On January 1, 2008 mandatory retirement became illegal in British Columbia with the exception of federally-regulated industries and specific occupations where it can be shown that mandatory retirement is justifiable as a bona fide occupational requirement.

Although we have achieved the purpose we set out to when we established this website, we will leave it operating for the foreseeable future so that others can fight against mandatory retirement in their own provinces and countries.

We thank the people of British Columbia who strongly supported us during our campaign to end mandatory retirement. This is their victory.

Few firms taking steps to retain employees past retirement age
Derek Sankey

Vancouver Sun
June 23, 2007 

More companies are deploying strategies to retain older workers in the face of aging demographics and labour shortages, but it appears the vast majority of firms still have a long way to go in retaining and recruiting mature workers over 50.

Human resource experts say that with the first round of baby boomers turning 60 this year, and labour shortages already apparent in most sectors, younger workers and immigrants will not solve staffing challenges alone as boomers look for the door.

"There's been an awful lot of off-ramps to get the older worker out, but there's not a lot of on-ramps to encourage people to stay or to return [to the workplace]," says Dianne Bond, market vice-president for Right Management in Calgary.

A recent Manpower survey showed that only 28 per cent of companies have a formal strategy in place to retain older workers past retirement age, while 18 per cent have a strategy to recruit older workers.

One positive indication is that the majority of boomers want to remain in the workforce, but it is going to require some innovative solutions to make them stay or return. A Merrill Lynch report found 71 per cent of people over the age of 50 want to work in "retirement," while 38 per cent of those want to alternate between work and leisure. An additional 17 per cent are looking for part-time work only.

Considering there are about 11 million "mature workers" in a country with a population of just over 32 million, according to Statistics Canada, it represents enormous potential to ease labour shortages, which became abundantly apparent in Alberta last year. "Now, the problem is more in your face," says Bond.

When it comes to developing effective strategies, boomers and people over 50 are looking for some unique things in the type of work they're willing to take on. A Right Management study found 40 per cent of those surveyed want flexible work schedules, 22 per cent want "enhanced health care," 17 per cent desire mentoring roles and 16 per cent look for leadership and professional development opportunities.

Retirement changes simply recognize basic human rights
Editorial

The Province
June 3, 2007

You might have missed it behind the barrage of headlines about our MLAs awarding themselves a fancy new pay raise. But the ending of the current B.C. legislative session also saw an historic milestone in social legislation.

As they pocketed their gold-plated pension packages, the politicians also approved amendments to the B.C. Human Rights Code, outlawing mandatory retirement at age 65.

B.C. had been behind the trend on this issue -- Quebec ended age-related discrimination in 1982. But the timing for this province could not be better.

In the current economic boom, a shortage of skilled workers threatens to limit severely B.C.'s ability to make the most of its opportunities.

Seniors' minister Ida Chong has estimated a need to fill more than one million vacancies over the next decade. Naturally, not all these jobs will be filled by senior citizens. But at least older workers will not be forced into early retirement against their will.

The new law, to take effect Jan. 1 next year, recognizes a dramatic shift in provincial demographics -- people are living longer and staying healthier.

SFU scraps mandatory retirement
John Bermingham

The Province
June 1, 2007

They're not getting any younger, so Simon Fraser University is wasting no time in scrapping mandatory retirement for its professors.

The day the legislature approved a bill eliminating mandatory retirement, SFU and its faculty agreed to allow faculty to work beyond age 65.

Glenn Chapman, an engineering professor who heads the 1,000-strong SFU faculty association, said that of 21 profs turning 65 this year, dubbed 'The Class of '07,' 11 want to continue working.

"Assuming people are healthy and are still actively engaged in research, a lot of people want to continue working for a few years," he said yesterday.

"People are not talking about continuing for an indefinite period."

Chapman said 40 per cent of faculty want to work past 65, and want the option of scaling down their work to half-time or three-quarter-time.

Dario Nonis, SFU's human resources director, said there are shortages of skilled faculty, and the university is facing up to the economic reality.

"It certainly provides some comfort to the faculty members who wish to work past 65," said Nonis.

"We are not sure how many may take advantage of that."

The provincial legislation, which takes effect on Jan. 1, 2008, amends the Human Rights Code to prevent employers from imposing retirement on anyone in the workplace.

This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

© The Vancouver Province 2007

Mandatory Retirement Elimination Act Becomes Law
CUFA/BC Wire

May 31, 2007

Despite indications last week that Bill 31 - Human Rights Code (Mandatory Retirement Elimination) Amendment Act, 2007 - might not be adopted in the spring sitting of the BC Legislature, the bill today passed all the necessary stages and was given Royal Assent late this afternoon as one of the final acts of Legislature before the summer break. This means that on January 1, 2008 mandatory retirement will become illegal in British Columbia.

The passing of Bill 31 into law is the culmination of a year-long campaign by the Confederation of University Faculty Associations of British Columbia (CUFA/BC) to end mandatory retirement in the province. Operating under the campaign banner 65 Is An Age, Not An Expiry Date, the university faculty organization battled stereotypes about older workers and succeeded in persuading the public and the government that it was time for mandatory retirement to end.

CUFA/BC also assisted its member faculty associations at the University of British Columbia, University of Victoria and Simon Fraser University to achieve agreements with their administrations to immediately end mandatory retirement for faculty members at those institutions. These agreements mean that approximately 110 faculty members at the three universities will have the choice whether or not to retire this year. That choice would not have been otherwise available to them under Bill 31. (Mandatory retirement does not exist at the University of Northern British Columbia or Royal Roads University.)

The CUFA/BC campaign website www.AbilityNotAge.ca will remain active until the new year in order to provide information to British Columbians about the transition to a world without mandatory retirement. It will also serve as a resource for individuals and groups in other provinces working to close loopholes that still allow mandatory retirement in some circumstances.

Let's not make ‘ mandatory' either staying or going at 65
Craig McInnes

Vancouver Sun
May 10, 2007

Note to boss: Don't take this the wrong way. I like my job. I get to talk to interesting people, there are no lumps of coal falling on my head and I get paid to speak my mind, even when you don't like what I have to say.

Still, the news that British Columbia is following the lead of other provinces by banning mandatory retirement does not immediately make my heart leap with joy.

I grew up in the 1960s, when the expectation was that advances in science and technology were going to allow us to work less and spend more time in the pursuit of leisure.

So I have a deeply embedded sense that there is more to life than paid work. Again, I'm not complaining, but my annual holidays are not long enough to quench my thirst for the wider world.

My adult life has been divided into an early period when I had lots of time to do what I wanted but no money, the scrambling years when our kids were young and we had neither time nor money for much other than the basics, and the sense I have now of having a little money to tick off some of the things on my do- before- I- die list but not enough time.

My dream of retirement is not a couch with my name on it, but a period in which I will have both the time and the money to do as much as possible before my body gives out.

But that's just me. Somehow I don't think the drafters of the bill banning mandatory retirement tabled in the legislature last month had me in mind.

But what were they thinking? There are essentially two groups lobbying to increase the opportunities for people to work beyond what has been in Canada since 1951 the " normal" retirement age of 65. That was the year Ottawa brought in the legislation that has evolved into the Canada Pension Plan and Old Age Security.

One group wants to keep on working past 65. That's not illegal now, but until the new legislation becomes law, employers can maintain policies that force employees, such as university professors who have been among the most active advocates for change, to retire when they reach that age.

The law before the legislature would make such policies subject to the Human Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination based on age.