The sky does have a limit when it comes to the age of commercial pilots

by Dentons
Contact

Dentons

The default retirement age in the UK was abolished on 6 April 2011. Since then, some employers have set their own fixed retirement age. However, in order to implement a fixed retirement age, and avoid successful claims of direct age discrimination, employers must be able to show that the limit is objectively justified. The limit must be intended to meet a legitimate aim and having that retirement age must be a proportionate means of achieving that aim. Another way to defend an age discrimination claim might be to rely on the occupational requirement defence under the Equality Act 2010.

In the historic UK case of Seldon v. Clarkson Wright & Jakes, an employment tribunal decided that a law firm's compulsory retirement of a partner at the age of 65 was objectively justified. The tribunal highlighted the requirements for justifying an age restriction on partners at a law firm. The tribunal looked at various factors in coming to its decision, including the firm's aims of retention and workforce planning, the partners' consent to the retirement age when signing the partnership deed, collegiality, the state pension age at the time and case law coming from the European Court of Justice which upheld a mandatory retirement age of 65 in respect of a variety of aims.

In the recent German case of Fries v. Lufthansa CityLine GmbH C-190/16, the Advocate General gave an opinion on the latest challenge to the imposition of an age limit in employment. This dealt with the age restrictions imposed on commercial airline pilots and reaffirmed the requirements courts will look to in order to justify direct age discrimination.

Relevant legislation

The Advocate General's opinion in this case was considered in light of the EU Regulation on Civil Aviation Aircrew (the Regulations). The Regulations provide that when a pilot reaches the age of 65 he or she can no longer undertake "commercial air transport" by flying commercial aircraft. Furthermore, a pilot between the ages of 60 and 65 is only permitted to pilot a commercial aircraft where he or she is part of a multi-pilot group in which all other pilots are below the age of 60. The Advocate General considered whether the Regulations were compatible with reference to the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (EU Charter), which states that:

  1. under article 15, everyone has the right to engage in work and pursue a freely chosen occupation; and
  2. under article 21, any discrimination on the grounds of age (amongst other things) shall be prohibited.

The facts

Mr Fries was a pilot for Lufthansa in Germany. His employment was subject to a collective agreement which provided that his employment would terminate two months after his 65th birthday, when he reached the retirement age provided for in the pension scheme. However, on turning 65, Mr Fries was dismissed. Lufthansa relied on the Regulations to explain his dismissal. Mr Fries countered Lufthansa's position by arguing that he could have continued with his employment, restricting his duties to training other pilots, acting as an examiner and flying non-commercial flights (without passengers, cargo or mail) (the Alternative Duties). Mr Fries contended that this would have been excluded from the ambit of the duties that the age restrictions were intended to protect. As a result, Mr Fries pursued a claim in relation to the pay he would have received had Lufthansa continued to employ him for a further two months (in accordance with the collective agreement).

The issues

It was mutually agreed that Mr Fries could not rely on the EU Equal Treatment Directive (2000/78) (the Directive) to pursue his case as this essentially amounted to a judicial review of the Regulations. The case was referred to the European Court of Justice to clarify the position with regard to the interaction between this secondary and primary legislation. The European Court of Justice was asked to determine two main points:

  1. whether the Regulations were compatible with articles 15 and 21 of the EU Charter; and
  2. whether the Alternative Duties were included in the definition of "commercial air transport" under the Regulations.

The Advocate General's opinion

The Advocate General determined, in favour of Lufthansa, that the restriction on pilots to cease flying commercial aircraft is a valid limitation and does not circumvent the requirements under articles 15 and 21 of the EU Charter. In particular, the Advocate General reflected on the provisions relating to genuine occupational requirements within the Directive. Despite the fact that Mr Fries could not rely on the Directive here, the Advocate General accepted that the concept of genuine occupational requirements within the Directive can be applied to article 21 of the EU Charter. As a result, he acknowledged that physical capabilities that diminish with age are clearly a characteristic that relates to age and has the potential to fall within a genuine occupational requirement in the context of the safety-critical environment pilots operate in. Therefore, it was considered that the concept of this restriction as a genuine occupational requirement might suffice in justifying the decision to dismiss Mr Fries on the grounds of his age.

Furthermore, the Advocate General accepted that Lufthansa's objective of maintaining air traffic safety was the legitimate aim being pursued here. He also determined that imposing the age limit of 65 was an appropriate measure in the circumstances taking into account the high risk involved with commercial flights as opposed to flying other categories of aircraft. In addition, Lufthansa's age limit was aligned with international civil aviation standards. It was not necessary to undertake individual assessments of employees' physical capabilities as long as the rules on age limits could be properly applied and objectively justified in the majority of circumstances. Using age as the only criterion reflected a legitimate regulatory choice here.

Notwithstanding this analysis, the Advocate General opined that Mr Fries should have been permitted to continue in his employment for a further two months, carrying out the Alternative Duties and giving up his role of flying commercial aircraft. It was not accepted that the definition of "commercial air transport" could extend to circumstances where an employee was not physically flying commercial aircraft, but only carrying out the Alternative Duties.

Comment

This case highlights that the EU Charter has force in employment law and shows how the notion of a genuine occupational requirement in the Directive can be used to assist in clarifying the EU Charter's principle of non-discrimination. It also helps to show how claimants can call upon the EU Charter when they are unable to rely on the direct effect of secondary legislation or provisions of national law. In the context of UK employment law, employers should use this case to remind themselves of the factors courts will look to in order to clarify whether direct age discrimination can be justified, both within the scope of national legislation and in light of European law.

 

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Dentons | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Dentons
Contact
more
less

Dentons on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):
hide

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.

Security

JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.