ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

Your story "Job boom looms as older staff bow out" (May ) raises interesting issues but makes one major assumption that requires comment. It is not necessarily the case that "new universities will be forced to replace thousands of ageing staff". From the end of 2006, all employees will have the right to request to continue working beyond any employer-determined compulsory retirement age, and all employers will be under a duty to consider such requests. It is likely that this employee "right to request" and employer "duty to consider" will lead to a higher number of older people remaining in the workforce for longer.

From 2006, employers will not be able to set a compulsory retirement age below 65 unless it can be shown to be appropriate and objectively justifiable. It is also likely that age-related practices such as encouraging older members of staff to retire and investing in young contract researchers could be seen as discriminatory, unless they too can be justified. Hopefully, forthcoming government regulations on age discrimination will spell out unambiguously the nature of the grounds for objective justification of such practices.

Legislation apart, a key aim for any organisation should be to work towards a diverse and well-balanced workforce. The Equality Challenge Unit is keen to hear the views of the higher education sector on age legislation. We would welcome responses from Times Higher readers, regardless of role, to our consultation at Further information is available on

Liz Sutherland
Policy adviser, disability and age Equality Challenge Unit