Mandatory retirement

Last updated

Mandatory retirement also known as forced retirement, enforced retirement or compulsory retirement, is the set age at which people who hold certain jobs or offices are required by industry custom or by law to leave their employment, or retire.

Contents

As of 2017, as reported by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), only three European member states (UK, Denmark and Poland) and four OECD countries (Canada, Australia, New Zealand, United States) had laws banning mandatory retirement. [1]

Rationale

Typically, mandatory retirement is justified by the argument that certain occupations are either too dangerous (military personnel) or require high levels of physical and mental skill (air traffic controllers, airline pilots). Most rely on the notion that a worker's productivity declines significantly after age 70, and the mandatory retirement is the employer's way to avoid reduced productivity. [2] However, since the age at which retirement is mandated is often somewhat arbitrary and not based upon an actual physical evaluation of an individual person, many view the practice as a form of age discrimination, or ageism. [3] [1] [4]

Economist Edward Lazear has argued that mandatory retirement can be an important tool for employers to construct wage contracts that prevent worker shirking. [2] Employers can tilt the wage profile of a worker so that it is below marginal productivity early on and above marginal productivity toward the end of the employment relationship. In this way, the employer retains extra profits from the worker early on, which he returns in the later period if the worker has not shirked his duties or responsibilities in the first period (assuming a competitive market).

Countries

Australia

In Australia, compulsory retirement is generally unlawful throughout the various State and Territory jurisdictions in Australia. [5] Among exceptions to the general rule, permanent members of the Australian Defence Force must retire at the age of 60 and reservists at 65. [6]

Since the passage of a constitutional amendment in 1977, judges on federal courts are required to retire at the age of 70. [6]

Brazil

The Constitution of Brazil says in Article 40, Paragraph 1, Item II, that all public servants in the Union, States, Cities and the Federal District shall mandatorily retire at the age of 70. [7] This regulation encompasses servants from the executive, legislative and judicial branches. It also applies to the Supreme Federal Court Justices, as per Article 93, Item VI, of the Constitution, [7] and the Court of Accounts of the Union Judges, as stated in Article 73, Paragraph 3 of the Constitution (disposition added after the 20th Amendment). [7]

Canada

The normal age for retirement in Canada is 65, but one cannot be forced to retire at that age. [8] Labour laws in the country do not specify a retirement age. [9] Age 65 is when federal Old Age Security pension benefits begin, and most private and public retirement plans have been designed to provide income to the person starting at 65 (an age is needed to select premium payments by contributors to be able to calculate how much money is available to retirees when they leave the program by retiring). [10]

All judges in Canada are subject to mandatory retirement, at 70 or 75 depending on the court. [11] Federal senators cease to hold their seats at 75.

Israel

A 2006 decision by Israel's High Court of Justice stated that mandatory retirement at age 67 does not discriminate against the elderly. [12]

New Zealand

In New Zealand, there is no mandatory retirement age [13] except if working in a job that clearly specifies a mandatory retirement age. [14] The normal age of retirement is the same as the beginning of pension payments, [14] which is 65. [14]

Philippines

Employees working in the government, who can retire as early as age 60, have a set mandatory retirement age of 65. [15] Personnel including officials of the Philippine Armed Forces, the Philippine Coast Guard, the Philippine National Police, the Bureau of Fire Protection, and the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology are required to retire once they reach age 56. [16] Judges are subject to mandatory retirement at 70. [17]

In the private sector, it is illegal to force employees and executives in the private sector to be forced to retire before age 65 with the exception of underground miners who are required to retire at age 60, and professional racehorse jockeys at age 55. [18]

South Korea

South Korea enforces compulsory retirement before age 60 at the latest to all private companies, and 65 for public sectors. However, it is custom for most companies to lay off their employees between the ages of 50 to 55.[ citation needed ]

United Kingdom

In October 2006 the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006, the UK Labour Government introduced a Default Retirement Age, whereby employers are able to terminate or deny employment to people over 65 without a reason. A legal challenge to this failed in September 2009, although a review of the legislation was expected in 2010 by the new Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition government. [19] [20] This review has taken place and on 17 February 2011 BIS published the draft Regulations abolishing the Default Retirement Age. [21] Revised regulations were later implemented and, as of 6 April 2011, employers can no longer give employees notice of retirement under Default Retirement Age provisions and will need to objectively justify any compulsory retirement age still in place to avoid age discrimination claims. [22] In 2021, the retirement age for judges was raised from 70 to 75. [23]

United States

Since 1986, mandatory retirement has been generally unlawful in the United States, except in certain industries and occupations that are regulated by law, and are often part of the government (such as military service and federal police agencies, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation). Earlier steps toward this include the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), which "protects individuals who are 40 years of age or older from employment discrimination based on age. The ADEA's protections apply to both employees and job applicants. Under the ADEA, it is unlawful to discriminate against a person because of his/her age with respect to any term, condition, or privilege of employment, including hiring, firing, promotion, layoff, compensation, benefits, job assignments, and training." [24]

From the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations discussing the Age Discrimination in Employment Act:

…one of the original purposes of this provision, namely, that the exception does not authorize an employer to require or permit involuntary retirement of an employee within the protected age group on account of age, [25]

…an employer can no longer force retirement or otherwise discriminate on the basis of age against an individual because (s)he is 70 or older. [25]


Professions

  • Pilots: the mandatory retirement age of airline pilots is 65. The Fair Treatment for Experienced Pilots Act (Public Law 110-135) went into effect on 13 December 2007, raising the age to 65 from the previous 60. [26]
  • Air traffic controllers: Mandatory retirement age of 56, with exceptions up to age 61. Most air traffic controllers are hired before the age of 31 (the hiring cutoff age for those with experience is 36). [27]
  • Foreign Service employees at the Department of State: Mandatory retirement at 65 with very narrow exceptions.
  • Federal law enforcement officers, national park rangers and firefighters: Mandatory retirement age of 57, or later if less than 20 years of service. [28]
  • Florida Supreme Court justices: The Florida Constitution establishes mandatory retirement at age 70.
  • Michigan Judges of all levels cannot run for election after passing the age of 70.
  • Minnesota has statutorily established mandatory retirement for all judges at age 70 (more precisely, at the end of the month a judge reaches that age). The Minnesota Legislature has had the constitutional right to set judicial retirement ages since 1956, but did not do so until 1973, setting the age at 70. [29]
  • New Hampshire Constitution - Article 78 sets the retirement of all Judges and sheriffs at age 70.
  • New Jersey Supreme Court also established mandatory retirement at age 70.
  • Maryland Constitution establishes mandatory retirement age of 70 for Circuit and Appellate Court judges.
  • Oregon – mandatory judicial retirement age of 75.

Religions

Roman Catholic Church

There is no mandatory retirement age for cardinals nor for the pope, as they hold these positions for life, but cardinals age 80 or over are prohibited from participating in the papal conclave as of 1970 because of the Ingravescentem aetatem . The Code of Canon Law specifies in Canon 401 that ordinary bishops, nuncios, and bishops with Curial appointments (but not auxiliary bishops) must present their resignation to the Pope when they turn 75, but he need not accept it right away or at all. Canon 538 makes a similar stipulation of diocesan priests who are requested, but not obliged, to offer to resign from their appointments at 75. Note that in either case, resigning from the active exercise of the office means giving up the daily responsibilities of the offices, not ordination itself. Once a man is ordained a priest or a bishop, he retains that character until his death, whether he is still working or has since retired.[ citation needed ]

See also

Related Research Articles

In United States labor law, at-will employment is an employer's ability to dismiss an employee for any reason, and without warning, as long as the reason is not illegal. When an employee is acknowledged as being hired "at will", courts deny the employee any claim for loss resulting from the dismissal. The rule is justified by its proponents on the basis that an employee may be similarly entitled to leave their job without reason or warning. The practice is seen as unjust by those who view the employment relationship as characterized by inequality of bargaining power.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Australian labour law</span> Rights and duties of workers, unions and employers in Australia

Australian labour law sets the rights of working people, the role of trade unions, and democracy at work, and the duties of employers, across the Commonwealth and in states. Under the Fair Work Act 2009, the Fair Work Commission creates a national minimum wage and oversees National Employment Standards for fair hours, holidays, parental leave and job security. The FWC also creates modern awards that apply to most sectors of work, numbering 150 in 2024, with minimum pay scales, and better rights for overtime, holidays, paid leave, and superannuation for a pension in retirement. Beyond this floor of rights, trade unions and employers often create enterprise bargaining agreements for better wages and conditions in their workplaces. In 2024, collective agreements covered 15% of employees, while 22% of employees were classified as "casual", meaning that they lose many protections other workers have. Australia's laws on the right to take collective action are among the most restrictive in the developed world, and Australia does not have a general law protecting workers' rights to vote and elect worker directors on corporation boards as do most other wealthy OECD countries.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States labor law</span> US laws on fair pay and conditions, unions, democracy, equality and security at work

United States labor law sets the rights and duties for employees, labor unions, and employers in the US. Labor law's basic aim is to remedy the "inequality of bargaining power" between employees and employers, especially employers "organized in the corporate or other forms of ownership association". Over the 20th century, federal law created minimum social and economic rights, and encouraged state laws to go beyond the minimum to favor employees. The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 requires a federal minimum wage, currently $7.25 but higher in 29 states and D.C., and discourages working weeks over 40 hours through time-and-a-half overtime pay. There are no federal laws, and few state laws, requiring paid holidays or paid family leave. The Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 creates a limited right to 12 weeks of unpaid leave in larger employers. There is no automatic right to an occupational pension beyond federally guaranteed Social Security, but the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 requires standards of prudent management and good governance if employers agree to provide pensions, health plans or other benefits. The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 requires employees have a safe system of work.

The Constitution Alteration Bill 1977 was a successful proposal to alter the Australian Constitution to introduce a retirement age of 70 for federal judges. It was put to voters for approval in a referendum held on 21 May 1977. After being approved in the referendum, it received the royal assent and became law on 29 July 1977.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967</span> United States labor law

The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 is a United States labor law that forbids employment discrimination against anyone, at least 40 years of age, in the United States. In 1967, the bill was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson. The ADEA prevents age discrimination and provides equal employment opportunity under the conditions that were not explicitly covered in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The act also applies to the standards for pensions and benefits provided by employers, and requires that information concerning the needs of older workers be provided to the general public.

A life tenure or service during good behaviour is a term of office that lasts for the office holder's lifetime, unless the office holder is removed from office for cause under misbehaving in office, extraordinary circumstances or decides personally to resign.

Superannuation in Australia or "super" is a savings system for workplace pensions in retirement. It involves money earned by an employee being placed into an investment fund to be made legally available to fund members upon retirement. Employers make compulsory payments to these funds at a proportion of their employee's wages. From July 2023, the mandatory minimum "guarantee" contribution is 11%, rising to 12% from 2025. The superannuation guarantee was introduced by the Hawke government to promote self-funded retirement savings, reducing reliance on a publicly funded pension system. Legislation to support the introduction of the superannuation guarantee was passed by the Keating Government in 1992.

A severance package is pay and benefits that employees may be entitled to receive when they leave employment at a company unwillfully. In addition to their remaining regular pay, it may include some of the following:

Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents, 528 U.S. 62 (2000), was a US Supreme Court case that determined that the US Congress's enforcement powers under the Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution did not extend to the abrogation of state sovereign immunity under the Eleventh Amendment over complaints of discrimination that is rationally based on age.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006 is a piece of secondary legislation in the United Kingdom, which prohibits employers unreasonably discriminating against employees on grounds of age. It came into force on 1 October 2006. It is now superseded by the Equality Act 2010.

Employment discrimination law in the United States derives from the common law, and is codified in numerous state, federal, and local laws. These laws prohibit discrimination based on certain characteristics or "protected categories". The United States Constitution also prohibits discrimination by federal and state governments against their public employees. Discrimination in the private sector is not directly constrained by the Constitution, but has become subject to a growing body of federal and state law, including the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Federal law prohibits discrimination in a number of areas, including recruiting, hiring, job evaluations, promotion policies, training, compensation and disciplinary action. State laws often extend protection to additional categories or employers.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938</span> United States wage law

The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 29 U.S.C. § 203 (FLSA) is a United States labor law that creates the right to a minimum wage, and "time-and-a-half" overtime pay when people work over forty hours a week. It also prohibits employment of minors in "oppressive child labor". It applies to employees engaged in interstate commerce or employed by an enterprise engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce, unless the employer can claim an exemption from coverage. The Act was enacted by the 75th Congress and signed into law by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1938.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Indian labour law</span> Laws regulating labour in India

Indian labour law refers to law regulating labour in India. Traditionally, the Indian government at the federal and state levels has sought to ensure a high degree of protection for workers, but in practice, this differs due to the form of government and because labour is a subject in the concurrent list of the Indian Constitution. The Minimum Wages Act 1948 requires companies to pay the minimum wage set by the government alongside limiting working weeks to 40 hours. Overtime is strongly discouraged with the premium on overtime being 100% of the total wage. The Payment of Wages Act 1936 mandates the payment of wages on time on the last working day of every month via bank transfer or postal service. The Factories Act 1948 and the Shops and Establishment Act 1960 mandate 15 working days of fully paid vacation leave and 7 casual leaves each year to each employee, with an additional 7 fully paid sick days. The Maternity Benefit (Amendment) Act, 2017 gives female employees of every company the right to take 6 months' worth of fully paid maternity leave. It also provides for 6 weeks worth of paid leaves in case of miscarriage or medical termination of pregnancy. The Employees' Provident Fund Organisation and the Employees' State Insurance, governed by statutory acts provide workers with necessary social security for retirement benefits and medical and unemployment benefits respectively. Workers entitled to be covered under the Employees' State Insurance are also entitled to 90 days worth of paid medical leaves. A contract of employment can always provide for more rights than the statutory minimum set rights. The Indian parliament passed four labour codes in the 2019 and 2020 sessions. These four codes will consolidate 44 existing labour laws. They are: The Industrial Relations Code 2020, The Code on Social Security 2020, The Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2020 and The Code on Wages 2019.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ageism</span> Stereotyping or discrimination due to age

Ageism is a bias against, discrimination towards, or bullying of individuals and groups on the basis of their age. The term was coined in 1969 by Robert Neil Butler to describe discrimination against the elderly, patterned on the terminology of sexism and racism. Butler defined ageism as a combination of three connected elements: negative attitudes towards old age and the aging process, discriminatory practices against older people, and institutional practices and policies that perpetuate stereotypes about elderly people.

In the United States, all states have passed laws that restrict age discrimination, and age discrimination is restricted under federal laws such as the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA). However, it is worthy of note that age discrimination is still an issue in employment as of 2019.

14 Penn Plaza LLC v. Pyett, 556 U.S. 247 (2009), is a United States labor law case decided by the United States Supreme Court on the rights of unionized workers to sue their employer for age discrimination. In this 2009 decision, the Court decided that whenever a union contract "clearly and unmistakably" requires that all age discrimination claims under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 be decided through arbitration, then employees subject to that contract cannot have those claims heard in court.

In law, wrongful dismissal, also called wrongful termination or wrongful discharge, is a situation in which an employee's contract of employment has been terminated by the employer, where the termination breaches one or more terms of the contract of employment, or a statute provision or rule in employment law. Laws governing wrongful dismissal vary according to the terms of the employment contract, as well as under the laws and public policies of the jurisdiction.

Seldon v Clarkson, Wright and Jakes [2012] UKSC 16 is a UK labour law case, concerning the discrimination under what is now the Equality Act 2010.

Babb v. Wilkie, 589 U.S. ___ (2020), is a case of the United States Supreme Court in which the justices considered the scope of protections for federal employees in the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967. Specifically, the Court ruled that plaintiffs only need to prove that age was a motivating factor in the decision in order to sue. However, establishing but for causation is still necessary in determining the appropriate remedy. If a plaintiff can establish that the age was the determining factor in the employment outcome, they may be entitled to compensatory damages or other relief relating to the result of the employment decision.

Gregory v. Ashcroft, 501 U.S. 452 (1991) was a U.S. Supreme Court case. It concerned a provision in the Missouri state constitution that required state judges to retire at the age of 70, and the court was asked to consider whether it conflicted with the 1967 federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The provision was upheld, with the case being one of several Supreme Court decisions supporting the principle that "ambiguous language will not be interpreted to intrude on areas of traditional state authority or important state governmental functions".

References

  1. 1 2 Karlsson, Carl-Johan (7 July 2021). "What Sweden's Covid failure tells us about ageism". Knowable Magazine. doi: 10.1146/knowable-070621-1 . Retrieved 9 December 2021.
  2. 1 2 Lazear, Edward P. (December 1979). "Why Is There Mandatory Retirement?" (PDF). Journal of Political Economy. 87 (6). The University of Chicago Press: 1261–1284. doi:10.1086/260835. S2CID   153817995. Archived from the original (PDF) on 24 September 2015. Retrieved 14 October 2012.
  3. ↑ Lawrence, Peter A. (2008). "Retiring retirement". Nature. 453 (7195): 588–590. Bibcode:2008Natur.453..588L. doi:10.1038/453588a. PMID   18509422. S2CID   205038532.
  4. ↑ Antonucci, Toni C.; Ajrouch, Kristine J.; Webster, Noah J.; Zahodne, Laura B. (24 December 2019). "Social Relations Across the Life Span: Scientific Advances, Emerging Issues, and Future Challenges". Annual Review of Developmental Psychology. 1 (1): 313–336. doi:10.1146/annurev-devpsych-121318-085212. ISSN   2640-7922. S2CID   212795833 . Retrieved 9 December 2021.
  5. ↑ "Age discrimination". Australian Human Rights Commission. 18 February 2015. Retrieved 26 April 2020.
  6. 1 2 Australian Law Reform Commission (2012). "Recruitment and Employment Law". Grey Areas—Age Barriers to Work in Commonwealth Laws (DP 78). Australian Law Reform Commission. Archived from the original on 31 December 2016. Retrieved 31 December 2016.
  7. 1 2 3 Constitution of Brazil. (in Portuguese). Retrieved 24 November 2012.
  8. ↑ "Mandatory retirement fades in Canada". Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. CBC News. 18 February 2010.
  9. ↑ "Mandatory Retirement in Canada". Archived from the original on 23 April 2010.
  10. ↑ "Old Age Security payment amounts". Canada.ca. Government of Canada. 30 October 2015. Retrieved 26 April 2020.
  11. ↑ "Supreme Court of Canada - Canadian Judicial System". Scc-csc.gc.ca. 7 April 2012. Archived from the original on 2 April 2010. Retrieved 14 October 2012.
  12. ↑ Suri Epstein (5 February 2018). "MANDATORY RETIREMENT IS IT LEGAL?". Binah . pp. 25–26.
  13. ↑ "Retirement Savings New Zealand | Live and Work New Zealand". 14 July 2022.
  14. 1 2 3 "Retirement age". 2 October 2020.
  15. ↑ Cervantes, Filane Mikee (15 November 2018). "House panel okays bill lowering retirement age of gov't workers". Philippine News Agency. Retrieved 21 October 2019.
  16. ↑ Arguilas, Carolyn (23 January 2018). "Duterte says 56 is "too young" for military, police to retire; DND proposes "up to 65"". MindaNews. Retrieved 21 October 2019.
  17. ↑ Tort, Marvin (10 October 2018). "Retiring by choice, not by age". BusinessWorld .
  18. ↑ Jimenez, Josephus (2 July 2018). "Supreme Court: Forced retirement before age 65 illegal". The Freeman. Retrieved 21 October 2019.
  19. ↑ "UK retirement age challenge fails". BBC News. 25 September 2009. Retrieved 25 September 2009.
  20. ↑ "Q&A: Retirement ruling". BBC News. 25 September 2009. Retrieved 25 September 2009.
  21. ↑ "Phasing out the Default Retirement Age: Consultation Document" (PDF). Gov.UK. Department for Business, Innovation and Skills. July 2010. Retrieved 26 April 2020.
  22. ↑ "Default Retirement Age to end this year". Gov.UK. Department for Business, Innovation & Skills. 13 January 2011. Retrieved 26 April 2020.
  23. ↑ "Judicial retirement age to rise to 75".
  24. ↑ "Facts About Age Discrimination". www.eeoc.gov. Retrieved 17 October 2016.
  25. 1 2 "US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission". Eeoc.gov. Retrieved 14 October 2012.
  26. ↑ "FAA Statement on Pilot Retirement Age" (Press release). 14 December 2007. Retrieved 21 October 2012.
  27. ↑ "5 USC 8335: Mandatory separation".
  28. ↑ SPECIAL RETIREMENT PROVISIONS FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, FIREFIGHTERS AND AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS Archived 25 September 2012 at the Wayback Machine , Defense Civilian Personnel Management Service, January 2011
  29. ↑ Stassen-Berger, Rachel E. (7 July 2015). "Minnesota judges aren't making a fuss about retirement rule". Pioneer Press . St. Paul, MN . Retrieved 28 December 2015.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.