Ruling on the future of forced retirement ages‚ a high court judge today revealed that the Government had only avoided defeat because ministers had already caved in to pressure for a review in 2010. Mr Justice Blake said: ‘I cannot presently see how 65 could remain as a DRA after the review’.

The fate of millions of people who want or need to work beyond the age of 65 now lies directly in the hands of MPs and peers‚ says Age Concern and Help the Aged.

The High Court ruling is a blow for huge numbers of older people who need to work longer to secure a decent retirement in the teeth of a harsh recession and the drop in returns on savings and investments. Older workers who wish to remain in work can still be forced to retire‚ regardless of whether they are fit and able to remain in their jobs.

While confirming that the default retirement age is lawful the judge said that if the regulation ‘had been adopted for the first time in 2009‚ or there had been no indication of an imminent review‚ I would have concluded…that the selection of age 65 would not have been proportionate. I would‚ accordingly‚ have granted relief requiring it to be reconsidered…’

Following the ruling‚ Age Concern and Help the Aged is challenging MPs to now demonstrate their support for older workers by acting urgently to overturn the outdated legislation. The Charity is calling on parliamentarians to use the passage of the Equality Bill to abolish the default retirement age. 

Andrew Harrop‚ Head of Public Policy at Age Concern and Help the Aged comments:

“Today’s ruling does not spell the end of our campaign to win justice for older workers – in fact‚ we will be stepping up our fight to get this outdated legislation off the statute book. Despite the judgement today‚ Ministers still have the opportunity this side of a crucial General Election to give real help to people in their 60s by outlawing forced retirement. They should amend the Equality Bill which is currently making its way through Parliament.

“In his ruling the judge makes it clear that the only reason he has allowed the law to stand is because ministers have already caved in to our pressure for a review of the law.  He makes it clear that forced retirement at 65 is unsustainable. This judgement makes it crystal clear that this unfair legislation is past its sell by date.

“The Government has heard people’s outrage about the DRA‚ but so far all that is being promised is the review ‘sometime’ in 2010. Instead we need action now. Ministers must use the Equality Bill which is currently before Parliament to outlaw forced retirement before the next election.

The charity brought the case against the UK Government in Summer 2006 arguing that the DRA was in breach of European Union law. A judgement from the European Court in March this year confirmed that the UK Government would have to robustly justify why such a policy was needed.

The charity took the case to the High Court because thousands of dedicated and experienced employees are being arbitrarily sacked purely on the basis of age‚ even though they want to work and can prove their competence. This completely undermines and contradicts the Government’s aim of encouraging longer working lives. 
 
The judge commented on the ‘useful role’ played by the charity in ‘marshalling a wide range of material [and] bringing the Regulations under prompt and detailed judicial scrutiny’. He said the ‘statements and the material they deploy present a cogent case for the proposition that either there should be no default retirement age or that the default retirement age should not be 65 but 70’.

The need to work beyond 65 is particularly acute at a time when economic turmoil means many people have seen the value of their pensions and savings fall rapidly.  Research shows that 60 per cent of over 50s believe they will have to work longer than originally planned because of the state of the economy. While the default retirement age exists in law‚ the option to remain in work is closed off for many.

Support for change to the law is strong‚ with almost nine out of ten over-50s believing people should have the right to continue working past 65 if they wish‚ as long as they are capable of performing well in their job.

Andrew Lockley‚ Head of Irwin Mitchell’s Public Law team‚ which represented Age Concern and Help the Aged‚ said:

“The judge’s criticism of the Government’s approach to the default retirement age will be seen as justifying the strenuous efforts made by Age Concern and Help the Aged in this litigation.  Had the Government not pre-empted this and announced a review while this case was ongoing‚ then the ruling would have gone against it.

“The judge has effectively given the Government breathing space to go away and change the rules. But his comments that he cannot see how the DRA can stay at 65 will give renewed hope to thousands of workers approaching that age. Essentially‚ the Government has been told to think again.”