Musician to advance challenge to mandatory retirement age at Royal Irish Academy of Music

John Finucane, a distinguished clarinettist and composer, is advancing a legal challenge against the Royal Irish Academy of Music’s (RIAM) mandatory retirement age policy, which requires retirement at 70. The case centers on allegations of age discrimination and has been cleared to proceed to a full hearing by the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC).

Finucane, who has been a professor of clarinet at RIAM for over 30 years and formerly served as principal clarinet with the National Symphony Orchestra, reached a pivotal moment last year as he approached his 70th birthday. Approximately eight months before this milestone, RIAM notified him that he would be expected to retire in line with a policy mirroring public sector standards setting 70 as the compulsory retirement age.

The decision to enforce this policy came as a unilateral move by the academy, which Finucane’s legal team contends was not agreed upon by the musician. Correspondence between Finucane and RIAM following the notification revealed ongoing objections to the imposition of the retirement age, with Finucane and his solicitors disputing the academy’s stance.

Significantly, Finucane pointed to examples within RIAM of colleagues who continued their teaching careers well beyond the age of 70, some into their eighties and nineties. This inconsistency has formed part of the argument that the mandatory retirement policy was selectively applied.

In June 2025, Finucane formally lodged an equality complaint alleging age discrimination under the Employment Equality Act. Despite this, subsequent discussions led to him signing a fixed-term employment contract in September 2025. His barrister emphasized that this agreement was made under considerable time pressure and represented less favourable terms than his previous arrangement.

RIAM’s representatives, represented by Heather Watters from the employers’ group Ibec, argued that the WRC should dismiss the case on procedural grounds. They claimed that since the complaint was filed before the fixed-term contract was signed, the tribunal lacked jurisdiction to consider matters occurring after the initial filing.

However, adjudication officer Gaye Cunningham rejected this argument, ruling that the protections afforded by the Employment Equality Act extend to discrimination claims related to conditions that may arise in the future. She acknowledged that the sequence of events, including the contract negotiations, fell within the commission’s remit due to the ongoing nature of the dispute and the academy’s awareness of the complaint.

Cunningham’s preliminary decision affirmed that the case warrants a substantive investigation into whether RIAM’s retirement policy constitutes unlawful age discrimination. This ruling ensures that Finucane’s challenge will proceed, potentially setting a precedent for how retirement policies are applied within educational institutions and the broader arts sector.

The dispute highlights a broader conversation about ageism in professional environments, particularly in fields where experience and longevity are highly valued. Finucane’s insistence on continuing his teaching career beyond the current retirement threshold underscores tensions between institutional policy and individual capability.

As the case moves forward, details remain limited regarding the full scope of arguments that will be presented at the hearing. However, the development marks a significant step in addressing mandatory retirement policies in Ireland’s cultural and educational spheres, potentially influencing future employment practices at RIAM and similar organizations.