Background
In honour of the late Professor Ross Anderson FRS, see his EJRA-related website (freecambridge.org) and some key materials:
We need to end the university's forced retirement policy.
At present, academics are sacked at the end of the academic year in which we turn 67, as are "academic-related" staff such as computer officers. So Cambridge sacks 30-35 people every September, many of whom are reluctant to go.
What's more, academics are not allowed to apply for grants or research contracts that would run past their retirement date, which drives star professors to retire early to go elsewhere, and makes it hard to replace them.
The policy cuts our research income and thus the opportunities for PhD students and postdocs. It discriminates against women, who tend to have less time in post because of childcare. It is also unlawful age discrimination: Oxford, with a similar policy, has lost five Employment Tribunal cases in a row. Forced retirement has to stop.
Some Key Points:
Paul Ewart - Oxford physics professor
based on statistical analysis - compared both Oxford and Cambridge with 21 other Russell Group universities
concluded the data showed no evidence of any benefit from forced retirement
and on gender equality, Oxford and Cambridge had actually done worse
Oxford reacted to the loss by restricting forced retirement to senior professors and raising the age to 70. (Cambridge proposed raising it to 69.)
Equality Act 2010 prohibits discrimination on the basis of any of nine protected characteristics (including age)
a Discussion in the Regent House, January 2023, transcript in the Reporter v 6685, 1 Feb 2023, at pages 304-318 (hightlighted the major cases to eliminate EJRA)
Cambridge's University Council set up a committee to produce a Report this academic year, to vote to amend the policy in the 2023-24 academic year
In March 2023, the Employment Tribunal found that Oxford's forced retirement policy is unlawful (press). Cambridge's policy is almost identical, as they copied ours. In June 2023 the Commissary – the university's internal supreme court – warned of massive reputational damage if the University were to wrongfully dismiss staff in September 2023. This is at the end of a decision in which he concludes that he unfortunately does not have the jurisdiction to intervene. (Our claim is here, the university's response here and here, and our reply here.) The University sacked about thirty of us anyway in September 2023. More than one of us is taking action at the Employment Tribunal for reinstatement.
In November 2023, the University Council was asked to decide whether we'll be allowed to vote to abolish the forced retirement policy this academic year or next. 120 professors signed a letter to the Vice-Chancellor demanding an end to foot-dragging and a vote this year (Cambridge News Varsity Daily Telegraph Times Higher). This pressured the Council to accelerate the review and hold a vote in time to save the cohort who were due to be unfairly dismissed in September 2024.
In mid-May 2024, the university released its report (see the Report Analysis tab) and data underlying the report. A rebuttal (also on the same page) reveals issues such as unclear application of data filters, inconsistent variable treatment, and erroneous statistical conclusions. The Report suggests EJRA increased job creation rates at Cambridge, but we show Cambridge consistently had lower job creation rates for Established Academic Careers compared to other Russell Group universities, both before and after EJRA implementation in 2011. This suggests that EJRA is not a significant factor driving job creation rates.
Despite this, the university continues to defend the report in a discussion published in the Reporter.