Life Health Professional forum is the place for positive industry interaction and welcomes your professional and informed opinion.

Ontario teacher fights for right to benefits past 65

Notify me of new replies via email
Leo Almazora | 17 Feb 2017, 09:10 AM Agree 0
‘People shouldn't be discriminated against because of their age,” he said
  • bruce | 17 Feb 2017, 02:09 PM Agree 0
    talos is a 44 year veteran, his pension is maxed? is he double dipping pension and full salary? and now he want full benefits? when is this guy going to give a little. at the least quit and give a young teacher a chance. why didn't he convert his health benefits at 65, there are so many questions here. age discrimination is normal part of insurance . young guys pay more for car insurance, a lot less for life, ltd terminates at 65 in all group plans, etc etc. companies don't want to pay for benefits for people who should not be in their employ. anyone with a defined benefit pension plan doesn't need to work past 65, but there's a whole other debate there. bottom line: he has no "rights" past 65. the plan is the same now as it's been for years, but now that he is inconvenienced, it's not fair. not as mature a position as I would have thought for a 44 year teacher veteran.
  • R Clark | 18 Feb 2017, 08:54 AM Agree 0
    Wow, pretty narrow minded comment.
    I too am still working and just about to reach that magic age 65. Maybe I'm a little different in that I run my own business but do receive benefits from a large Insurance company. They have just recognised that many people are now working past age 65, some due to necessity and others, simply because they want to and have expended benefits past age 65.
    The teacher you talk about may simply want to continue working and contribute his deep experience to his students and fellow teachers.
  • Steve Talos | 21 Feb 2017, 05:26 PM Agree 0
    This is in response to Bruce. I am Steve Talos the teacher whom the Grand Erie District School Board discriminated against in respect to benefits. Unfortunately he is misinformed. To begin with the Ministry of Education subsides teacher benefits to 90% ($8,000 -$10,000) a year. The GEDSB still receives this amount despite the fact I receive no benefits. You also may have missed the point my wife depended upon my Health Care Plan for drugs she needed to treat her ovarian cancer. These were terminated placing my life's health and life in jeopardy. Also if I retired another person would not get my job. Education has become like a temp-agency and few individuals receive a full time contract the way it used to be in the past. Using the same criteria Bruce suggests, everyone 65 and over should retire to give others their job. Why should teachers be any different than any other profession or form of employment. It was also proven at the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal that it cost no more for health insurance that it would for a person 30-45 with a family. You also seem to forget Bruce that once one is 65 drugs are now covered under the Ontario Drug Plan and by insurance providers.
    The bottom line Bruce is that I do the SAME JOB, if not better as a result of my experience than my younger teaching peers. If there exist a bona fide reason as in other cases of discrimination (eg. sex, nationality, colour, sexual orientation) I would certainly endorse your position benefits should be modified according to the circumstances. Also I will not receive my pension until I formally retire - this is not double dipping. Mature adults 65 and older should have the right to equality of treatment and self-respect. Perhaps Bruce once you reach the age of 65 you may elect to continue doing the job you presently are and decide to continue. I suggest that you would also want to receive the same compensation as your working peers. Good luck Bruce but until you have been there you will not truly understand my circumstances or what my wife (now deceased) had to experience as a consequence of the GEDSB discriminating against us re.benefits.

    P.S. My legal fight will not so much benefit myself but hopefully for every other person whom has attained the age of 65 and elects to continue being employed past the stereotype retirement age of SIXTY-FIVE. Nonetheless I much respect your position.
  • Money$$ | 05 Jun 2018, 06:42 AM Agree 0
    How will this effect injured workers collecting WSID benefits who are cut off at age 65?
  • Lena Thorogood | 05 Feb 2019, 12:39 PM Agree 0
    I am 69 years of age and I work full time for an elected official. When I turned 65, my benefits were drastically reduced. For me it is less about the reduction in compensation for doing the same job, than it is about age discrimination. I am made to feel less valued in the workplace due solely to my age. It is a terrible feeling to be treated with less dignity because one is now in one's 60's. My boss is very happy with my performance. I am competent and I miss very few days of work due to illness. But I am punished because I am over the age of 65. Even the Chief Commissioner at the Ontario Human Rights Commission has publicly denounced the practice of using age-based criteria in employee group benefit plans, as age discrimination. She has further encouraged employers to follow the spirt of the Ontario Human Rights Code and refrain from this practice. Not all employers treat their older workers this way. Sadly those that do, require legislation to force them to do the right thing. Let's hope the Employment Standards Act is changed to close this loophole. (Comments submitted on February 5, 2019)
Post a reply