In my last blog piece I asked whether pension cost alone could justify discriminatory treatment in terminating employment. The answer is no, but it does help, the Court of Appeal has ruled: Woodcock v Cumbria PCT. Saving money can’t be the sole aim of a discriminatory practice – there has to be a non-cost reason as well. But it may not be particularly difficult to find that non-cost reason. If an employer can do that, then balancing cost factors against the effect of the treatment may allow the employer to justify its actions. (more…)

Clients often question whether the costs that would result from changes made to their pension schemes to comply with age discrimination laws can be taken into account when determining whether the changes need to be made. How much weight can be given to costs to justify age discrimination? We should be finding out the answer to this soon, when the Woodcock case is decided.  Recently the Chancellor revealed his plans to extend the country’s austerity programme and it is arguable that cost savings have rarely featured quite so prominently on the political agenda. (more…)