or need to work. Modern retirement means having the right to chose when to work and when to stop. Employment has not been a priority for previous waves of retirees, but for this generation the right to continue working is a core area of concern. For many people, who have been victims of pension changes, who don't have a decent pension or need to continue earning money after 65 for whatever reason: the right to work free from discrimination is not an optional extra, it's something they need.
  • 3. In summer 2006, the National Council on Ageing, which operates under the names Age Concern and Heyday, brought a legal challenge to the Age Regulations in the public interest. This legal action against the Government received an early hearing on December 6 2006. The judicial review challenges the decision to permit Mandatory Retirement Ages (MRAs) allowing employers to force workers into retirement.Heyday has argued that the Regulations have not properly implemented the EU Equal Treatment Directive. The High Court agreed to adjourn the case to seek the opinion of the European Court of Justice on three key questions of EU law that needed to be addressed before the High Court can make its judgment.
  • 4. At the last count, there were over 260 people with Employment Tribunal claims challenging decisions to force them to retire, whose cases had been put on hold awaiting the outcome of the Heyday case. In a landmark decision in June, the Court of Appeal confirmed that it was right for these cases to remain on hold (Johns vs. Solent):
  • 5. The hearing of Heyday's case in the European Court of Justice took place on 2nd July 2008. The court heard the arguments of both sides, and representations from the European Commission. No announcement or decision was made on the day.
  • 6. Today (23rd September) The Advocate General has published his opinion on the Heyday case. The Advocate General is an adviser to the European Court of Justice who was at the hearing (2 July 2008). The Court usually follows this guidance, but not always and so it will be necessary to wait for the decision of the Court before we can know the ECJ's judgment. The case will then return to the High Court in London.
  • 7. The decision of the European Courts of Justice is expected at the end of this year, or early 2009. It is likely that the case will be referred back to the High Court for a final decision on whether the law on mandatory retirement is justified. It is hoped that the ECJ will give clear guidance on how this point should be decided.

Back to media releases