Fairness of termination of employment due to old age

Abstract

This dissertation serves as a legal analysis of a crucial labour issue, namely old age and retirement, which inevitably affects, or at least concerns, all employees, this dissertation will concentrate on the legal analysis of the principles which currently regulate the fairness of any termination of employment due to an employee reaching a certain age. The subject is deemed to be both relevant and actual, due to the relatively new amendment to one the Social Assistance Amendment Act, Act number 6 of 2008, whereby the retirement age of men has periodically been lowered from 65 to 60. The introduction to the last mentioned Act states to purpose of the Amendment Act, namely: “To amend the Social Assistance Act, 2004, so as to regulate afresh the eligibility of men for an older person's grant”. This inevitably had an impact on employers’ policies, relevant contractual clauses and the operational aspects of many businesses. Our society needs to protect the norms of fairness in not only the dismissal of employees, but also with regard to pre-employment interviews, advertisements, requirements set by labour brokers, etcetera. Any such similar study will inevitably lead to the question of what the most severe sanction could be when it is ruled that a dismissal is automatically unfair. The issue of retirement is a constitutionally enshrined and protected right and The Labour Relations Act honours this right by also providing “double the protection” against discrimination merely due to old age. This dissertation will concentrate on the latter part of the scale of unfairness, namely automatically unfair dismissals, which inevitably leads to a study of that fine line or balance between unfairness of a dismissal, which is not based on any arbitrary discriminatory ground as opposed to those dismissals which are. Firstly, the starting point is the pre-requisites / requirements for dismissal. Secondly distinction in labour law between “unfair dismissal” and “automatically unfair dismissal” is focused on. This entails a look at the meanings as set out in Sections 186 (1) and Section 187, especially Section 187 (1) (f). Thirdly a study of the Employment Equity Act’s prohibition of unfair discrimination as set out in Chapter II, Sections 5 to 11 will provide more clarity on the reason why not only the Labour Relations Act deals with or should deal with discrimination. Fourthly, the Social Assistance Amendment Act’s amendment of retirement age for males and the impact on the labour market in the RSA will be examined Thereafter, a brief comparison of certain countries’ legislation, practice and procedure on unfair discrimination due to old age, will be set out. It is the author of this dissertation’s objectives to:. <ul> (i) attempt to bring the impact of the Social Assistance Amendment Act, Act number 6 of 2008, to the attention of South African employers, employees and the State; (ii) highlight the need for employer’s to tread carefully when dealing with aspects which may easily be deemed to be automatically unfair; (iii) clarify the murky waters between fair dismissals and automatically unfair dismissals; (iv) present the cases “walking the tightrope” to provide more clarity and insight into the reasoning of Commissioners and Judges; (v) elaborate on the compulsory referral of automatically unfair dismissals to the Labour Court; (vi) Analyse the relevant Constitutional clauses and consequences of contravention thereof; (vii) Point out all relevant aspects of the Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act, Act number 4 of 2000; (viii) Shine a spotlight on the expanding realm of Social Security and the impacts thereof on this topic of discussion and ‘visa versa’; (ix) Attempt to provide answers to the self-posed question of whether or not the gap between unfair and automatically unfair dismissals should be broadened or narrowed, and; (x) take a brief, critical look into the cost effectiveness and accessibility of employees to our tribunals and Courts to satisfy employees that their rights are indeed easily enforceable. </ul>