News Articles >

Age Discrimination – Changes to Benefits

Unlike other forms of discrimination, such as race or sex discrimination, the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006 do allow a defence of justification in cases ofdirect discrimination, where this is ‘a proportionate means of achieving alegitimate aim’.

In the first major case involving the Regulations, which were introduced in October 2006, the Employment Tribunal (ET) has dismissed a £4.5 million age discriminationclaim brought against a City of London law firm (Bloxham v FreshfieldsBruckhaus Deringer).

Peter Bloxham, 54, was head of restructuring at Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer. He brought a claim of age discrimination against his former partners because he had lost outfinancially as a result of transitional arrangements made when the firm’spension scheme was being reformed. Had he been a year older, his retirementpension would not have been affected.

The ET found that Mr Bloxham had suffered less favourable treatment compared with partners aged55 or over and that the treatment would be discriminatory unless justified.However, when considering the test of justification, in the ET’s view,Freshfields did have a legitimate aim in reforming its pension arrangements.Without reform, the scheme in place meant that younger partners would bedisadvantaged as they would contribute more but receive smaller pensions. Thefirm had carried out a lengthy consultation before introducing the changes andno less discriminatory method of achieving the desired reform had been putforward then or since. The ET therefore found that the firm not only met butcomfortably passed the test. Its unanimous judgment was that Mr Bloxham’scomplaint was ‘not well founded’ and it dismissed his claims of direct andindirect age discrimination.

Says Clive Mackintosh, “The outcome in this case willbe welcomed by employers who find themselves in a similar situation. It hasbeen reported that Mr Bloxham has decided not to appeal against the decision.”