SUPPORTS ITEM NO. 1
CS&B COMMITTEE AGENDA
JULY 20, 1995
POLICY REPORT
HUMAN RESOURCES
Date: June 16, 1995
TO: Standing Committee on City Services and Budgets
FROM: Manager of Compensation & Benefits,
in consultation with Corporation Counsel
SUBJECT: City of Vancouver Mandatory Retirement Policy
RECOMMENDATION
THAT the City confirm its existing policy of requiring employees
to retire at the maximum retirement age as defined in the
Pension (Municipal) Act (age 60 for uniformed Fire and Police
personnel; age 65 for all others).
GENERAL MANAGER'S COMMENTS
The General Manager of Human Resource Services RECOMMENDS
approval of the foregoing.
COUNCIL POLICY
Employees are required to retire at the maximum retirement age as
defined in the Pension (Municipal) Act.
BACKGROUND
In June, 1993, Council reviewed its existing policy of requiring
employees to retire at their maximum retirement age and confirmed it
as policy. Council also requested that the policy be reviewed
following the decision in the "Lewis" case that was at that time
before the B. C. Court of Appeal, and in any event, no later than
1995 to ensure the policy continues to meet the best interests of the
City and its employees. The B.C. Court of Appeal has decided on the
"Lewis" case and has upheld Lewis' retirement.
DISCUSSION
The current policy requires that all individuals, except uniformed
Fire and Police personnel, must retire no later than the end of the
month in which they reach age 65; uniformed Fire and Police personnel
no later than age 60.
The matter of mandatory retirement is considered by some as a policy
that discriminates on the basis of age; on the other hand, the
absence of such a policy can be seen to reduce opportunities for
others to have access to employment.
The Supreme Court has held that for certain occupational groupings,
mandatory retirement at age 65 is "a reasonable and justifiable limit
on an individual's rights in our Society." The decision of the
Burnaby Board of School Trustees to require Ms. Lewis to retire at
age 65 also has been upheld by the B.C. Court of Appeal.
(Application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Count of Canada has
been made.)
In 1993, it was viewed that changing workforce demographics would
necessitate a review of the mandatory retirement policy no later than
1995. As predicted, employee demographics are changing. Our
workforce statistics indicate a significantly higher number of older
employees, typically referred to as the "baby boomers". We can
ascertain that over the next five to ten years we will experience
higher than average retirement statistics due to the retirement of
the employees in this group. But the workplace has experienced other
changes that will likely continue for a corresponding number of years
that will counteract any recruitment difficulties we may experience
as a result of these retirement vacancies. These changes include a
marked decrease in recruitment activities due to budget cutbacks and
a significantly lower employee turnover rate than in past years.
Continuance of a mandatory retirement age at 65 at this time will
provide the City with some future opportunities for revitalization of
its workforce.
We have reviewed the practices of other major employers in the region
and the vast majority of large B.C. employers maintain and support
mandatory retirement at age 65.
PERSONNEL IMPLICATIONS
The existence of mandatory retirement provides the City with some
opportunity for renewal and creates opportunities for new applicants
to the workforce and for existing employees for promotion.
The policy also allows the continuance of the City's practice of
employing an individual on a casual, less than full-time and limited
term basis for the City past age 65.
A copy of this report has been provided to the Director of EEO and
all civic unions.
* * * * *