Harry has been forced into early retirement by his employer at age 68 after over 40 years of working for the company. He has however, been given benefits that are 20 percent higher than the amount that he had been making per month. The reason given by the employer for the forced retirement is that Harry is no longer able or showing ability to perform his duties at the company as expected.
As the presiding judge, I would uphold the company’s decision to retire Harry. This is because they have substantial evidence that he does not work well as expected anymore, which puts to rest the suspicion that he could have been let free due to age discrimination. The Age Discrimination in Employment act prohibits employers from forcing their members of staff who are considered elderly into retirement. This law is meant to protect the aging generation from exploitation and discrimination as compared to their younger counterparts. This law, however, has exceptions that qualify the decision made by Simpson Securities as valid. First, the decision is acceptable by law when the employee in question is more that 65 years of age. Harry was 68 at the time he was offered the retirement package.
Secondly, this decision is valid when the company is able to prove that the employee in question is involved in a job that requires high policy decision making or that age is a bona fide qualification for the job. We are informed that Harry’s job requires that he interacts frequently with the clients, a role that he has been failing in recently, leading to the high chances that his lack of performance may pull back the company.
The company has also offered Harry a lucrative retirement package that will ensure that he does not suffer financially when he leaves the company. Having made all these considerations, I chose to uphold Simpson Securities decision to retire Harry.