Mandatory Retirement is Age discrimination
Bill C-481: An Act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Canada Labour Code (mandatory retirement age)
To prohibit federally regulated employers — that is, private-sector employers subject to federal acts and regulations, as well as the federal public administration — from setting a mandatory retirement age.
This bill was introduced as a private member’s bill, the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session, by Raymonde Folco Liberal MP Laval—Les Îles, QC, and now it is before the 3rd Session.
A feed of speeches and votes in the House related to Bill C-481.
All sorts of information on this bill—including the full text of the bill - is available at LEGISinfo, provided by the Library of Parliament.
SUMMARY
This enactment amends the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Canada Labour Code to prohibit federally regulated employers — that is, private-sector employers subject to federal acts and regulations, as well as the federal public administration — from setting a mandatory retirement age.
Introducing the Bill, Raymonde Folco, Liberal MP, said:
"My bill has three main objectives. The first is to repeal subsection 9(2) of the Canadian Human Rights Act. This amendment would ensure that unions and federal employees' organizations would no longer have the ability to exclude, expel or suspend an individual from membership in the organization because that individual has reached the normal age of retirement for individuals working in positions similar to the position of that individual. To clarify, this means within the same professional group, but not necessarily in the same organization.
"The second objective is to replace paragraphs 15(1)(b) and 15(1)(c) of the Canadian Human Rights Act with the following for paragraph 15(1)(b):
"It will be possible to terminate the employment of an individual who has not reached the minimum age that applies to that employment by law or under regulations that may be made by the Governor in Council.
"The third objective is to repeal paragraph 235(2)(b) of the Canada Labour Code. By repealing this paragraph of the Canada Labour Code, the legislator is ensuring that the employer will be obligated to pay severance pay to an employee who reaches an age at which the individual is entitled to receive a retirement pension from a complementary pension fund.
BILL C-481
This enactment amends the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Canada Labour Code to prohibit federally regulated employers — that is, private-sector employers subject to federal acts and regulations, as well as the federal public administration — from setting a mandatory retirement age.
Introducing the Bill, Raymonde Folco, Liberal MP, said:
"My bill has three main objectives. The first is to repeal subsection 9(2) of the Canadian Human Rights Act. This amendment would ensure that unions and federal employees' organizations would no longer have the ability to exclude, expel or suspend an individual from membership in the organization because that individual has reached the normal age of retirement for individuals working in positions similar to the position of that individual. To clarify, this means within the same professional group, but not necessarily in the same organization.
"The second objective is to replace paragraphs 15(1)(b) and 15(1)(c) of the Canadian Human Rights Act with the following for paragraph 15(1)(b):
"It will be possible to terminate the employment of an individual who has not reached the minimum age that applies to that employment by law or under regulations that may be made by the Governor in Council.
"The third objective is to repeal paragraph 235(2)(b) of the Canada Labour Code. By repealing this paragraph of the Canada Labour Code, the legislator is ensuring that the employer will be obligated to pay severance pay to an employee who reaches an age at which the individual is entitled to receive a retirement pension from a complementary pension fund.
BILL C-481
Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada, enacts as follows:
CANADIAN HUMAN RIGHTS ACT
1. Subsection 9(2) of the Canadian Human Rights Act is repealed.
2. Paragraphs 15(1)(b) and (c) of the Act are replaced by the following:
(b) employment of an individual is refused or terminated because that individual has not reached the minimum age that applies to that employment by law or under regulations, which may be made by the Governor in Council for the purposes of this paragraph;
3. Paragraph 235(2)(b) of the Canada Labour Code is repealed.
CANADA LABOUR CODE
The bill itself is seeking to repeal subsection 9(2) of the Canadian Human Rights Act, to replace paragraphs 15(1)(b) and (c) of the Canadian Human Rights Act and, third, to repeal paragraph 235(2)(b) of the Canada Labour Code.
CANADIAN HUMAN RIGHTS ACT
1. Subsection 9(2) of the Canadian Human Rights Act is repealed.
2. Paragraphs 15(1)(b) and (c) of the Act are replaced by the following:
(b) employment of an individual is refused or terminated because that individual has not reached the minimum age that applies to that employment by law or under regulations, which may be made by the Governor in Council for the purposes of this paragraph;
3. Paragraph 235(2)(b) of the Canada Labour Code is repealed.
CANADA LABOUR CODE
The bill itself is seeking to repeal subsection 9(2) of the Canadian Human Rights Act, to replace paragraphs 15(1)(b) and (c) of the Canadian Human Rights Act and, third, to repeal paragraph 235(2)(b) of the Canada Labour Code.
Subsection 9(2) of the Canadian Human Rights Act, Paragraphs 15(1) b and Paragraph 15(1)(c) of the Canadian Human Rights Act is contrary to the charter because it perpetuates the prejudice with the following statement:
an individual’s employment is terminated because that individual has reached the normal age of retirement for employees working in positions similar to the position of that individual;
In an attempt to align federal law with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Bill C-481 is designed to prohibit federally regulated employers – that is, private sector employers subject to federal acts and regulations, as well as the federal public administration – from setting a mandatory retirement age.
And from a judicial standpoint, Folco’s bill would correspond with the many court rulings which deemed mandatory retirement an infringement of human rights and fundamentally, a discriminatory practice.
No comments:
Post a Comment