Author
No results available
In the case of Patrick Donnellan and Eircom Limited (ADJ-00051860) the Complainant brought a complaint under section 77 of the Employment Equality Act, challenging the Respondent’s enforcement of a mandatory retirement age of 65 and its refusal of his application for an extension of his contract.
Facts:
Prior to his retirement in April 2024, the Complainant had been employed by the Respondent (and/or its predecessor) for 44 years. The Complainant submitted that his contract of employment did not specify a retirement age. He submitted that it made reference to 65 in terms of receipt of pension but there was no requirement to retire at that age. The Complainant was employed as a field technician.
The Complainant submitted that he had substantial financial commitments for example putting a family member through third level education and was not in a position to retire at 65. Both sides acknowledged that he sought an extension of his contract but that this was refused citing factors such as intergenerational fairness, health and safety concerns and succession. He appealed this internally within the Respondent but his appeal was unsuccessful.
Stay informed with the latest legal developments at Global Law Experts
posted 1 day ago
posted 1 day ago
posted 1 day ago
posted 1 day ago
posted 1 day ago
posted 1 day ago
posted 1 day ago
posted 1 day ago
posted 1 day ago
posted 1 day ago
posted 1 day ago
posted 1 day ago
No results available
Find the right Legal Expert for your business
Send welcome message