LATEST AGE DISCRIMINATION CASES — age discrimination
Viewing entries tagged
Pay and benefits
A doctor left a pension scheme to avoid tax penalties. Years later, his employer set up a scheme to compensate those affected. It wasn’t indirect age discrimination to limit the retrospective effect of the scheme.
Comment
Did additional “pension strain cost” influence a decision not to make someone redundant?
The EAT found an error in the ET’s reasoning when looking at justification, so remitted the case for rehearing.
The ECJ rules that it was not discrimination to withhold a 10% termination payment to a “young person” but make that payment to older persons.
The ECJ has ruled on a German pay scheme where those over 35 years of age received greater pay compared to younger colleagues.
The EAT holds that a change to new terms after a TUPE transfer was a PCP.
A pay scheme for Austrian civil servants which was amended because of age discrimination, was still age discriminatory.
It wasn’t age discrimination for RBS to decline to offer a redundant employee a chance to change her mind about voluntary redundancy or redeployment.
ECJ rules transitional pay arrangement that retained age based pay awards was justified.
Government wins test case that could have had major implications for public sector pay.
Danish law which gave 3 years pay to civil servants, but not those of pensionable age, was age discrimination.
A cut off of 55 for PHI payments was direct and indirect age discrimination.
This case looks at differences in severance payments on voluntary redundancy in the Civil Service between younger and older leavers.
The EAT upheld the decision of an ET that an age discrimination claim centring around the contention that a benefit payable under an insurance contract was due to terminate at 65 was “a little short of absurd”
The ECJ held that a collective agreement which fails to take into account professional experience acquired with another airline company in the same group does not constitute age discrimination.
In these joined decisions, the ECJ has held that a term in a collective agreement which provides that the pay of a public sector employee is determined by reference to their age is unlawful.
An 18 year old who was fired for claiming minimum wage was fired.
The Pension Ombudsman rules that tapering of a lump sum payment under the Civil Service Compensation Scheme was in breach of the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006.
In an interim hearing, an ET finds that the test in Regulation 32(2) of the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006 is a mix of objective and subjective tests.
Barking and Dagenham Council loses appeal after 15 employees bring age discrimination claim.