Search

Copyright of National Journal of Constitutional Law is the property of Carswell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Approaching the issue through their review of several recent court and tribunal decisions, the authors argue that the legislative policy choice in Ontario and other jurisdictions to permit age-based distinctions in the provision of benefits to employees over age 65, notwithstanding the abolition of mandatory retirement, was not only reasonable but necessary. That choice, in their view, represents a fair, and amply justified, balance between the right of individual employees to continue working past 65, and the right of employees as a collectivity to freely negotiate benefit provisions and group insurance plans that are in the interests of the group as a whole. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]