86 year old Secretary sacked

[furryjammies]

There is an article in the DF today about a now 88 year old woman who sacked from her NHS Secretary job for I think fairly spurious reasons at the age of 86. She has won her case for unfair dismissal. Do you think there should be a cut off point for retirement or should you be able to work as long as you want? She wanted to work until 90.

Depends on the job doesn't it? I'm all happy for a 90 year old to send emails, file and general admin but I wouldn't want a 90 year old performing an operation on me or driving the bus/ train I'm aboard!

@TulipsInbloom1 It would be an unlawful clause now.

@furryjammies The Trust claimed she had made errors, but the tribunal found that she was made a scapegoat for training failures (not hers). She was also subject to derogatory comments about her health and age, despite having a spotless attendance record, and the disciplinary investigation was heavily flawed.

How outrageous that you are arguing for age discrimination!

Next time you get on a plane, and see the 86 y/o pilot walking into the cockpit, let's see what you think about arguing against age discrimination then.

My DM was an elementary school teacher in the US. She was forced to retire at 70 (the oldest age her contract allowed). She was absolutely gutted and had been planning on carrying on until 80. I think she couldn’t quite believe they had actually enforced her contract, even though no one else had ever been allowed.

I think you should be able to remain in a job for as long as you are capable of carrying out the role.

The thing that policy cannot allow for is the individual differences in ageing. Some people will be spot on sharp and capable at 86. Some (many) will not. There should be a not-hurtful way to manage these people put without making them feel bad about a job they have done wonderfully for years or decades before. The compulsory retirement age used to provide this, but no longer does so it is tricky.

I went to a college where one of the porters was an 80-something year old lady. She couldn’t answer questions whilst walking. Literally, if you made small talk or asked her a question whilst she was crossing the room or getting your post (her main job), she would stop and look really confused and take a while to get going again. You had to wait for her to finish each job or enquiry before starting your next one, slowly and with no confusing side issues mentioned. You either had to allow at least 10 minutes for what should have been a 20 second conversation, or only go in when you were sure one of the other competent porters was on duty. No one wanted to sack her because it would have been hurtful and unnecessary, but she wasn’t capable.

When I'm elderly I won't need to eat much or go many places

You are joking?

This thread is quite an eye opener!

I can see why much older people couldn't do strenuous physical jobs, but come on. You think older people should get their slippers on and get in their rocking chair to make way for the youth.

thefirstruleoffightclub A 60 year old woman is at least 6 years of working till she gets her state pension. Only the well off can afford to retire before that. So there is nothing unusual in this.

I think anyone who WANTS to work past 65, probably didn't start work til they were 40, and/or has a piss easy cushy job.

Who the fuck would want to work (for someone else for minimum pay) til nearly 90?

Nope.

Bombardier25966 I suppose it's hard to compare performance - you can have someone in a job for years who is super efficient and another who takes forever to do anything, although not slow enough to get sacked. We've all worked with people like that!

furry I assume your mum gets housing benefit and that is a large part of her income?

By the time I get to retire, I will have worked for 50 years. No WAY am I working a SECOND longer than I have to.

newnameforthis Most of us will have no choice. I dont get my state pension till 67. Been working full time since 16.

I agree with @Craft1905 - whether people clutch pearls about 'age discrimination' or not, you ARE too old for some things.

Sorry and all that, but you are.

Craft1905 ha ha that's true. There must be rules for pilots, surgeons etc. Surely they are not insured into their 80s?

No, some people don't suit retirement.
I'll never forget my Dad telling me of the men who'd retired from his office and their life expectancy no being long after retirement.
It wasn't to do with health but losing the will when given free time and not being able to manage it.

There aren’t enough jobs to go round. It’s selfish when older people who receive pensions and have paid off their mortgages are still hogging jobs and preventing younger people from earning a living and paying into a pension. They should have to retire at 70-ish and give someone else an opportunity.

But there was no evidence that this lady was unfit for her role.

People should be treated as individuals.

Well that's the age I will be @marymarkle - 67!

If I will have worked for 50 years by the time I retire, I am not gonna be 55 am I?!

marymarkle no not housing benefit but she has arthritis so maybe that's why she gets more. I was really surprised at how much she gets - I won't get anything like it.

Some posters should take a trip to Florida over the winter. Whole towns are run by 'snow birds' - retirees who head south for the winter. Your groceries are packed by octogenarians, all the bar tenders are elderly, it's actually brilliant.

The rules for pilots, surgeons etc are based on capability, as they are at any age. It's not unlawful to dismiss someone if they're not fit to do their job.

If a pensioner has no private pension, they have to live on £163 a week if single or £248 as a couple. That really is not a lot to live on.

newnameforthis7 same here, I want some leisure time!

furry She must be getting extra for that, Because it is far more than most pensioners get.