Search Join Download

Legal Briefing

< back to search results

HR briefing: Court of Appeal hands down key ruling on age discrimination

Overview

The Court of Appeal has handed down an important decision in the context of age discrimination and criteria for career progression. Endorsing the earlier judgement of the Employment Appeal Tribunal, the Court has found that it was not discriminatory on the grounds of age for the employer to require an employee to hold a degree in order to be promoted to the top level of its career structure.

This was so notwithstanding that, at age 61, the employee would not have had time to undertake the necessary qualification prior to retiring at age 65.

The claimant, Mr Homer, had enjoyed a successful career as an officer in the West Yorkshire Police Force before taking up the position of internal legal adviser. Although he did not have a law degree, he was accepted to the new post on the basis of his considerable skills and experience in criminal law.

The majority of subsequent recruits to the legal advisers' team were required to hold a law degree. A number of years later, the holding of a degree qualification became more significant still following a departmental review aimed at aiding staff recruitment and retention. New salary and promotions structures were introduced, eligibility for the top band of which required qualification to degree level.

Mr Homer was promoted to the second band of the new career structure but, despite meeting all other criteria for further promotion, was not promoted to the top level because of his lack of a degree in law.

Having challenged this unsuccessfully internally, Mr Homer commenced an employment tribunal claim. The basis of his claim was that his employer's insistence upon a law degree for promotion was indirectly discriminatory on the grounds of age and resulted in his loss of status and inability to obtain increased remuneration. Already in his 60s, Mr Homer would not have time before his retirement at age 65 to complete a law degree.

This paper by Eversheds examines the legal context of the case and assesses the impact of the decision.

Click “view briefing” to continue reading.

Rating: 1 person found this useful

Categories related to Equal Treatment