Labour Court Database __________________________________________________________________________________ File Number: CD9092 Case Number: LCR12847 Section / Act: S67 Parties: UNIVERSITY COLLEGE DUBLIN - and - COLLEGE GROUP OF UNIONS |
Dispute concerning the introduction of mandatory retirement at 65 years of age for academic staff.
Recommendation:
5. Having considered the submissions made by the parties, it is
the Court's view that, in an industrial relations context, the
question of the legality of the Governing Body's decision to
retire its staff at age 65 is irrelevant unless it is established
that the decision is contrary to the relevant statutes. The Court
notes that this has not been established and accordingly does not
deal with the question in this recommendation.
It is clear to the Court and agreed by the parties, that over many
years it has been "custom and practice", with only rare
exceptions, to continue the employment of staff to age 70 unless
earlier retirement was taken voluntarily. Up to the Governing
Body's decision of November, 1987, the continuation of this
practice was a reasonable expectation of the staff employed before
that date.
It is also clear to the Court that changed staffing and financial
circumstances in the College have created a situation in which
management is obliged to seek reasonable cost reductions in all
areas including staffing.
However, the decision of the College to introduce the lower
retirement age without adequate consultation and negotiation with
the Unions concerned, on behalf of their members, was contrary to
good industrial relations practice and cannot be justified by
claims of time or financial pressures. A continuation of the
situation would be equally unjustified. The Court therefore
recommends that the parties enter discussions without further
delay to establish how best the concerns and requirements of both
sides can be accommodated and to formalise as far as possible the
arrangements which the College can apply to ameliorate the effect
of any reduction in the retirement age on the staff involved.
Division: CHAIRMAN Mr McHenry Ms Ni Mhurchu
Text of Document__________________________________________________________________
CD9092 RECOMMENDATION NO. LCR12847
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACTS, 1946 TO 1976
SECTION 67
PARTIES: UNIVERSITY COLLEGE DUBLIN
AND
COLLEGE GROUP OF UNIONS
SUBJECT:
1. Dispute concerning the introduction of mandatory retirement at
65 years of age for academic staff.
BACKGROUND:
2. In 1987 a report to the finance committee on retirement age in
the College recommended the introduction of a retirement age of 65
for all staff on a phased basis i.e. reduction from 70 years by
one year each year. On 24th November, 1987 the governing body of
the College approved the recommendation that no further extensions
be made for retirement age beyond 65 years, but a staff member
could be continued in an acting capacity until the end of the
session in which he/she reaches the age of 65. Prior to 1987 the
position of the academic staff was that they could hold office
until they attained the age of 65 years and continue in office for
five further years subject to certain conditions as provided for
in the statutes of the College (details supplied to the Court).
The Unions rejected the College's decision and claim that existing
academic staff should retain the expectation of continuance in
employment up to the age of 70 years. No agreement was reached at
local level and the matter was initially referred on 23rd January,
1989 to the conciliation service of the Labour Court by the
Services Industrial Professional Technical Union. On 19th June,
1989 the Irish Federation of University Teachers also referred the
matter to the conciliation service. On 18th October, 1989 a
conciliation conference was held at which no agreement was reached
and the matter was referred on 5th February, 1990 to a full
hearing of the Labour Court which took place on 27th March, 1990.
UNION'S ARGUMENTS:
3. 1. Prior to 1987 it was custom and practice that academic
staff retired at the age of 70 years. Those who retired
before the age of 70 years did so voluntarily or due to ill
health.
2. At the time of joining the College academic staff were
clearly given to understand that they could reasonably expect
to remain in employment up to the age of 70 years. Financial
arrangements and commitments were calculated on this basis and
mandatory retirement at the age of 65 years would enormously
disadvantage the staff concerned. Early retirement would also
have an adverse affect on pension entitlements.
3. When the statutory and contractual provisions for the
continuance beyond the age of 65 years are examined it is
apparent that the fitness of the individual concerned is the
sole criterion identified and to be taken into account. These
provisions created the legitimate expectation amongst staff
that, given good health, they could remain in their jobs after
65 years of age if they wished to do so.
4. The College's decision alters the terms of employment
contracts without any discussions having taken place either
with the members directly or with their trade unions. This is
also in breach of the consultation agreement.
5. The academic staff who were employed by the College with a
statutory or other contractual entitlement and legitimate
expectation in regard to continuance in employment beyond age
65 and up to age 70 years, after due procedure, should retain
that right and expectation and have the associated procedures
adhered to.
COLLEGE'S ARGUMENTS:
4. 1. The College faced a financial crisis in 1987 due to a
severe reduction in its grant income and was forced to make a
substantial reduction in the number of staff employed.
Against this background the College decided on 24th November,
1987 to confirm its previously expressed intention to
discontinue extensions in office beyond the retiring age of 65
years as recommended by the finance committee report.
2. The College's statutes indicate that academic staff may be
continued in office beyond the age of 65 years but confer on
the staff no absolute right to be retained beyond 65 years of
age. Prior to November, 1987 many academic staff members were
retained on a year to year basis beyond the age of 65 years
but some others were not. Extension of employment beyond 65
years of age was not automatic.
4. 3. The Union has claimed that assurances were given to some
staff on recruitment, generally by heads of departments, that
they could expect to be continued in office until 70 years of
age. No evidence of such assurances has been produced. In
any event the heads of department would not have the authority
to vary the terms of the statutes.
4. In relation to possible financial loss the College's
pension scheme provides for the addition to a person's actual
years of pensionable service of up to one-third of the number
of such years. This provision has been used as generously as
possible and in a number of cases staff members who retired at
65 years of age have been given part-time work to supplement
their pensions.
5. The College considers that its decision of 24th November,
1987 was justified and was in accordance with the statutes.
It should be noted that no change has been made in the
relevant statutes and that the College could in the future
reverse or amend its decision in the light of changed
circumstances.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. Having considered the submissions made by the parties, it is
the Court's view that, in an industrial relations context, the
question of the legality of the Governing Body's decision to
retire its staff at age 65 is irrelevant unless it is established
that the decision is contrary to the relevant statutes. The Court
notes that this has not been established and accordingly does not
deal with the question in this recommendation.
It is clear to the Court and agreed by the parties, that over many
years it has been "custom and practice", with only rare
exceptions, to continue the employment of staff to age 70 unless
earlier retirement was taken voluntarily. Up to the Governing
Body's decision of November, 1987, the continuation of this
practice was a reasonable expectation of the staff employed before
that date.