![[Basket]](images/basket.png){kind=small}
Your order![[cover image]](images/issue/BK201305.jpg)
Redundancy selection criteria and age discrimination
A selection procedure that discriminates on grounds of age can be objectively justified, as long as it is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. However, tribunals scrutinise closely the use of such criteria, to make sure they are a genuinely proportionate response, and that there was no more suitable non-discriminatory option available. A solution is more likely to be judged proportionate if it has been the subject of proper consultation with a recognised union. For example:
The Land Registry urgently needed to relocate to smaller premises and cut staff numbers, so the Registry offered voluntary redundancy terms to the group of employees who were the cheapest to release under the terms of the Civil Service Compensation Scheme. This meant that those entitled to the most generous benefits under the scheme — those aged between 50 and 54 — were not offered voluntary redundancy. The EAT scrutinised the decision and decided it was objectively justifiable, as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, to target only the cheapest workers on this occasion, but warned that this decision must not be seen as a green light to selection on the basis of age-related cost.
HM Land Registry v Benson [2011] UKEAT/0197/11