Court Rejects 72-Year-Old Professor’s Bid for Reinstatement After Forced Retirement from UNISA

Labour Court rules against former UNISA professor in age-based dispute over employment

The Labour Court has dismissed a case brought by Jan Walters Kruger, a former University of South Africa (UNISA) professor who challenged his forced retirement at 65, arguing it was age discrimination. The 72-year-old academic, who joined UNISA in 2001 and became a full professor in 2018, hoped to be reinstated or compensated, but the court ruled against him, citing policy consistency and lack of evidence for his claims.

A Career Cut Short or Right on Time?

Kruger’s academic path with UNISA spanned nearly two decades, culminating in a professorship at the School of Business Leadership (SBL). But when he hit the official retirement age in January 2019, UNISA ended his employment in line with its policy.

Kruger believed the termination was discriminatory. He pointed to colleagues who had worked beyond 65—Professors Neuland (84), Klopper (72), Strydom (77), and Pellissier (66)—arguing that there was no consistent retirement standard. However, UNISA clarified that those individuals were rehired on fixed-term contracts after retirement, based on operational needs, not kept on as permanent employees.

‘Verbal Promises’ Fall Flat in Court

A key part of Kruger’s case rested on an alleged verbal promise. He claimed that the CEO of SBL assured him in 2018 that he would not be forced into retirement due to his “scarce skills.” According to Kruger, he was told UNISA would keep him on indefinitely, as long as his performance remained strong.

But Judge Connie Prinsloo wasn’t convinced. Kruger failed to call the CEO as a witness or present any formal evidence of this promise.

“The plaintiff failed to prove the agreement,” the judge said. “Considering the evidence and the probabilities, it is improbable that such an agreement was reached.”

UNISA Defends Its Policy

UNISA maintained throughout the trial that its retirement policy was well-established and clearly communicated to Kruger. At the time of his appointment, the standard retirement age was 60. This was extended to 65 in 2012 through a formally adopted bargaining agreement.

UNISA’s legal team stressed that Kruger’s case was not a dismissal, but simply the lawful conclusion of his employment contract upon reaching the retirement age.

They also pointed out that within the SBL, no current staff members over 65 were employed in permanent roles.

Court: Sympathy Isn’t a Legal Argument

Judge Prinsloo acknowledged Kruger’s belief that he could still contribute meaningfully to academia, especially given his long history of service since 1974 and his expertise in niche business fields. However, she emphasized that personal capability and intent do not override contractual obligations or institutional policy.

“The law must be applied dispassionately,” said Prinsloo. “This court has empathy for Mr. Kruger, but the facts and legal principles do not support his claim.”

What This Means for SA Academia

This case highlights the growing debate around age limits in academia, especially as institutions face a brain drain and rising demand for skilled educators. While Kruger argued that his skills were still relevant and in short supply, the court reinforced that policies exist for institutional clarity, not individual exceptions.

The ruling also signals to South Africa’s academic professionals that retirement policies are likely to be upheld, even when personal skillsets remain valuable.

{Source: IOL}

Follow Joburg ETC on Facebook, Twitter , TikTok and Instagram

For more News in Johannesburg, visit joburgetc.com