Default Retirement Age debate

A paragraph in the ruling of the Heyday case, which is quoted in the Seldon case, very aptly summarises the dilemmas in the argument for and against the DRA:

¬†“There is an acute policy tension in this area. On the one hand there is the Government’s interest in promoting employment, continuity of employment, self-sufficiency in employment, tax revenues from people who remain in employment after 65, reducing the burden on the State pension, and ensuring that as people live longer they work longer and are able to lead both socially and economically productive lives. On the other, there is the need for reassurance, clarity and flexibility to reduce the social cost of regulation, maintain competitiveness, address issues as to career planning, and ensure availability of jobs in industry and public service to workers of different ages.”

 According to the judgement in the Seldon case an employer can have a DRA as long as it has its own legitimate aims in enforcing it.  However, the Government has proposed to abolish the national DRA, which will almost inevitably lead to more employment tribunal cases as the focus shifts to performance issues, and a loss of the dignified approach to the end of employment, which the agreed retirement age was intended to address in the Seldon case.

What do you think?¬† We’d be interested to know how this will affect your organisation.

Hardwick HR will be advising clients on the steps they should take to remain compliant with legislation and issue new policies as soon as more information becomes available.