Government ‘open to debate’ on abolition of mandatory retirement ages

Speaking in the Dáil at the first stage of the Employment Equality (Abolition of Mandatory Retirement Age) Bill, Minister David Stanton said the Government “supports in principle measures aimed at facilitating fuller working lives”.

Ireland does not have a mandatory statutory retirement age in the private sector, but does in the civil and public services.

The bill has been introduced by John Brady, Sinn Féin’s spokesperson on social protection.

However, Mr Stanton said there are “serious technical problems with the Bill as drafted and that there are serious policy and expenditure issues that need to be considered very carefully”.

Among other issues, Mr Stanton said legal issues could arise from applying the legislation retrospectively.

He said: “It appears that the Bill is intended to apply retrospectively to pre-existing contracts of employment.

“The Attorney General has advised that legislation of this nature may be susceptible to legal challenges having regard to Article 15.5.1 of the Constitution which precludes the Oireachtas from declaring unlawful acts which were not so at the date of their commission.

“In addition, employers may consider that the legislation amounts to an interference with contractual relations and disproportionately interferes with their constitutionally-protected property rights.

“The legislation may further impact on pending legal proceedings (where an employee has challenged the justifications advanced by an employer for imposing a compulsory retirement age).

“This issue may, in the absence of transitional provisions, generate disputes and legal challenges. I would be interested in hearing how the Deputy proposes to address questions such as this.”

He concluded: “In closing, I would note that Government is open to debate on the current Bill. However, we need to proceed carefully in what is a complex area. What we would not want is a Bill that could have serious adverse or unintended consequences arriving on the Statute books where the State would then be vulnerable.”