Another one for Older Workers who want Respect and one for the Tories

   After two decades of employers trying to force out older workers from the workforce whether they are ready or not, the human rights law has come down on the side of the workers and why not?
I've always said that I do not understand retirement and what is it's purpose? I agree this should be optional. No one should be forced to give up his job unless there is bona fide reason for it such as work performance.
   Many older people retire to a life of poverty both financially, morally and spiritually. There should be a place for everyone to make meaningful contribution to society and his or her livelihood until such time they just can't do it anymore.
Work keeps people happy and involved in life. Our elders have much to teach and should be given the opportunity to do so.
  I am happy to see that forcing an older worker into la la land is now interpreted as discrimination based on age. It is the right and humane decision.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/12/18/tories-end-forced-retirement-decades-of-age-discrimination/
Two decades since Ottawa’s first attempt to kill mandatory retirement, the Conservative government has managed to quietly overturn legislation that has for 30 years given federally regulated employers the right to force workers into retirement because of their age.

The section of the Canadian Human Rights Act that permitted mandatory retirement was officially repealed by the government’s Budget Implementation Bill, which received Royal Assent last week. Now that the budget bill is formally on the books, the country’s 12,000 federally regulated employers will no longer be able to force their 800,000 employees into retirement beginning December 2012.

AlterNet: Rage Against Islam: the New Anti-Semitism

AlterNet: Rage Against Islam: the New Anti-Semitism

AGE DISCRIMINATION

A US supreme court ruling 4-5 in the case of age discrimination has shifted the burden of proof on the employee who claims age discrimination. This will be a disadvantage to employees because proving that it was age and no other reason would like prove to be much more difficult to prove in a court of law. The burden of proof rests solely on the employee overturning long standing precedent and practice that was fairer to the employee. In the past the employer had the burden of producing evidence that showed bona fide reason for terminating an employee and an employee only had to show some sort of inference of age discrimination.

In Canada employees are protected under the Human Rights Code from age discrimination. In Manitoba there is no mandatory retirement. An employer would have to find other bona fide reasons for asking an older employee to resign from their job.
One has to ask whether this decision in favour of employers in the United States will have ripple effect in Canada. Canadian employers continue to complain about the strangehold human rights laws have on their businesses and bottom line.

Read the following opinion piece in today's NYT

Editorial - Age Discrimination - NYTimes.com