compulsory retirement age

A number of legal websites are indicating that employers may have to justify retiring employees at age 65 following recent case in EU .

Is it true that the civil service no longer have a maximum age of 65 and compulsory retirement since 2004?

when I'm 64 said:

Is it true that the civil service no longer have a maximum age of 65 and compulsory retirement since 2004?

Click to expand...

I don' think that is correct.

Mind you i htink the rest of use who pump money in the National Pension reserve fund would like it if they did....

when I'm 64 said:

Is it true that the civil service no longer have a maximum age of 65 and compulsory retirement since 2004?

Click to expand...

Yep, its true. New entrants are free to keep working until we drop

thanks for clearing that up.

Therefore an employer in the private sector cannot compulsory retire an individual who does not have a contract stating a retirement age of 65 Is this correct?

Some staff would have an age in their contract of employment of retirement and because of this those who don't are implied to have the same. But reading some of the solicitors website on this issue they are all indicating that 'employers will have to justify compulsorily retiring an individual..!

So can an individual argue this in order to stop being terminated on the basis of reaching a certain age?

You must be fit for work and the employer will have the right to assess your suitabilty/capability to continue - I'm not too sure on details though.

In the case of the public service I belive a medical will be done. Put it like this would you like an 80 year old surgeon performing surgery on you.

A friend of mine will be 65 this month. For this reason he has been told he has to stop working. He has contributed to a DB pension scheme but he also has avc's in a DC scheme. When he went to find out the value of his avc's to supplement his main pension he found that the value of this fund is only 75% of the original money he invested.

Q. Does his employer have to justify ending his employment on grounds other than age? He does not want to give up his job so what can he do.

Q Can he defer taking his avc's until the market comes back hopefully to at least equal to the original sum he invested. or

could be get an ARF to the value of the original investment from the same financial institution

Sorry to go a bit off the thread but in general the Civil Service situation is not going to take effect for a long time as it is only new entrants that are affected.

So, take young Clerical Officer aged 20 taking new job in civil service under new rules in 2004 he will be due to retire (age 65) in 2049 he can then consider his options, to retire or not.

Maybe it's called forward thinking

If someone who joined the Civil Service before 2004 decides, at 65, that they'd like to stay on for a while, do they have any option? Seems strange that it would only apply to certain people.

It is a condition of employment for persons employed prior to 2004 that retirement is at maximum age 65. This condition was changed for new employees after that date which explains why there are different rules for different staff and why pre-2004 staff can't stay on past 65.