A leading classical musician is set to advance his equality complaint challenging a mandatory retirement age of 70 at theRoyal Irish Academy of Music (RIAM).
The academy’s representatives have failed to block a full hearing at the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) into alleged ageist discrimination against clarinettist and composer John Finucane (71).
The tribunal published a preliminary decision today dismissing a motion advanced on behalf of RIAM arguing it had no jurisdiction to hear the claim under the Employment Equality Act against the academy’s retirement policy.
Mr Finucane, the former principal clarinet with the National Symphony Orchestra, began teaching at RIAM in 1995 and has been professor of clarinet there for over three decades, the tribunal heard.
Around eight months ahead of Mr Finucane’s 70th birthday in August 2025, RIAM “unilaterally contended” that Mr Finucane had agreed that his retirement age was 70, his barrister, James Doran BL submitted.
Mr Doran submitted that his client was told in a letter in late 2024, when he was 69, that RIAM was following the policy in the public sector which “mandates an upper retirement age of 70”.
Mr Finucane, and then his solicitors, exchanged correspondences with RIAM through late 2024 and on into 2025 objecting to RIAM applying the mandatory retirement age, the tribunal heard.
Mr Finucane maintained that that colleagues of his had worked on into their 80s and 90s, and he had not agreed with a retirement age of 70.
The musician registered an equality complaint alleging age discrimination in June 2025.
Following discussions between the parties, Mr Finucane signed up to a fixed-term contract of employment last September, the tribunal was told. Mr Doran submitted that this was done under “time pressure” and left his client on less favourable terms.
Heather Watters of Ibec, for RIAM, argued that as Mr Finucane had filed his complaint in June 2025, the WRC was not entitled to rule on matters that happened later, such as the contract.
She called on adjudication officer Gaye Cunningham to dismiss the case on this basis.
Ms Cunningham wrote in her decision that the Employment Equality Act extended to shielding workers from discrimination on the basis of protected grounds that “may exist in the future”.
She also wrote that there was a “sequence of events” extending into the period of her jurisdiction prior to the complaint and that the RIAM was “on notice” that Mr Finucane was alleging age discrimination at that time.
“I find that the matter should proceed to an investigation of the substantive issue,” she concluded.
