13th July, 2009
All the latest stories from the world of work
The Heyday case is set to return to the UK High Court following a judgement from the European Court of Justice. The High Court will hear the case on July 16th.
The case was brought by Age Concern and Help the Aged, who argue that the UK’s default retirement age introduced in the 2006 Employment Equality (Age) Regulations fails to interpret a European directive on age discrimination correctly.
The case has been bounced back from the European Courts and now the UK government must make the case for why its social or employment policy objectives make the default retirement age necessary.
Hundreds of other cases are on hold until the final ruling on this case is made.
Last month’s employment figures from the Office of National Statistics showed that older people were one of the groups hit hardest by the recession, damaging pensions, and forcing many who would like to work longer into early retirement. The number of people aged 50 plus out of work has increased by nearly 15 per cent (14.2%) over the past three months and those claiming Jobseekers Allowance has risen by 92.7 per cent over the past year.
The High Court hearing is due to run until July 20th, and a judgement will be made in the autumn.
17 per cent of BA’s workforce responded to the chief executive’s plea to help cut employment costs. Nearly 7,000 employees have agreed to take unpaid leave, reduced hours, or unpaid work.
Chief executive Willie Walsh, who will also not receive pay in July, said, "I want to thank everyone who has volunteered to help us pull through this difficult period,"
Unite, BA’s largest union, said that the deal was “insulting”, and a spokesman pointed out earlier in the week that forfeiting pay was far easier for Walsh who earns £735,000 per annum.
BA have said that they will run the scheme again later in the year for those who did not apply before the June 24th deadline.
Many observers have been surprised at the level of take up among staff. David Guest, professor in organisational psychology at King's College London, offered two reasons:
"Either they have high levels of commitment to the firm," he said, "or they have high levels of insecurity."
The government plans to amend the Coroner and Justice Bill, currently going through parliament, to regulate damages based contingency fees. These no-win no-fee arrangements often see employment lawyers taking a percentage of the awards made to claimants.
Justice Secretary Jack Straw said: "Unregulated contingency fee arrangements expose claimants to unfair terms and conditions being imposed by those representing them, which could lead to huge slices being taken out of their damages. The measures announced by the government seek to redress this, offering proper regulation to protect the interests of consumers."
Among the government’s proposals are measures to limit the percentage of the awards that lawyers can take; require legal representatives to disclose full information on costs; require legal representatives to provide information to clients on alternative ways of funding their action.
According to the Ministry of Justice’s research, damages based agreements can result in legal representatives taking between 10 and 50 per cent of the claimant’s awards.
