Earlier this month, the preliminary hearing was held for the Employment Tribunal, in which John McCririck is alleging that Channel 4 discriminated against him under the Equality Act 2010, on the grounds of age. He is claiming £500k in basic compensation plus a further £2.5m for unfair dismissal. Channel 4 is looking to reduce its financial liability by arguing that McCririck was a self-employed freelancer rather than defend against the accusation of age discrimination
Jelf Employee Benefit’s Head of Jelf Money after Work, Lee Coles said: “An employer attempting to justify direct age discrimination must point to a legitimate aim of a social policy or public interest nature and not just individual business interests. In the case of the media industry, employers may believe that their viewers prefer to see younger, fresher faces but they will struggle to prove that the sacking of older employees is not, in the main, anything other than a commercial decision.
“There will be other industries, where the age and appearance of employees are arguably part of the product being sold – for example high-street fashion stores and health clubs – that will need to tread very carefully when terminating employment contracts. It remains to be seen what is deemed to be in the ‘public interest’ in future cases.
“Bottom line, some employees will want to carry on working for as long as possible, and as long as they are performing their role to an acceptable standard, their employer may simply have to accept the employee has the right to do so.
“Anti-age discrimination may well have introduced the unwanted consequence of making retirement a taboo subject. Employers feel they can’t ask any questions of the employee, and employees are concerned about possible consequences if they suggest they’re thinking of retiring.
“Better outcomes for both employer and employee can, however, be achieved through better communication, and workplace education can be the catalyst. Employees are more likely to commence an open dialogue about retirement where they can see a secure financial future and an attractive lifestyle beyond their current employment, and external specialists in this area are often best-placed to help with this.
“Whilst Channel 4 must have thought through the implications of their decision and whether or not McCririck benefits financially from his claim, employers and employees would do well to avoid finding themselves in a similar costly and stressful situation.”
