The government has won an appeal against a ruling which could have lead to thousands of workers aged over 65 to claim unfair dismissal and redundancy pay if sacked.
As reported by Startups.co.uk, government lawyers launched an appeal after an employment tribunal ruled in August 2002 that two veteran employees were entitled to claim for unfair dismissal and should be given redundancy pay.
The decision was expected to affect an estimated 250,000 older workers in the UK, who could have used the test case as a legal basis to claim the extra employment rights.
John Rutherford, of Essex, and Samuel Bentley, of North London, who are both in their 70s, were fired from their jobs at a clothing manufacturer.
Under current employment law, employees over 65 are not entitled to compulsory redundancy payments after being sacked, or protected from unfair dismissal.
The two men took their case to an employment tribunal, which ruled they had been unfairly treated and should be allowed to apply for compensation.
However, the government successfully argued during the appeal that relevant statistics were not taken into consideration at the first hearing and that the men were not the victim of sexual discrimination, due to the difference between male and female retirement ages and rights, as was originally claimed.
Age Concern at the Trades Union Congress (TUC) both voiced their disappointment at the decision, claiming that workers should be given the same rights, regardless of age.
Paul Quain, who represented Rutherford in court, said that although the decision was disappointing, it does not mean that it was the end of the road.
“We have the option of taking this to the Court of Appeal and further if necessary, and I shall be discussing this with Mr Rutherford.
“This is an extremely important case, as people working after retirement age are an increasingly significant part of the working population, and we are told that people will have to expect to work even longer because of the state of the pensions,” he said.
Although the law does not currently offer much protection to older workers, new employment rights are set to be introduced in 2006, which will outlaw age discrimination in the same way racism and sexism is banned at present.
Employers have been advised to change their recruitment practices before the new rules become law, with job advertising regarded as a potential minefield for allegations of discrimination.
Lawyers have warned firms that adverts containing the words “enthusiastic” or “energetic” could be deemed to be ageist and result in a tribunal claim.
Tell us what you think on our interactive forum or email the editor, matthewt@crimsonpublishing.co.uk
