This case involved two complaints of age discriminatory redundancy against Chivers (Ireland) Ltd (now owned by Premier Foods Ltd).

In particular, it involved complaints by two 62 year old female employees who, due to the cut-off point for ex-gratia payments based on age during redundancy situations, lost out an extra payment when redundancies occurred. Both were offered an early retirement package (retirement was normally 63 but some worked to 65) but neither could avail of the additional ex-gratia sum available to those made redundant under the age of 60.

The Equality Officer acknowledged that the "former Managing Director gave cogent and forthright evidence when he said his aim in devising the scheme was to keep costs down for the company and that the normal retirement age there was 63." She accepted that, "While it may be argued that business objectives and avoiding windfall payments to employees close to retirement are legitimate aims, where this justification clearly fails is that the means chosen to achieve these aims were not appropriate or necessary."

The Equality Officer found the redundancy scheme to be discriminatory in that it wasn't proportionate:

"While taking account of income forgone between termination of employment and compulsory retirement age is a legitimate aim, the means employed by Chivers (Ireland) Ltd was not appropriate. If the respondent had presented a tapered scheme based on income forgone, their justification would be less assailable."

She continued:

"The inequity of the scheme is obvious and is based exclusively on the age of the employees. While taking account of income forgone between termination of employment and compulsory retirement age is a legitimate aim, the means employed by Chivers (Ireland) Ltd was not appropriate. If the respondent had presented a tapered scheme based on income forgone, their justification would be less assailable. The total cost to the company if all the relevant employees over 60 received the ex-gratia payment was €41,207. Chivers (Ireland) Ltd was sold to Premier Foods for £21.8 million (sterling) in January 2007.In addition, the respondent would also be entitled to a 60% rebate from the Social Insurance Fund for all employees given statutory redundancy. Therefore, I also find the means chosen to achieve the aim was not necessary."

The respondent was ordered to pay the complainants the appropriate shortfall amount based on appended calculations.

http://bit.ly/tkMU8r