Age discrimination: Avoidance of "windfall" benefit justified notice of redundancy before formal consultation meeting
This report relates to 1 case(s)
Woodcock v Cumbria Primary Care Trust  IRLR 119 EAT (1 other report)
In Woodcock v Cumbria Primary Care Trust  IRLR 491 CA, the Court of Appeal upheld the EAT decision that the employer was justified in dismissing a senior member of staff, who had been at risk of redundancy for some time, before he reached the age of 50 to avoid him getting a pension "windfall". However, the Court of Appeal stressed that this case has unusual facts and it is not opening the door for employers to time a reorganisation solely to prevent an employee from qualifying for enhanced pension rights.
In Woodcock v Cumbria Primary Care Trust  IRLR 119 EAT, the EAT held that an employer that directly discriminated against a redundant employee by bringing forward his notice of dismissal to avoid incurring the substantial costs of enhanced pension entitlements that would crystallise on his 50th birthday was justified in doing so. Although not directly relevant in this case, the EAT also cast doubt on the "cost plus" approach to justification.