jump to navigation

Working until 70? December 30, 2018

Posted by WorldbyStorm in Uncategorized.
trackback

Jason O’Toole has a piece today on the upping of the (voluntary) age of retirement until 70. Mixed feelings about this. Ruth Coppinger is quoted in the piece:

“As Socialists, we oppose pushing up the retirement age.

“This was a right fought for by trade unions for centuries. Governments worldwide are seeking to raise the age and slash pensions.

“Although the Bill proposed it as voluntary to breach age 65, it sets a dangerous precedent for the entire public sector and thus for all workers in general.

“The government and some union leaders pose this as an individual right for those who wish to work beyond 65.

“However, the breaching of the retirement age is what is significant. This also has implications for job creation for younger people.”

Comments»

1. CL - December 30, 2018

So long as its voluntary it should not be a problem. Mandatory retirement, apart from certain professions, e.g. airline pilots, is illegal in the U.S. The district attorney in Manhattan, Morganthau, retired when he was 90. And there’s a federal judge in NY still working in his 90s. Trump of course has passed the three score and ten, and a whole slew of people over 70 want his job. Coppinger is wrong on this one.

Like

Daniel Rayner O'Connor - December 30, 2018

The trouble is that, with this lot in power, it is likely that this could be a sugar coated thin end of a very nasty wedge.

Like

Alibaba - December 30, 2018

I share some of the concerns of both Coppinger and O’Toole. They both suspect that a new law is a dangerous precedent and it will one day be compulsory to work until 70 years of age.

Yet it seems reasonable to remove the obligation to retire at 65, especially for those who wish to work part-time. However, it is vital to ring-fence all the rights and entitlements of those who choose not to do so.

Liked by 1 person

Fergal - December 30, 2018

Hmm! How do the kids get a start if some auld fella hangs on until 90 like CL’s NY judges?

Like

CL - December 30, 2018

Well the unemployment rate in the U.S is the lowest its been in years,-and there is no mandatory retirement age.
There is of course still a certain amount of ‘ageism’, but as regards employment its illegal.
Many government workers in NYC, retire in their 50s; others continue working into their 70s and even 80s, with a few even in their 90s. Its a matter of choice. People can draw social security at age 62, but get more if they retire later.

Like

Polly. - December 30, 2018

One former colleague, who kept on tottering gamely in until 91, doing a part-time version of his former job, saw it as having our employer pay for a nice, centrally heated room, coffee and social contact 3 days a week. He was a great colleague and repository of institutional expertise so no one else saw it like that, he was very well worth hanging on to. But as fuel poverty hits us in our seventies, who knows how we’ll see it.

Liked by 1 person

CL - December 30, 2018

And not forgetting Nancy Pelosi, pushing 80, taking over as leader of the House Dems, and second in line of succession to the presidency.

Like

EWI - December 30, 2018

Second those who suspectvthat this is the thin end of a wedge involving making people work until 70 (which is what the pension age will escalate to). Numerous grassroots efforts within the former IMPACT to deal with the anomolous year by (ultimately) industrial action were sabotaged by the union; now we see why.

Like

Alibaba - December 31, 2018

Thinking through the ‘the rights and entitlements’ I mentioned already about those retiring at 65 or choosing to work thereafter, it got me wondering about what the Left currently proposes in these circumstances.

For example, public servants need 40 years service to qualify for a full pension on retirement. If you have 20 years service when you hit 65, why not seek to top up your pensionable allowances by accumulation of extra years due to working beyond 65? The state should be told either let us do that (which they won’t) or give us our occupational pension (plus lump sum) at 65 and then pay us our weekly (or part-time) wages for every instance we work thereafter. So, shut up or put up with this!

The devil on pensions is in the proverbial detail. But surely the Left should have some concrete demands and not a simple No to any bill which seeks to extend the retirement age on a voluntary basis, whilst demanding a cast-iron guarantee that those who choose to retire at 65 will never be disallowed.

Like

Joe - December 31, 2018

“If you have 20 years service when you hit 65, why not seek to top up your pensionable allowances by accumulation of extra years due to working beyond 65?”

I’m pretty sure the new arrangements enable this. So if you have 20 years service when you hit 65 and you continue working for another five years, you will have 25 years service when you retire and the pro-rata increase in your weekly pension.

Like

Alibaba - December 31, 2018

You could be right, Joe, but give me the proof. And why we would not enable people to pull down their occupational pension at 65 anyway (even if they worked on) so they can it enjoy it before they pass on? Pensions are vastly complicated matters. I would like to think the Left has some expert take on them and it is made manifest in concrete demands for public and private sector workers.

Like

EWI - January 1, 2019

I would like to think the Left has some expert take on them and it is made manifest in concrete demands for public and private sector workers.

TASC and such are well aware, however the ‘Croke Park’ trade union set – most good Labour Party members – will not allow anything to be done about it (but are not at all shy about seizing on and trumpeting victories by others, obviously).

Like

Jim Monaghan - January 1, 2019

Well there are health problems which a person could ignore. I remember a famous trial where it turned out that the judge was not just sleeping but was dying. Some, who to put is harshly, can be beyond it. Perhaps a system where people can move sideways into less strreeful or demanding jobs. I think as well of young people never getting a chance because their elders cling on for ever.
I am 71 at the end of the month. And am no way as active or energetic as I was when younger.

Liked by 1 person

makedoanmend - January 1, 2019

Great comment.

Why not return to the traditional role that elders previously held in many societies – as sources of information in real time.

Experience and mentoring are hugely under-rated skills in our capitalist economies since these skills are not easily monetised, and sometimes seen merely as costs.

We’re great societies for wasting value. Seems an inherent feature of capitalism.

Like


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: