View cases - Stewart McKelvey

Page: 89paragraph 15(1)(c) of the CHRA for both employers and employees. Some of these benefits areenjoyed by employees throughout the life-cycle of their employment.[339] It has not, however, been established that such beneficial employment regimes require thatparties be free to negotiate employment terms that include mandatory retirement in order for suchregimes to continue. Indeed, the evidence before the Tribunal clearly demonstrated that the benefitsof such regimes have continued in jurisdictions where mandatory retirement has been eliminated.2011 FC 120 (CanLII)[340] In the absence of evidence that any of the benefits associated with traditional labour marketstructures have been lost in provinces that have abolished mandatory retirement, how can it be saidthat the benefits associated with permitting mandatory retirement outweigh its deleterious effects?[341] It is also important to have regard to the nature of the interest affected, in assessing whetherthe salutary benefits of paragraph 15(1)(c) outweigh its deleterious effects. For individuals over thenormal age of retirement, the interest at stake is the ability of the individual to continue working inthe career of his or her choice. As I said in Vilven #1, “the importance of this interest cannot beoverstated”, as “Canadian jurisprudence is replete with references to the crucial role thatemployment plays in the dignity and self-worth of the individual”: at para. 293.[342] For example, in Reference re Public Sector Employee Relations Act (Alberta) [1987] 1S.C.R. 313, [1987] S.C.J. No.10, the Supreme Court of Canada stated that “Work is one of the mostfundamental aspects in a person's life, providing the individual with a means of financial supportand, as importantly, a contributory role in society”: at para. 91.