Retirement, Collective Agreement, and Age Discrimination: Implications for the Higher Education Sector in the UK

Abstract

This article explores the possible impact of the removal of the default retirement age of 65 on the Higher Education sector as an employer. It considers the findings from empirical research to highlight some of the management issues likely to be faced by the sector as a result of the removal of the default retirement age. One of these issues is the need to avoid job blockage and provide jobs and career opportunities for younger academics. Thus, it can be questioned whether the need to redistribute job opportunities among younger generations of employees would constitute a legitimate aim and objectively justify a contractual retirement age in the HE sector. In order to investigate this question, the CJEU emerging case law relating to retirement rules and objective justification under Article 6(1) of Council Directive 2000/78/EC, and the case of Seldon in the UK, are discussed. It is argued that the HE sector could draw on the experience of the CJEU case law and the use of the collective bargaining process to tackle the issues raised by the removal of the retirement age against a very challenging economic environment. This article also highlights that research findings indicate that in the absence of a contractual retirement age staff performance management is likely to come into focus in the management of human resources. It is suggested, however, that employers in the sector will need to give careful consideration to the way the performance of older workers is monitored and measured in order to avoid the risk of age bias that may lead to claims of age discrimination. Although this article focuses on the Higher Education sector, it is suggested that some of the research findings and the arguments presented here could apply to other employment sectors.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 8 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.