Age Discrimination at Work: UK Law & Examples 2026

Age discrimination remains one of the most frequently litigated areas of workplace equality law in the UK. Unlike some other protected characteristics, age discrimination can affect employees at every stage of their career — from young applicants entering the workforce to senior employees approaching retirement.

For employers, the legal risks are significant. Claims under the Equality Act 2010 do not require a qualifying period of service and compensation is uncapped. Even well-intentioned decisions around recruitment, promotion, redundancy or retirement can expose an organisation to legal challenge if age plays any part in the reasoning. For wider compliance context, see our guide to employment discrimination and what employers can expect in employment law in 2025.

What this article is about

This guide explains what age discrimination means under UK law, the different types of unlawful conduct, practical examples employers commonly encounter, when age-based treatment may be lawful, and the steps organisations should take to minimise legal risk. It also addresses frequently asked questions, including recruitment discrimination, section 13 of the Equality Act 2010 and mandatory retirement.

Section A: Age Discrimination Meaning in UK Law

Age discrimination is governed by the Equality Act 2010. Age is one of the Act’s nine protected characteristics. The legislation prohibits discrimination, harassment and victimisation because of age in employment and vocational training. For an overview of the framework and how it is applied in practice, see our Equality Act 2010 guide.

Protection applies to job applicants, workers and employees. It covers the entire employment lifecycle — from the wording of a job advertisement through to post-termination matters such as references. Employers should treat age-related risk as a core compliance issue across recruitment, day-to-day management and exit processes.

1. What is age discrimination?

Age discrimination occurs where a person is treated unfavourably because of age. Age can refer to a specific age (for example, 25) or to an age group (for example, “under 30s” or “over 50s”).

Importantly, protection applies not only where a person is discriminated against because of their actual age, but also where they are treated unfavourably because of a perceived age.

Unlike most other protected characteristics, direct age discrimination can, in limited circumstances, be objectively justified. This makes age legally distinct from characteristics such as race or sex, where direct discrimination cannot be justified.

2. The four types of age discrimination

There are four legally recognised forms of prohibited conduct under the Equality Act 2010:

Direct discrimination (s13 Equality Act 2010)
This occurs where, because of age, an employer treats a person less favourably than it treats or would treat others. A claimant must show less favourable treatment compared with an actual or hypothetical comparator. For example, refusing to shortlist a candidate because they are “too young” or “too old” would amount to direct discrimination unless objectively justified. For more detail, see our guidance on direct discrimination.

Indirect discrimination
This arises where a provision, criterion or practice (PCP) applies to everyone but puts people of a particular age group at a particular disadvantage compared with others, and the employer cannot show that it is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.

For example, limiting a leadership development programme to employees with less than two years’ service may disproportionately disadvantage older workers, depending on workforce composition.

Harassment
Unwanted conduct related to age that has the purpose or effect of violating a person’s dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment. The tribunal will consider the claimant’s perception, the circumstances of the case and whether it was reasonable for the conduct to have that effect. For related guidance, see our article on workplace harassment.

Victimisation
Subjecting someone to a detriment because they have carried out a “protected act”, such as raising a complaint of age discrimination, giving evidence in proceedings or supporting another person’s complaint. See also our guidance on victimisation at work.

3. Who can bring a claim?

Protection against age discrimination does not require two years’ service. A job applicant who is rejected because of age can bring a claim. An employee dismissed for a discriminatory reason can bring a discrimination claim regardless of length of service.

Where the individual has sufficient qualifying service, they may also bring a claim for unfair dismissal. However, discrimination claims stand independently and compensation for discrimination is uncapped. Awards may include financial loss and injury to feelings, assessed by tribunals by reference to the Vento guidelines bands (as updated from time to time).

Claims are brought in the employment tribunal. Employers should assume tribunal scrutiny will focus on contemporaneous documentation, comparator evidence and whether age influenced the decision-making process. For related context on awards, see employment tribunal compensation limits.

Section Summary
Age discrimination under the Equality Act 2010 covers direct discrimination, indirect discrimination, harassment and victimisation because of age. Protection applies from recruitment to post-employment and does not require a qualifying period of service. Employers must therefore ensure that age plays no unlawful role in decision-making across the employment lifecycle.

Section B: Age Discrimination Examples Employers Actually See

Understanding the legal definition of age discrimination is only part of the picture. In practice, claims most commonly arise not from overt policies but from informal assumptions, careless language or poorly documented decision-making.

Tribunals examine what actually happened in the workplace — what was said, how decisions were reached and whether there is evidence that age influenced the outcome. Below are the scenarios where employers most frequently face exposure.

1. Age discrimination examples in recruitment

Recruitment is one of the highest-risk areas because protection applies to applicants regardless of service.

Job advertisements and role descriptions
Phrases such as “young and dynamic team”, “recent graduate”, “digital native” or “high energy” can be interpreted as favouring younger candidates unless clearly justifiable. Equally, language suggesting a role would suit someone “experienced and mature” may discourage younger applicants.

While such wording is not automatically unlawful, it can form part of the evidential picture in a tribunal claim. Employers should focus on skills, competencies and objective criteria rather than age-related assumptions. For further guidance, see our article on recruitment discrimination and managing recruitment bias.

Application forms and age-related information
Requesting date of birth during the selection process is not automatically unlawful, but it is rarely necessary. If collected for equal opportunities monitoring, it should be separated from the decision-making process. Where age information is visible to decision-makers, it increases litigation risk. If age data influences selection, this may later be relied upon as evidence of discrimination.

Shortlisting decisions
Rejecting a candidate on the basis that they are “overqualified” can sometimes mask age bias, particularly where it is assumed that older candidates will not “fit in” or will leave quickly.

Similarly, declining to progress a younger applicant on the basis that they lack “gravitas” or “life experience” without objective assessment criteria can expose the employer to challenge.

Examples of age discrimination during the recruitment process commonly include:

• Stating a preferred age range in a job advert without justification
• Rejecting applicants because they are perceived as too close to retirement
• Assuming younger applicants are unreliable or likely to job-hop
• Using age as a proxy for salary expectations

Employers increasingly use technology and automation in hiring. Where artificial intelligence tools are deployed, careful oversight is required to ensure that automated filtering does not indirectly disadvantage particular age groups. See our guidance on AI in recruitment.

2. Workplace examples after hire

Age discrimination risk does not diminish once employment begins. It often becomes more subtle.

Training and promotion opportunities
Denying development opportunities because an employee is “near retirement” or assuming that younger staff should “prove themselves first” can amount to unlawful treatment.

Employers sometimes rationalise these decisions as commercial. However, unless objectively justified, treating employees differently because of age in access to promotion or training is likely to be unlawful.

Performance management stereotypes
Assuming older employees struggle with technology or that younger employees lack resilience can influence appraisal outcomes. Even where performance concerns are legitimate, employers must ensure that evidence — not age-based assumptions — drives the process.

Workplace ‘banter’
Comments such as “over the hill”, “dinosaur”, “wet behind the ears” or “you’re too young to understand” may be dismissed as humour internally. However, repeated or unwelcome age-related remarks can meet the statutory definition of harassment if they create an offensive or degrading environment.

An employer may be vicariously liable under section 109 Equality Act 2010 for discriminatory acts carried out in the course of employment unless it can show that it took all reasonable steps to prevent such conduct. For related guidance, see our articles on workplace harassment and bullying at work.

Pay and benefits structures
Certain statutory schemes, such as National Minimum Wage age bands and statutory redundancy pay calculations, lawfully differentiate by age. However, discretionary benefits or bonus structures linked to age — rather than service or role — will require careful scrutiny and, potentially, objective justification.

Length-of-service benefits are permitted up to five years without further justification. Beyond five years, the employer must reasonably believe that rewarding longer service fulfils a legitimate business need, such as encouraging retention or recognising experience, and be able to show that the approach is proportionate.

3. Dismissal, redundancy and retirement risk points

Dismissal and restructuring decisions are particularly vulnerable to scrutiny.

Redundancy selection criteria
Using “last in, first out” as a sole selection criterion may indirectly disadvantage younger workers. If used at all, it should generally form part of a broader, balanced scoring matrix. For further guidance, see our overview of redundancy, redundancy consultation requirements and how to design a lawful redundancy matrix.

Selection criteria that favour “future potential” or “cultural fit” without objective measurement can also conceal age bias.

Performance-related dismissal
Dismissing an older employee based on an assumption that capability will decline, or removing a younger employee on the basis that they lack maturity without documented evidence, creates substantial risk.

Where qualifying service exists, unfair dismissal claims may arise in addition to discrimination claims. Where service is insufficient, a discrimination claim may still proceed independently.

Retirement conversations
There is no default retirement age in the UK. Employers may discuss career plans and future intentions for workforce planning purposes, but they must not pressure or single out employees because of age.

A mandatory retirement age can only be lawful if objectively justified as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. The burden of proof rests with the employer. For practical guidance, see our article on retirement procedure for employers and managing phased retirement.

Section Summary
In practice, age discrimination claims most often arise from recruitment decisions, promotion and training assumptions, workplace culture issues and poorly managed dismissal or retirement discussions. Even informal comments or undocumented assumptions can form persuasive evidence before a tribunal. Employers should ensure that all employment decisions are based on objective, documented criteria unrelated to age.

Section C: When Can Age-Based Treatment Be Lawful?

Age is unique among the protected characteristics in that direct discrimination can, in limited circumstances, be justified. However, this does not give employers flexibility to rely on generalisations or administrative convenience. The burden of proof rests firmly on the employer to show that any age-based treatment is lawful.

Tribunals apply a structured legal test. Assertions or business preference are not enough. Employers must be able to demonstrate both the legitimacy of their aim and the proportionality of the means used to achieve it.

1. Objective justification: legitimate aim and proportionality

Both direct and indirect age discrimination may be lawful if the employer can show that the treatment is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.

This involves a two-stage test:

• Legitimate aim: The employer must identify a real, objective business aim. Examples accepted in case law include workforce planning, inter-generational fairness, promoting opportunities for younger workers, maintaining dignity in certain roles or ensuring health and safety. Cost alone will not amount to a legitimate aim, although cost combined with other legitimate factors may be relevant.
• Proportionality: The employer must show that the measure adopted is reasonably necessary and that there are no less discriminatory alternatives available. The tribunal will weigh the discriminatory impact against the importance of the stated aim.

The justification must be supported by evidence. Employers should be able to demonstrate that they considered alternatives and that the policy or decision was carefully evaluated rather than adopted as a blanket assumption.

For example, imposing a mandatory retirement age purely because it is administratively convenient is unlikely to succeed. In specific sectors — such as certain partnership models or roles involving public safety — a retirement age may be justified if robust evidence supports it, but the employer must prove this.

2. Occupational requirements and sector-specific roles

In rare cases, age may constitute an occupational requirement. This is most likely to arise in safety-critical or physically demanding roles where age is directly linked to the ability to perform essential duties.

Even then, the employer must demonstrate that the requirement is objectively justified and proportionate. Blanket age limits without individual assessment are difficult to defend.

Public sector employers and certain regulated professions may operate within statutory frameworks that lawfully differentiate by age. However, such distinctions must still align with Equality Act principles and withstand proportionality analysis.

3. Statutory schemes that lawfully differentiate by age

Not all age-based differences are unlawful. Parliament has expressly permitted some distinctions.

National Minimum Wage
The National Minimum Wage and National Living Wage operate on age bands. Employers who pay the correct statutory rate are not acting unlawfully merely because younger workers receive a lower rate prescribed by law.

Statutory redundancy pay
Statutory redundancy payments are calculated using an age-related multiplier. This statutory formula is lawful.

Length-of-service benefits
Employers may lawfully reward length of service up to five years without needing to justify the practice. Where benefits are linked to service beyond five years, the employer must reasonably believe that the arrangement fulfils a legitimate business need, such as rewarding loyalty, encouraging retention or recognising experience, and be able to demonstrate that the approach is proportionate if challenged.

4. Positive action vs positive discrimination

The Equality Act permits limited forms of positive action. Where an employer reasonably believes that people of a particular age group suffer disadvantage or are under-represented, it may take proportionate steps to address that imbalance.

For example, targeted training initiatives aimed at supporting older workers in developing digital skills may be lawful if evidence shows a disadvantage.

However, positive discrimination — such as automatically preferring one age group over another solely because of age — remains unlawful unless it can be objectively justified under the age-specific provisions. For further context, see our guidance on positive discrimination.

Section Summary
Age-based treatment is not automatically unlawful, but it is only lawful where it can be objectively justified or falls within a statutory exception. Employers must identify a legitimate aim, demonstrate proportionality and retain evidence supporting their decision-making. Blanket assumptions or convenience-driven policies will not satisfy the tribunal test.

Section D: Employer Compliance Playbook – Preventing Age Discrimination

Preventing age discrimination requires more than a written policy. Tribunals look at culture, documentation, training and consistency in decision-making.

Employers who successfully defend age discrimination claims are typically those who can demonstrate structured processes, objective criteria and clear evidence that age played no part in the outcome.

The following compliance framework aligns with the areas where risk most frequently arises.

1. Recruitment controls to reduce risk

Recruitment decisions are frequently scrutinised because applicants do not require qualifying service to bring a claim.

Use objective criteria
Job descriptions and person specifications should focus on competencies, qualifications and measurable skills rather than assumptions linked to age. Avoid language that implies a preferred age demographic unless it can be objectively justified. For practical guidance, see our article on recruitment discrimination.

Separate monitoring data
If collecting equal opportunities information, ensure that age data is separated from shortlisting and interview decisions. Decision-makers should not have access to unnecessary personal data that could influence unconscious bias.

Structured scoring systems
Use scoring matrices during shortlisting and interviews. Record reasons for decisions at the time they are made. Tribunals give considerable weight to contemporaneous documentation.

Train hiring managers
Managers should understand how age bias can arise subtly, including assumptions about “cultural fit”, “energy levels” or “career stage”. Training strengthens the employer’s ability to rely on the statutory defence that all reasonable steps were taken to prevent discrimination.

2. Training, promotion and performance management

Equal access to development opportunities is a common flashpoint in age discrimination claims.

Transparent promotion criteria
Promotion decisions should be based on clearly defined competencies and documented evidence. Avoid informal selection based on perceived “future potential” without measurable standards.

Equal access to training
Do not assume that older employees are less interested in progression or that younger employees require longer probationary proof. Opportunities should be advertised transparently and selection criteria applied consistently.

Evidence-led performance management
Where performance concerns arise, rely on documented objectives and measurable outcomes rather than assumptions about age-related capability. Consistency across age groups is critical.

If dismissal is ultimately required, ensure that the process meets both unfair dismissal standards (where qualifying service exists) and discrimination safeguards.

3. Workplace culture and harassment prevention

Age-related comments often appear in claims as contextual evidence of bias.

Clear policies
Maintain an up-to-date equality and anti-harassment policy that explicitly references age as a protected characteristic.

Practical training
Training should go beyond generic diversity messaging. Managers should understand how everyday language, humour or stereotypes may constitute harassment under the statutory definition.

Prompt intervention
Where age-related remarks or complaints arise, address them promptly. Failure to act can weaken the employer’s defence and increase compensation risk.

Employers are vicariously liable under section 109 Equality Act 2010 for discriminatory acts of employees carried out in the course of employment unless they can demonstrate that they took all reasonable steps to prevent such conduct.

4. Redundancy, retirement and restructuring safeguards

Business change processes require particular care.

Balanced selection criteria
Avoid reliance on “last in, first out” as a sole criterion. Use objective scoring across skills, performance and qualifications. Ensure criteria do not indirectly disadvantage a particular age group without justification. For further process guidance, see our resources on redundancy consultation and designing a lawful redundancy matrix.

Document workforce planning rationale
If age is relevant to long-term succession planning, ensure that any resulting policy is evidence-based and capable of objective justification.

Retirement discussions
There is no default retirement age in the UK. Career discussions are permissible, but they must not single out employees because of age or apply pressure to retire. For practical steps, see our guide to retirement procedure for employers.

5. Complaint handling and litigation readiness

Early intervention reduces exposure.

Follow a structured grievance process
Investigate complaints impartially and maintain confidentiality. Document findings and rationale for any decisions taken. For best practice, see our guidance on implementing a compliant grievance procedure.

Prevent victimisation
Ensure that individuals who raise concerns are not treated less favourably. A detriment includes any treatment that a reasonable worker would consider disadvantageous.

Understand tribunal process and timing
Claimants must normally commence ACAS early conciliation before bringing a tribunal claim. Claims must normally be presented within three months less one day of the act complained of, subject to early conciliation extension.

Employers should retain relevant documents, emails and notes. Tribunals often scrutinise internal communications to assess whether age influenced decision-making.

Section Summary
Effective prevention of age discrimination requires structured recruitment processes, transparent promotion criteria, documented decision-making and proactive cultural management. Employers who apply objective standards consistently and maintain clear evidence are far better positioned to defend claims and demonstrate compliance with the Equality Act 2010.

Age Discrimination FAQs

What is age discrimination in the workplace?

Age discrimination occurs when a job applicant, worker or employee is treated less favourably because of their age, or because of a policy that disproportionately disadvantages a particular age group.

Under the Equality Act 2010, age discrimination includes direct discrimination (section 13), indirect discrimination, harassment and victimisation. Protection applies from recruitment onwards and does not require two years’ service.

What are common age discrimination examples?

Common examples include:

• Rejecting a candidate because they are perceived as too young or too old
• Denying promotion on the assumption that someone is “close to retirement”
• Refusing training because an employee is considered too inexperienced or too senior
• Making repeated age-related jokes that create an offensive environment
• Applying redundancy criteria that indirectly disadvantage a particular age group without justification

Each case depends on the facts, but tribunals examine whether age influenced the decision and whether the employer can justify its actions.

What are examples of age discrimination during the recruitment process?

Examples frequently seen in tribunal claims include:

• Stating an age range in a job advert without lawful justification
• Requesting date of birth at shortlisting stage without necessity
• Rejecting a candidate as “overqualified” where this is a proxy for age
• Assuming younger candidates lack commitment or maturity

Recruitment decisions must be based on objective, job-related criteria rather than assumptions about age. For further guidance, see our article on recruitment discrimination.

What does section 13 of the Equality Act 2010 say about age?

Section 13 defines direct discrimination. It provides that a person discriminates against another if, because of a protected characteristic (including age), they treat that person less favourably than they treat or would treat others.

Unlike most other protected characteristics, direct age discrimination can potentially be objectively justified if it is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.

Do employees need two years’ service to bring an age discrimination claim?

No. There is no qualifying service requirement for discrimination claims. A job applicant or employee can bring a claim regardless of length of service.

If an employee also brings an unfair dismissal claim, that claim will usually require two years’ qualifying service, unless an exception applies.

Can an employer ask for an applicant’s age?

It is not automatically unlawful to ask for age or date of birth. However, it is rarely necessary during the recruitment process and can create evidential risk.

If age data is collected for monitoring purposes, it should be separated from selection decisions. If age information influences recruitment decisions, this may later be relied upon as evidence of discrimination.

Can an employer enforce a mandatory retirement age?

There is no default retirement age in the UK. An employer may only impose a mandatory retirement age if it can objectively justify it as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.

The burden of proof rests with the employer, and tribunals apply this test strictly. Employers considering such a policy should seek specialist advice and review their retirement procedure for employers.

What are successful age discrimination cases in the UK and what do they show?

Successful claims often involve:

• Clear evidence that age-related comments influenced decision-making
• Inconsistent explanations for dismissal or redundancy
• Lack of documentation supporting the employer’s stated rationale
• Failure to consider less discriminatory alternatives

Tribunals place significant weight on contemporaneous documentation and comparator evidence. Employers who rely on structured processes and objective documentation are better positioned to defend claims.

When should an employer seek advice from age discrimination lawyers?

Legal advice is advisable where:

• Considering implementing a policy that differentiates by age
• Defending a complex grievance involving discrimination allegations
• Introducing a mandatory retirement age
• Facing an employment tribunal claim

Early advice can reduce risk and improve the employer’s position before matters escalate.

Conclusion

Age discrimination presents a distinctive compliance challenge for UK employers. It can affect individuals at every career stage, it does not require qualifying service for a claim to be brought and compensation for successful claims is uncapped.

The legal framework under the Equality Act 2010 is clear: employers must not directly or indirectly discriminate, harass or victimise individuals because of age. While age is unique in allowing direct discrimination to be objectively justified in limited circumstances, the burden of proof rests with the employer. Legitimate aims must be genuine, evidence-based and pursued through proportionate means.

In practice, risk most commonly arises in recruitment decisions, promotion and training access, redundancy selection, workplace culture and retirement discussions. Informal assumptions, undocumented reasoning and careless language frequently feature in successful claims.

Employers can significantly reduce exposure by:

• Applying objective, competency-based criteria in recruitment and promotion
• Maintaining clear documentation supporting employment decisions
• Training managers to recognise age bias and avoid stereotypes
• Addressing complaints promptly and preventing victimisation
• Reviewing any age-linked policies to ensure they are capable of objective justification

A structured, evidence-led approach to workforce management is the strongest safeguard against age discrimination claims.

Glossary

Useful Links