Nationwide Employment Lawyers
Legal enquiries and clients : 0333 242 3851
Get in Touch
Service Rating: Damian McCarthy 5 starts - Service Rate
  • About Us
    • Contact
    • Howell John
    • Damian McCarthy
    • Simon Armstrong
    • Case Studies
    • Employment Law News
  • Employee Services
    • Questionnaire
    • Contact
    • Locations
    • Dismissal
    • Whistleblowing Law
    • Discrimination
      • Sex discrimination
        • Maternity rights in employment
        • Pregnancy or maternity discrimination
        • Returning to work and flexible working
        • Health and safety for pregnant women in the workplace
        • Sexual Harassment
      • Disability discrimination
      • Race discrimination
    • Equal Pay
    • Bullying and Harassment
    • Family Friendly Rights
    • Disciplinary and grievance hearings
    • Contracts
    • Transfer of Undertakings
    • Agency workers and part time workers
    • Privacy at work
    • Constructive dismissal
    • Resignation letter templates
      • Constructive dismissal letter template
      • Standard notice resignation letter template:
      • Short or long notice request template
    • Health and Safety at Work
  • Locations
    • London – Berkeley Square
    • London – Canary Wharf
    • London – Croydon
    • London – Hammersmith
    • London – High Holborn
    • London – King’s Cross
    • London – Liverpool Street
    • London – London Bridge
    • London – Richmond
  • Case Studies
    • A v PWC
    • P v S (confidential)
    • Moira Stuart quits, reigniting BBC ageism row
    • Married HBOS bank manager propositioned by colleagues
  • News
  • FAQ
  • Contact



Forced Retirement Case – Police Officers Landmark Age Discrimination Win

South Wales, North Wales, West Midlands, Nottinghamshire, Devon and Cornwall could face a payout of millions of pounds after forcing officers to retire after 30 years. In this landmark case, a London Central Employment Tribunal made the ruling on behalf of 250 officers forced to retire under regulation A19. This regulation says that those below chief officer rank could be required to retire after 30 years, “in the general interests of efficiency.”

 

This regulation had previously been ruled lawful by the High Court last year, but was criticised by members of the Police Superintendents’ Association for England and Wales (PSAEW.) They argued that the retiring of older officers would not result in major savings.

 

As the government had announced following a spending review in October 2010 that it was cutting police funds, Nottinghamshire Chief Constable Chris Eyre argued that,

 

“It was necessary for the police authority to consider the use of regulation A19 as a  result of the wide-ranging austerity measures affecting public services.”

 

He also argued that,

 

“This was a very difficult decision for the authority and one which was taken after extensive consultation with officers who had 30 years’ pensionable service and the relevant staff associations,” and that, “had there been other viable alternatives the police authority would not have made the difficult decision to implement A19.”

 

Therefore, Deputy Chief Constable Dave Thompson of West Midlands Police has said that the police force are “actively considering,” an appeal. They now have 42 days to appeal this decision or they may face a bill for millions in compensation. Thompson has also stated that, “we note the decision of the employment tribunal and need some time to consider our position going forward.”

 

Following the tribunal result, Nottinghamshire Police Federation secretary Mick Taylor said both he and the officers involved had been “vindicated.”

 

PSAEW’s national secretary Graham Cassidy commented that:

“the decision is the culmination of a substantial amount of work from all those involved, including the former officers, their families, and all those who supported them throughout what was a devastating period in their lives. Although we are pleased with the result, nothing can make up for the loss to the country of hundreds  of experienced officers whose careers were cut short unnecessarily via discriminatory means.”

 

It will be interesting to see what will happen should the Police Force follow through with an appeal.




Social Share
  • google-share

Our specialist areas of law

  • Employment Tribunals
    • Employment Tribunals London
  • Dismissal
    • Unfair Dismissal
    • Constructive Dismissal & Resignation Advice
    • Compromise agreements
    • Executive Dismissal
    • Whistleblowing Law
    • Redundancy claims
    • Age Discrimination & Redundancy – Protection for all Ages In Redundancy
    • Collective redundancy
  • Whistleblowing
    • Whistleblowing Law
  • Discrimination (overview)
    • Discrimination at work – overview
  • –– Sex Discrimination
    • Maternity rights in employment
    • Pregnancy or maternity discrimination
    • Returning to work and flexible working
    • Health and safety issues for pregnant women in the workplace
  • –– Disability discrimination
    • Disability discrimination
  • –– Race discrimination
    • Race discrimination
  • –– Age discrimination
    • Age discrimination in recruitment and selection
    • Age discrimination – your rights at retirement
    • Age discrimination and redundancy – protection for all ages in redundancy
    • Age discrimination and pensions
    • Age discrimination and benefits
  • –– Sexual-orientation discrimination
    • Sexual-orientation discrimination in goods and services
  • –– Religious discrimination
    • Religious discrimination
  • –– Gender reassignment discrimination
    • Gender reassignment discrimination
  • Equal pay
    • Equal pay
  • Bullying and Harassment
    • Bullying and harrasment at work
  • Family-friendly rights
    • Family leave
    • Maternity rights in employment
    • Pregnancy and maternity discrimination
    • Return to work and flexible working
    • Health and safety for pregnant women in the workplace
    • Paternity rights
    • Maternity
    • Part-time workers
  • Disciplinary and Grievance Hearings
    • Disciplinary Hearings & Procedures
    • Grievance procedures
  • Contracts
    • Bonus disputes and discrimination
    • Bonus disputes
    • Bonus discrimination & The Risks Associated With It
    • Contract disputes and permanent health insurance
    • Employment contract disputes – restrictive covenants
  • Transfer of Undertakings
    • Transfer of undertakings (TUPE)
  • Agency Workers and Part Time Workers
    • Agency workers
    • Part-time workers
  • Privacy at Work
    • Privacy at work
  • Letter Templates
    • Constructive dismissal letter template
    • Standard notice resignation letter template:
    • Short or long notice request template

Contact Us

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
  • We will be able to help you quickly if you leave us a contact phone number. We keep this strictly confidential.

Quick Links

Navigation

About Us
Employee Services
Locations
Case Studies
News
FAQs
Contact

Terms

Privacy statement
Terms

Copyright Notice | Disclaimer | Website Terms & Conditions | Privacy Statement
ACAS | EHRC
Nationwide Employment Lawyers Ltd is Authorised and Regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. For peace of mind you can find information about our authorisation by checking the Registration number 838365 on the Financial Services Register : register.fca.org.uk. Please note all telephone calls are recorded, as required by the regulator. Nationwide Employment Lawyers Ltd is not a firm of solicitors. Instead we offer an exceptional level of service using specialist employment law Solicitors, Barristers and a Senior Advocate.
Please contact us using either the questionnaire, quick contact form (above) or telephoning us on 0333 242 3851.