Select a region
More than 30 firefighters claiming their new pension arrangements discriminate against them due to their age have had their cases extinguished - unlike their UK counterparts - due to an 'exception' in Jersey law.
Centring on the forced switchover from the more favourable final salary scheme to one based on an average of earnings over their entire career, the group made 32 individual claims against the States Employment Board (SEB) before the Employment and Discrimination Tribunal.
The proceedings followed success for UK firefighters, who won a similar case to return to their pre-2015 pension rates after the Court of Appeal found the changes to their pension scheme constituted unlawful age discrimination.
But the Jersey complaints have taken a rather different turn - they have been struck out due to the fact that a safeguard within the island’s law allowing for pension schemes to be an ‘exception’ when it comes to age discrimination.
Pictured: 32 firefighters had brought a collective dispute because they were too young to remain on their more favourable pension scheme.
Although legally this meant that the collective dispute had to be struck out, the Chairman Hilary Griffin expressed “the Tribunal’s discomfort” that this safeguard appeared to be put into the Discrimination Law “with the aim of protecting the CARE [new pension] Scheme and to stifle any claim against the” SEB relating to that scheme.
Despite raising this concern, Mrs Griffin said that, “...the Tribunal did not consider it appropriate to interfere with the decision of the States Assembly,” to include this safeguard in the Discrimination Law.
As part of the transitional arrangements, those over 48 (and therefore closer to retirement age) at the beginning of 2019 were offered the opportunity to remain on the old scheme, but those younger than that had to change over to the new one – and with it a lower accrual rate and higher retirement age.
Pictured: The Discrimination Law has been drafted with pension schemes as an exception to age discrimination.
At the hearing, Advocate Giles Emmanuel – representing the lead firefighter bringing the dispute – argued amongst other things that the SEB, “...should be subject to scrutiny, especially when it has implemented legislation which is discriminatory in nature."
Posting on Facebook following the publication of the ruling, the FRSA wrote: “Thirty-two of our Members, purely because of their age, will suffer financial detriment compared to those nearer to retirement, who would be affected the least, but were given greatest protection.
“These firefighters, will now retire at 60 years old, 5 years longer than they were contracted, while trying to maintain the fitness standard of an 18 year old. Studies show that up to 23% of personnel would fail to reach this criteria and would potentially force further actuarial reduction of their pension upon them.
“Fire doesn’t discriminate; Jersey law does.”
In the meantime, the FRSA’s continued defence of their legal victory over the SEB’s breach of their agreed collective dispute resolution procedure regarding the pension changeover is still ongoing as both parties await the latest ruling from the Court of Appeal.
Comments
Comments on this story express the views of the commentator only, not Bailiwick Publishing. We are unable to guarantee the accuracy of any of those comments.