With the removal of the Default Retirement Age (DRA), employers and recruiters have been urged to think more flexibly about older people entering the workplace.

The advice comes from Rachel Krys, campaign director of age campaigners the Employers Forum on Age (EFA).

The government has today confirmed that it will remove the DRA and proceed with its plan to phase it out between 6 April and 1 October 2011.

Currently the DRA enables employers to force staff to retire at 65 regardless of their circumstances. The change, from 6 April, stops employers from issuing any notifications for compulsory retirement using the DRA procedure.

Between 6 April and 1 October, only people who were notified before 6 April and whose retirement date is before 1 October will be able to be compulsorily retired using the DRA. From 1 October, employers will not be able to use the DRA to compulsorily retire employees. While the government is removing the legislation, individual employers can operate a compulsory retirement age, provided that they are able to objectively justify it.

The government has also:

• published guidance with Acas (Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service) as well as new Age Positive guidance setting out how many employers manage without fixed retirement ages and benefit from the employment and retention of older workers.
• committed to introducing an exception so that there are not unintended consequences for employers that currently voluntarily offer group risk insured benefits (income protection, life assurance, sickness and accident insurance, including private medical cover) due to concerns that removal of the DRA could lead to increased costs and uncertainty for businesses by in effect removing the cut-off point beyond which such benefits are currently no longer offered.

Krys told Recruiter: “One of things issues in stopping employers recruiting people in their 60s and even their early to mid 50s is a fear around candidates wanting to retire soon, which will mean they will not get any return on investment. I hope this frees up recruiters to think much more flexibly about older people and new older people coming into their workforce.

“Even now recruiters can’t refuse to employ someone unless they are within six months of the DRA. That will go but that rule has meant that people have worked 15 years in advance of that and anyone over 50 has been ignored. It ensures older people are judged on ability. Age is a very poor indicator of how long someone will do a job. We need to think slightly differently.

“Employers have had over a year to think about this; they knew this was coming. They will have to make sure their policies are in place.”

Employment relations minister Edward Davey says: “Retirement should be a matter of choice rather than compulsion – people deserve the freedom to work for as long as they want and are able to do so.

“We are putting in place support to help business adapt to the change, but it is important to remember that about two-thirds of employers already operate without fixed retirement ages – and many of those with retirement ages already offer flexibility for workers to work longer.”

Chris Ball, chief executive of TAEN – The Age and Employment Network, says: “We welcome the coalition’s resolve to stick to its timetable for scrapping the DRA.

“However, allowing exceptions for certain groups of workers – such as air traffic controllers and police officers – is unacceptable. Any use of age as a proxy for ability and competence is discriminatory and will penalise people who are perfectly able and capable to go on doing their jobs, and contributing to the success of the organisations they work for.”

Dianah Worman, public policy adviser at the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD), adds: “Today’s final confirmation that the DRA will be phased out between April and October this year is welcome news. It must now mark a step-change in the attitudes of some employers and managers towards older workers.

“Much of the language deployed by some opponents of today’s announcement talks in derogatory terms about making it more difficult to ‘get rid of people’. This kind of corrosive language not only affects people at retirement – it can blight the careers of older employees filed by ineffective and poorly trained managers in the ‘retirement pending’ tray.

“Poor performers can and should be tackled by managers regardless of their age. The date of someone’s birthday should not come into such decisions, but the existence of the DRA has acted as a smokescreen and easy get-out clause for poor management for far too long.”