header-logo header-logo

20 January 2011
Issue: 7449 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

DRA approaches retirement

The default retirement age will cease to exist from October

Employment lawyers predict that the cost of insurance benefits and redundancy compensation will increase for many employers as a result of the phasing out of the default retirement age (DRA).

The Department for Business, Innovation & Skills (BIS) confirmed last week that employers will no longer be able to compulsorily retire employees at 65 under DRA as of 1 October 2011. The DRA is to be phased out from 6 April onwards. This means that:

  • from 6 April, employers can no longer issue any notifications for compulsory retirement under DRA; and
  • between 6 April and 1 October, only people who were notified before 6 April and whose retirement date is before 1 October can be compulsorily retired under DRA.

Employers will continue to be able to operate a compulsory retirement age as long as they can justify it objectively. BIS offered air traffic controllers
and police officers as an example of this.

BIS has included an exemption for group risk insured benefits such as income protection, life assurance, sickness and accident insurance so that employers can continue to withdraw these when the employee reaches the age of 65.

ACAS has issued a 20-page guide for employers on the changes.
Employment lawyers said there was a lot for employers
to consider.

Rachel Dineley, age discrimination expert at Beachcroft, says: “The prospective cost to employers will vary considerably, depending on the nature of the organisation, age profile of its workforce and adequacy of pensions provision.

“In many cases it will lead to an increase in cost of both insurance benefits and redundancy compensation and there may also be a cost involved in making ‘reasonable adjustments’ when managing any potential disability issues.

“A key concern raised by the Confederation of British Industry was how an employer can manage an employee whose performance has started to decline – this will require careful management on the part of the employer, and while ACAS has produced guidance, the reality is that managers will need support and training to understand and proactively address problems where they arise. No ageist assumptions should be made along the way.”
 

Issue: 7449 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll