Euphemism, whether judicial or administrative, remains what it is: a euphemism. Giving an unpleasant action a respectable name does not make it any less unpleasant for the person at the receiving end. Nor does it allay the apprehensions of those against whom such an action is taken.

The Supreme Court has clarified that an order of compulsory retirement is neither punitive nor stigmatic. It does not, in legal terms, cast aspersions on an employee’s conduct or imply a finding of misconduct. In theory, the distinction is perfectly sound.

But, as the saying goes, only the wearer knows where the shoe pinches. Ask an employee how he feels when he is compulsorily retired, often without an opportunity to defend himself. Will he agree that the decision carries no stigma and is not a punishment?

Purpose........

© Free Press Journal