Topic: Retirement Age for Workers - Does this Make Sense? - page 11. (Read 1422 times)
The retirement of the workers is still based on the workers and their capacity to work at the old ages.In my country some people are working at the age of 70-80 years.It May be considered as the different one,but it was the fact.This happening in many countries and in some countries people with below 35 are not ready to work for their jobs and bill.They depend on their family members and brothers to survive in the hard situations.This is not a right way to survive in this world.Some people are ready to save for their life term in his 35 years.Most of them was in crypto trading and some in stock market.Earning money is the essential one.
In my country, the retirement age is okay because all things doing good I don't think I want to work after their retirement age. I will like to live my life to the fullest and not dragging to work more after the age
Once you are 60 years old people should retire and go and enjoy their life, people should not be forced to work into their later years. I know there are pros and Cons to this but it is important to consider a lot of issues. It is important to note that late retirement may not be feasible or desirable for everyone, as individual circumstances and preferences vary. Factors such as health, family obligations, job satisfaction, and personal financial situation should all be considered when making decisions about retirement and the Government shouldn't be in the position to make this for one, especially when you look at the history of Government when it comes to important issues like this
I always believed that relegating senior and experienced workers to advisory positions with less hours and decent pay is a good way to go. Giving them a choice to accept this role or quit working won't hurt any company that they're working on. Experience and knowledge is always respected and valued no matter the field is, and you can't pass it on to the young ones without a senior teaching them a thing or two about their industry.
The retirement age they have imposed is okay, though there should always be an option for these seniors to continue what they're doing albeit in a less physically-intensive work load and of course, reduced amount of pay, but I guess that's just me wanting these kinds of things to other people. I want to retire early, but I understand the void that it will leave me once I no longer do what I'm doing for years all of a sudden.
The retirement age they have imposed is okay, though there should always be an option for these seniors to continue what they're doing albeit in a less physically-intensive work load and of course, reduced amount of pay, but I guess that's just me wanting these kinds of things to other people. I want to retire early, but I understand the void that it will leave me once I no longer do what I'm doing for years all of a sudden.
It makes sense. However, it is important to note that ageism in the workplace is a real issue, and older workers may face discrimination and be forced into retirement even if they are still capable and willing to work.
No one can discriminate senior workers in a workplace, remember they are the people who get in the work first, and others are like juniors to them. In work ethics, it is often that seniors are getting the respect of their juniors. If a person wanted to discriminate they will discriminate regardless of the age of person they wanted to discriminate.
Also, I don't think that underperformance will be the issue in this decree. Since we cannot see any major changes in the performance of a person if ever the retirement age is increased by 2 years. Other people are working even at the age of 70+. I agree that it can bring both positive and negative emotional and psychological impacts to the worker but it is what it is, the government implementation of an increased age retirement bracket will not please everybody.
It makes sense. However, it is important to note that ageism in the workplace is a real issue, and older workers may face discrimination and be forced into retirement even if they are still capable and willing to work. In terms of the benefits and drawbacks of retaining older employees, it is essential to strike a balance between experience and productivity. While experience can be invaluable, it is also important to recognize that cognitive and physical decline can affect job performance. Employers should consider alternative arrangements such as part-time work, flexible hours, or job sharing to accommodate older workers and maximize their contributions while minimizing the negative impact on their health and well-being.
Quote
France's Constitutional Council on Friday approved an unpopular plan to raise the retirement age from 62 to 64, in a victory for President Emmanuel Macron after three months of mass protests over the legislation that have damaged his leadership.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/france-retirement-age-raise-64-approved-constitutional-council/
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/france-retirement-age-raise-64-approved-constitutional-council/
This so-called measure has several benefits and drawbacks. The elder employees can benefit from their years of experience if they are retained on the job for longer, which is one advantage. The drawback of this is that many workplaces will report low performance because there is an inverse relationship between a person's success at work and their deterioration in cognitive and physical capacities.
Regardless, what I think is that the government shouldn't shove it down the throat of people. Workers who are approaching retirement age should be given a choice after appraisal to keep working or retire.
What sense does this make? Would you agree or disagree?
Besides that, increasing the retirement age can also trigger several impacts, one of which is triggering negative reactions from certain groups, such as the news that you share with trade unions and social organizations. In this case, the French government should carefully consider these impacts before making a decision to increase the retirement age. Therefore, I do not agree with President Emmanuel Macron's decision.
Extension of retirement is of an advantage and also of disadvantage. One of the advantages is that the worker will enjoy more years of service when they appear to be young and able to work. One of the disadvantage is that the younger workforce would not have space to be accommodated in the work space.
But talking with respect to this topic, the increments of the retirement year from 62 to the 64 should be made in such a way that it would be the opinion of the worker to continue the next two years, if not they should retire with their whole benefits.
But talking with respect to this topic, the increments of the retirement year from 62 to the 64 should be made in such a way that it would be the opinion of the worker to continue the next two years, if not they should retire with their whole benefits.
The retirement age is much higher in other European countries; usually it's approximately 64 or 65 years old; in Greece, however, it's 67, which I personally believe is too much. I admire the French people's fight; although two more years might not seem much for us, as the retirement age is already quite low compared to the EU's average, the French are fighting to avoid any potential further increase in the future or other measures taken against them. Seeing that they didn't react to the first one, why not increase it further?
of course it makes sense in my opinion, because a person's productive age to work in that field may have been determined, that's why some differ in applying the retirement age, because the person's performance will not be maximized if forced, and it may also be dangerous for them if they are still working there.
What sense does this make? Would you agree or disagree?
It does make sense for the government so they can save the economy but sure it didn't for the people in France which already cause unrest in the country.
AFAIK part of the culture in France is leisure. Taking that away from someone who is about to get 62 is like slavery. These people already planned to travel somewhere a year ago for their vacation. But now they have to work for 2 more years to enjoy pension.
To be fair this is something we had to dealt with the same things in my nation for a long time as well. The main issue is that even though people pay taxes for it, you dont really make that work for 40 years. I mean do you think someone who is 60 years old right now, that could start paying taxes in 80s 90s being available today? Absokutely not, so todays kids working pays the taxes for todays elderly so that when they are old tomorrow, tomorrows kids would pay for theirs. This decision helps just a bit withkut a doubt, it doesnt suddenly make economy better, but it allows a bit of a lee way to cyt the spending and government not hurting the economy too bad. Obviously I know this because when I was a kid people retired at 40-45, and we started to spend taxes for them, thankfully its 60 years and even 65 years old in most cases, and that definitelymakes it a lot better now that it makes everything later, not that our economy is any better but at least its not that much worse.
Quote
France's Constitutional Council on Friday approved an unpopular plan to raise the retirement age from 62 to 64, in a victory for President Emmanuel Macron after three months of mass protests over the legislation that have damaged his leadership.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/france-retirement-age-raise-64-approved-constitutional-council/
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/france-retirement-age-raise-64-approved-constitutional-council/
This so-called measure has several benefits and drawbacks. The elder employees can benefit from their years of experience if they are retained on the job for longer, which is one advantage. The drawback of this is that many workplaces will report low performance because there is an inverse relationship between a person's success at work and their deterioration in cognitive and physical capacities.
Regardless, what I think is that the government shouldn't shove it down the throat of people. Workers who are approaching retirement age should be given a choice after appraisal to keep working or retire.
What sense does this make? Would you agree or disagree?
Jump to: