Don't Get Caught Out: Maximum Award For The Employee Against Mandatory Retirement
Ensuring you are fully compliant with Irish employment law is a must when looking at ending an employees employment whether it be by termination or retirement. The following case is an example as to how not taking the right steps can lead to a huge cost for the employer.
The Case: Senior Staff Nurse Vs Nursing Home
The Complainant was employed as a senior staff nurse from the 10th May 2014 until the date of her compulsory retirement on the 28th October 2019, by the Respondent, a nursing home in liquidation. She received remuneration of approximately €5,883 per month gross. The Complainant sought an award of compensation in respect of discrimination suffered, loss of almost a year’s work and loss of redundancy payments before the Respondent closed and went into liquidation.
The Complainant was initially provided with a “Relief Panel Fixed Term Contract” requiring her to work ‘as required and when the need arises, varied hours up to 39 hours of a standard 39 hour week’. This included a retirement clause stating ‘Retirement age is 65 years. Employment beyond retirement age is exceptional and only by agreement of the employer.’ There were no further renewals of this contract, and it therefore effectively became a contract of indefinite duration. The Complainant was granted a one-year extension on her compulsory retirement, setting her new retirement date as the 31st of October 2019.
In July 2019, the Complainant entered discussions with Ms. A, who was the Clinical Nurse Manager and the Complainant’s line manager in regards to continuing her employment following the 31st of October 2019. Here, Ms, A. indicated her support for this and told the Complainant to apply for an extension in writing which she did, she did not receive a response. In absence of a response, the Complainant went straight to the Director of Nursing, Mr. B where he informed her that this would not be possible and that they would only have work for her until the end of October 2019. He also informed her verbally that there was a plan to recruit non-EEA national nurses to fill positions with the Respondent. Non-EEA national work visas can only be applied for by employers when no suitable EEA nationals were available to work in the same occupational category. The Complainant asserts that the Respondent did not offer any rationale or objective justification for their decision to terminate her employment.
On 25th October 2019, the Complainant received her final communication from Mr. B confirming that her last working day would be 28th October 2019. Non-EEA nurses were recruited in November 2019 and took over the Complainant’s duties. The Respondent operated for a further eleven months and was then subject to High Court Winding-Up Proceedings on the ground of insolvency. Some staff were redeployed nearby, others received statutory redundancy and approximately €3,000 ex gratia payment which the Complainant had been denied. She had received an excellent reference from Ms. A, which the Complainant asserts proves that she was dismissed based purely on age. The complaint was referred to the WRC on 28th February 2020 where noo evidence was provided in rebuttal of the complaint that the Respondent had acted unlawfully and in breach of the Employment Equality Acts on the ground of age.
Decision: The Adjudicator found that the only basis for the Complainant’s compulsory retirement was her date of birth, and that at the time she was provided with the Fixed Term Contract in 2018 upon her reaching the age of 65, no objective justification was given either verbally or in writing. The Adjudicator was satisfied that there was sufficient work available that the Complainant was fully capable of undertaking. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Complainant €85,000, being 2 years’ remuneration, in compensation for breaches of the Employment Equality Acts.
The takeaway of this case for employers is they should note that compulsory retirement must have an express valid reasoning and justification behind it, and that it is not exempt from being construed as discrimination on the basis of age.
Related Articles:
- Retirement in the Workplace: Is it enforceable?
