Hourglass with books symbolizing academic careers and time.

Ageism in Academia: Cambridge's Retirement Policy Under Fire

Soraya Malik in Law & Justice August 2025 • 4 min read.

"A critical review questions the fairness and effectiveness of the Employer Justified Retirement Age (EJRA) policy at Cambridge University, sparking debate about age discrimination in higher education."

The hallowed halls of Cambridge University, an institution synonymous with academic excellence, find themselves at the center of a heated debate. At issue is the Employer Justified Retirement Age (EJRA) policy, which mandates retirement for all academic and academic-related staff at the end of the academic year in which they turn 67. This policy, implemented in 2012, was intended to ensure inter-generational fairness, promote innovation, and enable effective succession planning.

However, a recently published critical review is challenging the very foundation of the EJRA, questioning its proportionality and justification. The review, conducted by a group of academics from Cambridge and Oxford, alleges that the EJRA is not only ineffective but potentially discriminatory, exacerbating existing disparities within the university.

This controversy comes at a time when ageism is increasingly recognized as a pervasive form of discrimination, and institutions are under growing pressure to ensure equitable treatment for all employees, regardless of age. The debate surrounding the EJRA at Cambridge highlights the complex challenges of balancing the needs of different generations within the academic community and the importance of evidence-based policy making.

Does EJRA Really Boost Job Creation? A Closer Look at the Numbers

Hourglass with books symbolizing academic careers and time.

One of the central justifications for the EJRA is the claim that it increases job creation rates for younger academics. The University's report suggests that the EJRA has had a beneficial effect on vacancy creation, contributing positively to the academic workforce. However, the critical review casts serious doubt on this assertion.

According to their analysis, Cambridge consistently had lower job creation rates for Established Academic Careers (EAC) compared to other Russell Group universities, both before and after the EJRA implementation in 2011. This finding directly contradicts the University's claim that the EJRA has stimulated job growth.

Data Filtering Issues: The review points to unclear application of data filters and inconsistent variable treatment in the University's report.
Statistical Errors: The analysis alleges erroneous statistical conclusions, undermining the credibility of the findings.
Lack of Control for External Factors: The review argues that the University's analysis fails to adequately control for pre-existing trends and differences between universities, making it difficult to isolate the impact of the EJRA.

Furthermore, the review highlights the fact that other Russell Group universities, which do not have an EJRA, exhibit higher job creation rates. This suggests that job creation can be sustained or even thrive without such a policy, further weakening the case for the EJRA.

Time for Change? The Call to Abolish EJRA

The critical review concludes with a resounding call for the abolition of the EJRA at Cambridge. The authors argue that the policy does not meet its intended aims and could be viewed as unlawful age discrimination. They recommend that the university adopt a more equitable approach to managing its workforce, one that values the contributions of academics of all ages.

About this Article -

This article was crafted using a human-AI hybrid and collaborative approach. AI assisted our team with initial drafting, research insights, identifying key questions, and image generation. Our human editors guided topic selection, defined the angle, structured the content, ensured factual accuracy and relevance, refined the tone, and conducted thorough editing to deliver helpful, high-quality information.See our About page for more information.

This article is based on research published under:

DOI-LINK: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2405.14611,

Title: Is The Ejra Proportionate And Therefore Justified? A Critical Review Of The Ejra Policy At Cambridge

Subject: econ.gn q-fin.ec

Authors: Oliver Linton, Raghavendra Rau, Patrick Baert, Peter Bossaerts, Jon Crowcroft, G. R. Evans, Paul Ewart, Nick Gay, Paul Kattuman, Stefan Scholtes, Hamid Sabourian, Richard J. Smith

Published: 23-05-2024

Everything You Need To Know

What is the Employer Justified Retirement Age (EJRA) policy at Cambridge University, and why is it under scrutiny?

The Employer Justified Retirement Age (EJRA) is a policy at Cambridge University mandating retirement for all academic and academic-related staff at the end of the academic year they turn 67. This policy, implemented in 2012, aimed to promote inter-generational fairness, encourage innovation, and facilitate effective succession planning. However, a critical review questions the EJRA's fairness and effectiveness, suggesting it might be discriminatory and not achieving its stated goals, igniting a debate about ageism in higher education.

What are the main criticisms of the EJRA policy as highlighted in the critical review?

The critical review of the EJRA policy at Cambridge University raises several key concerns. It questions the policy's proportionality and justification, alleging it is ineffective and potentially discriminatory. The review points out issues with data filtering and inconsistent variable treatment in the University's report. Statistical errors in the University's analysis are also alleged. The review also argues that the University's analysis inadequately considers pre-existing trends and differences between universities, making it difficult to isolate the impact of the EJRA.

Does the EJRA at Cambridge University actually boost job creation, as the University claims?

The critical review disputes the University's claim that the EJRA increases job creation rates for younger academics. The review's analysis indicates that Cambridge had lower job creation rates for Established Academic Careers (EAC) compared to other Russell Group universities both before and after the EJRA's implementation. Moreover, the review notes that other Russell Group universities, without an EJRA, exhibit higher job creation rates, thus weakening the justification that the EJRA stimulates job growth.

What are the potential implications of the EJRA policy for academic careers and innovation at Cambridge University?

The EJRA policy's potential implications include concerns about age discrimination and its impact on academic careers. Critics argue that the policy could lead to the loss of valuable experience and expertise from senior academics. Furthermore, mandatory retirement might stifle innovation by removing seasoned academics from the workforce. The debate surrounding the EJRA underscores the challenge of balancing the needs of different generations and the importance of fair treatment within the academic community, potentially hindering the university's pursuit of excellence.

What recommendations does the critical review make regarding the EJRA policy at Cambridge University?

The critical review calls for the abolition of the Employer Justified Retirement Age (EJRA) at Cambridge University. The authors argue that the policy does not meet its intended aims and could be considered unlawful age discrimination. They recommend that the university adopt a more equitable approach to managing its workforce, one that values the contributions of academics of all ages. This would involve assessing individual performance and contributions rather than mandating retirement based solely on age.