Just a quick question with regards to a new employment contract.

I recently changed jobs and I noticed with some astonishment that one clause states it automatically terminates on my 65th birthday.

It wasn't mentioned and I didn't ask during the job interview, as I thought I cannot be retired against my will anymore, but my contract states it will automatically end on my 65th birthday. I didn't realize they could do that ?

On another note it also states if I wish to end my employment I will have to give three months notice, but if my employer wishes to end it, they will give no more than 1 weeks notice. I also am a bit surprised they can put themselves in a far better position, shouldn't it be the same for both parties ?

It is a full time position, 39 hours per week

The notice period issue is standard.

Re retirement age clause, I don't believe age discrimination laws prevent this as it applies to all employees. I.e people are not individually discriminated against. Acolleague of mine went through this issue and they had to retire. You should ask your HR department whether the contracts of employment will be amended in line with the revised state pension age. Obviously 65 was based on the previous pension age.

 

as it applies to all employees. I.e people are not individually discriminated against. .

The clause is only in newer contracts, that were drawn up after the law came into force. Employees who have been working in this company from before the law changed are not affected as it hasn't been added to their contracts retrospectively. It only applies to employees who have joined since the law came into force apparently. So only new employees will be affected.

My understanding is that an automatic retirement age is age discrimination. However, it will be lawful if the discrimination can be justified. For example, a law firm has been allowed to make its partners retire at 65 to ensure that there are promotion opportunities for younger lawyers (who would otherwise want to move to different law firms). The key point is that the employer will need to have a good reason in order for it to be lawful. Have a read of this - http://www.theguardian.com/money/2012/apr/25/age-discrimination-employers-retirement-dates.

Most employment contracts I've seen have the same notice period either way. 1 week for you vs 3 months for the employer sounds pretty unreasonable, you can always ask them to change it.

The minimum periods of notice allowed by law are stated here: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/18/section/86. You'll see that, once you have 2 years service, the minimum notice period you are entitled to will increase.

SP has it spot on.

The difficulty for an employer is trying to justify a retirement age. Why choose 65 - why not 64 or 66? Many employers can't answer that question and if they can't, it's probably unlawful.

I also agree that the notice provision is unreasonable. It's not unlawful, but it's certainly not fairly balanced and I wouldn't be comfortable drafting such a one sided clause!

(Although your statutory notice is one week for each year of service, so if you stick it out for 12 years you'd be almost even...)

I don't know your situation but depending how much you need the job, I'd be seriously wondering if I wanted to work for a company issuing a contract like that if I was you.

so tough choice- take the job and ignore their stupidity in the drafting of the contract or reject the offer because if they are dumb enough to have such conditions in a contract they are not going to be a good employer anyway.

Also, how close to retirement are you anyway, it may not be of any relevance if this is just another step on the ladder.

I was grateful for the job offer so didn't notice these clauses until I filed the contract away at home. It wasn't specifically discussed or mentioned and I never had such clauses in previous contracts of employment.

I am not about to retire in the next few years , so probably won't be there anymore when it comes to that time (or when I have earned my equal 12 weeks notice period in 12 years time )

It just puzzled me when I read it.

Especially as my retirement age would not be 65 anymore anyway due to new rules and regulations, so I couldn't understand why my contract would terminate at 65 years of age, what was special about 65, but of course that used to be the official retirement age, so it was supposed to be forceful retirement through the back door.

Well if it did come to that day when you turned 65 how are they going to dismiss you legally? they cant say it is retirement or a requirement of the work that you suddenly become unfit to do it by age so it will cost them dearly to boot you out. I bet they just hadnt thought things out and copied and pasted an old contract and said that will do.

I would have thought they would just tell me not to come back after my 65th birthday as my contract was now void, as it was only temporary until I turned 65 or something to that effect.

This clause was apparently added to contracts for new starters after the law came into force that prevented automatic retirement at age 65.

Maybe they were advised this was a legal way around it ?

I doubt they took legal advice on this.

If they tried to dismiss you at 65, you could make an age discrimination claim. In order to defend the claim they would have to demonstrate to an Employment Tribunal that they have a very good legitimate reason for making people retire at 65. If they do not have a very good legitimate reason, they would be on the hook to pay compensation for unfair dismissal and age discrimination.

To be honest, this sort of clause will only be legal in a small number of cases. I doubt there are that many situations where a compulsory retirement clause can be legally justified.

Can I still un-accept a job offer before I start a new job ? I.e. whilst still on my notice period with my current employer ?

yes.

Can I still un-accept a job offer before I start a new job ? I.e. whilst still on my notice period with my current employer ?

You can but might not be wise with nothing else to go to. You could just take it to tide you over until something better turns up.

Sorry, I didn't explain the entire turn of events. My current employer called me into a meeting today and I was told they would like me to stay, they said they would match the offer I had (money wise). As I am not entirely keen on the terms and conditions of the new company and have worked for my current company for a while I decided to stay put. So wanted to put my mind at rest. My current company also said I was entitled to change my mind in such a situation, but wanted to make sure as the advice here is always so good.

Good stuff, well done.

If there is an opportunity, it might be worth telling the new employer why you had doubts. This might encourage them to remove such unfair terms from their contracts in future.