Sir Tom Jones has never exactly seemed ready for retirement.
At 86, he is still touring, recording music and, until recently, spinning around in a red chair on The Voice UK. So, when news broke that ITV had decided not to retain him as a coach, his response raised an interesting employment law question.
According to Sir Tom, he did not choose to leave. He says he was told there was no longer a place for him on the judging panel, with references reportedly being made to insurance costs and a desire to “refreshâ the show.
Whether that is the full story only ITV and Sir Tom know.
But it does prompt a broader discussion: when does “refreshing” become age discrimination?
More Than Just Employees
The first thing to note is that Sir Tom may not be an employee in the traditional sense. Television personalities are often engaged under consultancy or other service arrangements rather than standard employment contracts. That does not necessarily put discrimination laws out of reach.
The Equality Act 2010 protects more than just employees, meaning age discrimination claims can arise in a range of working relationships, including some arrangements that fall outside traditional employment. So, if age genuinely influenced a decision to end someone’s engagement, the fact they are not an employee would not automatically end the conversation.
The Problem With “Refreshing”
Wanting to refresh a team is not, in itself, a problem. Every organisation evolves. New faces, new ideas and new branding are all part of running a successful organisation. The difficulty arises when concepts such as âfresh talentâ, ânew energyâ or âa younger imageâ begin to blur the line between legitimate business change and assumptions about age.
In employment law, direct age discrimination occurs when someone is treated less favourably because of their age. For example, being overlooked for a promotion simply because they are considered “too old” for a role.
There is also indirect age discrimination, where a policy, requirement or practice applies to everyone but disproportionately disadvantages people of a particular age group. For example, an employer might recruit exclusively through graduate schemes. While the requirement is not expressly age-based, younger candidates are far more likely to meet the criteria than older applicants.
Older workers can often find themselves battling assumptions that they are less adaptable, less innovative or simply no longer fit the image an organisation wants to project. Those are exactly the types of stereotypes age discrimination laws are designed to challenge.
Of course, proving age discrimination is rarely straightforward. A tribunal would look at the wider picture, including the reasons given for the relevant decisions and the treatment of other comparable employees or workers. If an older individual is replaced by someone significantly younger, that does not automatically make the decision discriminatory, but it can raise questions as to whether age was a key reason in the decision-making process.
Looking Beyond Age Alone
The commercial reasons given for a decision can be just as important as the relative ages of the people involved. In Sir Tom’s case, one of the factors reportedly discussed was financial difficulty with insurance. Without knowing the full facts, it is impossible to comment on whether insurance played any part in ITV’s decision-making or, if it did, how significant a factor it may have been.
However, it does raise an interesting point about age discrimination more generally.
Unlike most forms of direct discrimination, direct age discrimination can sometimes be justified. To do so, an employer must show that the treatment was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. In other words, there must be a genuine business reason for the decision, and the approach taken must be reasonably necessary to achieve that aim.
That does not mean employers have a free pass whenever they can point to a commercial justification. A tribunal would still scrutinise the decision carefully and consider whether the aim being pursued was legitimate, whether the steps taken were proportionate and what financial resources were available to the employer. An increase in cost may be less persuasive where the employer had the resources to absorb it, particularly if a less discriminatory alternative was reasonably available.
Previous case law demonstrates why employers should tread carefully where age-related costs influence decision-making. Where an individual attracts an additional cost because of their age, it may be difficult to argue that age played no part in the decision. Financial considerations may form part of a justification argument, but an employer will generally need to demonstrate more than the fact that an older individual costs more.
The Final Verdict?
Ultimately, none of us knows exactly why ITV decided to part ways with Sir Tom Jones.
What makes the story interesting from an employment law perspective is that it highlights some of the questions that can arise whenever age intersects with workplace decision-making:
- How do employers balance experience with change?
- When does a desire for something “new” risk creating age-related stereotypes?
- How can organisations ensure that decisions are based on objective business reasons rather than assumptions about a particular age group?
Those questions are relevant whether you’re discussing a prime-time television show, a boardroom, or an office.
Sir Tom’s departure may have made the headlines, but the issues it raised are far from unique. As workforces become increasingly age-diverse, employers must continue to ensure that decisions are driven by evidence, not assumptions about what a particular age group can or cannot bring to the table.
How Can We Help?
We support employers with practical advice on preventing age discrimination and making fair, legally compliant workplace decisions.
Our Employment Team can assist with:
- Reviewing policies and procedures;
- Advising on dismissals, restructures and changes to roles;
- Assessing age discrimination risks;
- Delivering tailored workplace training; and
- Supporting wider equality and compliance strategies.
If you would like advice on age discrimination in the workplace, please contact our Employment Team.
