WRC ruling upholds mandatory retirement age
The Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) has issued a landmark decision upholding Eircom Limited's (trading as Eir) right to enforce a mandatory retirement age of 65.
describes the ruling in the case of long-serving field technician Patrick Donnellan as a significant victory for employers seeking clarity on age-based retirement policies following recent Supreme Court guidance.
Donnellan, who had been with the telecommunications company for 44 years, challenged the company’s refusal to grant him a contract extension when he reached 65 in April 2024.
Despite his desire to continue working to support a family member through third-level education, the WRC found that Eir’s policy was both "consistent" and "objectively justified".
Central to the case was whether Eir could prove that its mandatory retirement age served a "legitimate aim".
Under the Employment Equality Act, age discrimination is permissible only if the employer can show the policy is a proportionate means of achieving a valid social or business goal.
Eir defended its policy by citing four primary objectives:
- Inter-generational fairness: Creating promotional and entry-level pathways for younger staff,
- Succession planning: Managing the "cliff-edge" risk of losing highly skilled technicians,
- Health and safety: Acknowledging the physically demanding nature of "safety-critical" field roles,
- Workforce diversity: Maintaining a balanced age structure.
Evidence presented at the hearing revealed that 60% of Eir's field technicians were currently over 60.
In the Clare area where Mr Donnellan worked, that figure rose to 88%.
The company argued that, without a fixed retirement age, it would be impossible to plan the hiring of apprentices to replace the aging workforce.
Adjudication Officer Úna Glazier-Farmer relied heavily on the 2024 Supreme Court ruling in Seamus Mallon v The Minister for Justice.
That case established that employers do not need to conduct "individual capacity assessments" – testing if a specific person is still fit to work – if a general retirement age is already justified.
The WRC found that Eir was "best placed" to assess what was necessary for its business operations. The adjudicator noted that Eir’s policy had been reviewed in 2020 through external benchmarking and union engagement, making it a "coherent" and "systematic" rule rather than an arbitrary decision.
Cushion
The WRC also considered the financial impact on Donnellan. While acknowledging his personal financial commitments, the adjudicator noted that upon retirement, he received a tax-free lump sum of €68,087 and an annual pension of €22,695.
This "pension provision" helped the company meet the legal requirement of proportionality, ensuring the employee was not left in a state of hardship.
Implications
This decision serves as a reminder to employees that personal financial need is rarely enough to overturn a well-documented company policy. For employers, the case highlights the importance of
- Clear documentation: Having a written retirement policy that identifies specific legitimate aims,
- Consistency: Applying the rule uniformly across the workforce,
- Advanced planning: Showing how retirement ages link to apprentice intake and succession.
As the Government considers new legislation to restrict mandatory retirement ages below the state pension age (currently 66), this WRC ruling confirms that for now, the Mallon principles provide a robust shield for companies with aging workforces, the Anne O'Connell Solicitors briefing points out.