Justifying Age Discrimination in the EU

This article examines the Employment Directive from the age perspective and endorses a life course approach to ageing. It explores the permitted exclusions on grounds of age and especially the exceptional justification for direct age discrimination, contained in Article 6. In the end, EU Member States may find it more difficult to successfully transpose Article 6 than they imagine. The article reveals special challenges for age and refers to age laws in Ireland and the USA, in particular. It also refers to preparations for transposition in a number of Member States, including the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. Whether and to what extent age will ultimately receive the least protection of all the new grounds, remains to be seen and will depend largely on the individual approaches of the Member States. The ultimate consequence of the additional opportunities for excluding or justifying age discrimination may well be different protected areas throughout the EU.

Download Full-text

Services, Public Functions, and Transport

Blackstone's Guide to the Equality Act 2010 ◽

10.1093/oso/9780198870876.003.0005 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 81-122

Author(s):

Chris Fry

Keyword(s):

European Union ◽

Age Discrimination ◽

Service Users ◽

Sex And Gender ◽

The European Union ◽

Insurance Benefits ◽

Court Of Justice ◽

Gender Reassignment ◽

And Gender ◽

The Eu

This chapter focuses on services and public functions and transport provisions. Both are covered by Part 3 of the Equality Act 2010, which deals with discrimination in services and public functions. As with other Parts of the Act, Part 3 consolidates and harmonizes previous legislation. Compared to the previous enactments, one of the most significant changes made by the Act is to introduce a new ban on age discrimination in services and public functions, which applies to service users aged 18 and over. Another significant change to Part 3 of the Act was made necessary following the 2011 decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the case of Association Belge des Consommateurs Test-Achats. This decision established that the EU Gender Directive provision that permits proportionate differences between men and womens’ insurance premiums and insurance benefits was unlawful. In response to this decision, regulations made by HM Treasury repealed the insurance exception in paragraph 22 of Schedule 3 relating to sex and gender reassignment and pregnancy and maternity.

Download Full-text