Rights as an Elderly Employee - Redundancy vs Retirement

[gallapunk]

My dad hit 65 two years ago and gave notice to retiire to his employer. The employer said they didn't want to take it. My dad asked if they would consider him only working part-time, but his employer said no, they wanted him full-time as per usual, nothing was to change.

All went well. Dad had a pension, but got used to having extra money from the income he didn't expect to have (working).

Last year the company started asking for redundancies. Dad jumped up straight away (after a long service, it would be a nice lump of cash to live on whilst - hopefully - working part-time somewhere). The company said no way.

Now they've given him 6 months notice to retire!

How can they do this? It's not fair! Can anyone advise where he stands? He's tried the Citizens Advice in his area, but all he gets is a message saying they're not open (and when they supposedly are, it's the same message). Would really appreciate any advice.

[Jan1957]

Sorry I do not know the answer myself but there is a website that can help you. www.ageconcern.org.uk and they have a section on retirement, dismissal or redundancy.

Hope this helps as it does sound unfair to me.

[buildersmate]

Most of the answer to your question is here.
http://www.berr.gov.uk/whatwedo/employment/dis crimination/age-discrimination/page26488.html
The critical bit of information you didn't tell us is what the normal retirement age for your dad's company is.

If it was 65 then I don't understand the bit about refusing to retire him two years ago. No-one is obliged to work and he could have simply said 'I'm off'.
However in the situation he currently finds himself, it appears to be correct that an employer can forcibly retire a person after their 65th birthday given 6 months notice - read the paragraph under the words Notification.
As the above says, you could probably check this out with Age Concern.

[gallapunk]

Thank you both, I will have a look at the sites.

He stayed on past retirement initially as a favour to his employer, buildersmate, because they didn't want to lose him. Even though the normal retirement age is 65, they are flexible if people want to stay.

It's just a way of getting out of paying him redundancy money, or that's how it seems, which just doesn't seem fair.

Thanks again.

[buildersmate]

Galla - have a look at this Case Study - its the best that I can find for you.http://www.ageconcern.org.uk/AgeConcern/ageism _advisers_case7.asp
This is an area of employment law I know less about - it is relatively new. But the case study suggests that there isn't much hope I can hold out - we've already covered off the 6 months notice thing.
Age Concern may have some internal 'experts'.

[buildersmate]

Sorry, I should have added, the key thing now seems to be whether there is any evidence that the normal retirement age for your dad's post in that company is higher than his current age - otherwise I reckon it won't fly.