In the realm of employment, the practice of allowing individuals to work beyond the conventional retirement age has become increasingly prevalent. Yet, the question arises—what protections are afforded to post-retirement employees facing potential dismissal, and to what extent can employers terminate their services without legal ramifications?

According to Section 187(1) of the Labour Relations Act (LRA), the dismissal of an employee based on age is deemed ‘automatically unfair.’ This statutory provision places a substantial onus on employers, potentially necessitating compensation equivalent to 24 months’ remuneration in case of unjust dismissal. Notably, Section 187(1)(f)(b) outlines an exception, allowing dismissal based on age if it aligns with the normal or agreed retirement age for individuals in that specific role.

Despite multiple rulings by the Labour Courts attempting to clarify this exception, ambiguity persists. In the Solidarity obo Strydom and State Information Technology Agency case, employees were granted permission to work beyond the standard retirement age of 60, as specified in their retirement fund rules. However, tensions arose when termination notices were issued before they reached the extended age of 67, as outlined in the rules. The employees contended that tacit consent had been given for them to work until 67, rendering their dismissals automatically unfair.

The court ruled that employees cannot concurrently rely on both normal and agreed retirement ages to support their claims. Once employees reach the standard retirement age, they become ‘vulnerable’ to formal termination by the employer, without the option to argue for a newly agreed-upon age. This ruling underscores the employer’s right to terminate services under certain conditions.

Drawing insights from cases like Solidarity obo Strydom and State Information Technology Agency, employers may serve termination notices once an agreed or normal retirement age is reached, provided that age is the sole reason for termination. Notably, if the termination is grounded in reasons such as redundancy or misconduct, it must adhere to standard dismissal procedures, subject to the Code of Good Practice: Dismissal.

Clearly stipulate retirement age in employment contracts or incorporate retirement fund rules into contracts. If an employee continues working beyond retirement age, explicitly communicate (preferably in writing) the employer’s right to terminate services at any time with notice. Adhere to standard dismissal procedures if termination is not solely based on age.

The Labour Appeal Court reaffirmed these principles in the Motor Industry Staff Association and Landman vs Great South Autobody cc t/a/ Great South Panelbeaters case (judgment dated 27 September 2022). The court emphasized an employer’s right to fairly dismiss an employee based on age after reaching the agreed or normal retirement age, aligning with the legislative purpose to create opportunities for younger workers and address unemployment concerns.

In conclusion, while navigating the nuances of employee dismissal after reaching retirement age, employers must remain vigilant, adhering to legal frameworks and ensuring clear communication with employees. The evolving legal landscape underscores the importance of proactive measures to mitigate potential legal challenges.

For comprehensive guidance on CCMA / Bargaining Council / Labour Court / High Court proceedings, labour law, legal advice, and consultations, our team of experts is ready to assist. Contact Workplace Law Chambers to address your specific concerns and navigate the intricate landscape of dispute resolution.