Furious professors brand Cambridge University ‘ageist' as retirement age set at 67

Furious professors brand Cambridge University branded ‘ageist’ as retirement age set at 67

Cambridge University has been branded “ageist” by a number of professors for setting the retirement age at 67, it has been reported.

The University is among the two institutes, along with Oxford, which maintain an “employer justified retirement age” (EJRA) seeing professors having to retire at an age determined by university policy.

As many as 120 former and current professors at the university have signed a letter that says the EJRA policy discriminates on the basis of age and calls for its abolition, reported Cambridgeshire Live.

The letter also says that the policy causes “stress and poor mental health” among academics as they anticipate retirement at 67.

Professor of Security Engineering, Ross Anderson, 67, was unable to continue in his full-time position at the university after the end of September 2023 as a result of the EJRA policy.

He described the policy as “forced retirement”, adding: “In a normal university people might retire at 65 or 70 or 73, depending on how their work is going how vigorous and healthy they feel, whether their PhD students are coming to the end of time and they’re graduating, and so on and so forth.

“But in Cambridge, you had this artificial system whereby people got sacked on the 30th of September after which he turned 67.”

He said that some professors are hindered by the policy from their early 60s, since it discourages them from applying for five-year research grants.

Since 2011, employers have been able to operate a compulsory retirement age if they can show it is justifiable as a means to achieve a legitimate aim. The EJRA at Cambridge was adopted in June 2012 and reviewed in 2015/16.

It is under review again and will be discussed at a meeting of the University Council on Monday (November 27). Four academics at Oxford who were forced to retire at 68 won at an employment tribunal in March after judges said the university’s EJRA policy had a “discriminatory effect”.

The letter claims that the EJRA policy causes ‘brain drain’ as academics take up posts elsewhere and that it ‘impedes retention’ of academics. It concluded: “We the undersigned believe EJRA is immoral, illegal, unfair, uneconomic, and bad employment practice.”

Professor Anderson said he will be taking his case to the employment tribunal in the next few weeks. He said he wanted the policy to be abolished before Easter next year to prevent another cohort of academics being affected by the policy in September 2024.

A university spokesperson said: “The University has established a review group to consider whether its employer justified retirement age should remain, be abolished or be updated, and the University Council will shortly receive an update on its work. It is aware of the considerable interest that all staff (not just those who are approaching retirement) have on this matter and has been consulting widely.

“The review group is aiming to complete this work in time for the 2024 cohort of retirees to know where they stand and the Council will be considering the feasibility of this timetable later this term.”