Do we all really love work so much that we want to do it until we drop dead?
Some do and some simply need the money. Is it really the case that people prefer to work than have free time to do hobbies?
Or is it the lack of money for the hobbies? i.e lack of a pension ?
You’ve hit the nail on the head there.
The brain is like any muscle, without constant work it withers.
My gut feeling is that when people hear you have to keep mentally stimulated into old age, they imagine travelling the world and having new experiences.
Whereas I think it has more to do with real mental exertion, like barbells for your brain.
Maybe we’re talking at cross purposes. My point is that most jobs are not totally Cerebral like academia. Most jobs are actually physical jobs and as you get older your capacity to do them lessens. Laying brick, painting, stacking shelves, collecting bins and nursing sick people are all physical jobs and your effectiveness at them will lessen as you get older.
Going back to the point of raising the retirement age but your company not upping the retirement age of your contract. That should end. It should be put into law that any new contracts must have the retirement aligned with the national retirement age.
I think an issue is the assumption baked into employment law and common practice that people get better (or at least no worse) at their job as time goes on.
I wouldn’t mind getting a pay cut as my mental or physical faculties diminish (although there’s not a lot to spare) but it’s very difficult to achieve in practice unless I volunteer for a more junior position.
The mandatory retirement age is a crappy catch-all solution to this problem, although maybe in the evolving gig economy the post-65s will all just work as contractors with state supports to fall back on.
I’ve worked with some excellent software engineers in their sixties.
I would have no real difficulty in working in a less stressful situation with reduced hours, as things stand I only have 10 years left until retirement, I work in IT with a broad range of skills but I do find that many of the younger team members are overtaking me in terms of being able to keep up with the technology. As for software engineers, the older ones usually have a better understanding of the underlying code than many of the recent graduates who probably never touched machine code or used compilers.
I hope that i would be able to do part time for as long as I am physically & mentally able to do so to earn that little bit extra to enable me to actually enjoy the extra time off.
Indeed many private sector workers would like to work and get well paid until 70.
Will that even happen until age 60?
Will it f#ck…
This seems to me just a way to keep the public sector pay train chugging along well past peak productivity years (I know - there are always exceptions). Is there any talk that people could accept diminished responsibilities, and so reduced pay? Of course not.
As currently described this will balloon the amount needed every year for public sector pay… which to be fair is probably the exact intention.
I used to have a public sector job in the UK and the retirement age was 60, but staff could return as “retreads” (Retired & Reinstated).
Essentially this meant that they came back and continued to work, but, they were re-employed at the bottom of the scale and as experienced members of the team they were treated well as cut priced consultants.
That sounds like a really good & practical idea. I fear that in Ireland it would mean people being brought in at the top of scale rather than bottom because “that’s where they were before they left” etc etc. Which defeats the purpose entirely.
We also have an indirect unintended consequence in the making…if enough people do this then borrowing for housing takes it into account and suddenly we have to compete with people working another 5 years or more
There are currently two main streams for retirement age in the service:
-Pre 2004 can go from 60 and must go at 65
-Since 2004 staff can go from 65 and must go at 70
There are also a small cohort who have no mandatory retirement age. That will be fun when some are 80 and still coming in and it will happen…
Most of my older colleagues prefer to retire at 60. I have witnessed two in the past year who only went at 65 because they had too. Both were unmarried and the work was their only social outlet and all they knew. They would definitely stay to 70. Problem for the office is they were not very productive after 60. Depts now facing into 10 years of disengagement instead of 5 which was bad enough.
Very demoralising for younger staff looking at someone who is 61 and not doing a tap of work, on twice the salary. Now you will also wait a further 5 years for that promotion to become available,
Obviously the maths of the old schemes no longer work since when they started people died in their 70s, inflation was 10%+ per annum and schemes didn’t have to give pension increases the maths probably did work. Lower inflation, zero interest rates, successive legislation and improving life expectancy are the biggest killers to these schemes, auto-enrolment as a solution only moves the liabilities around.
The people who want to work until 70 plus are going to be in cushy numbers. Those who have to work are likelier in tougher jobs. Hard to see every 70 year old being able to build a house, service a car and to be honest all day long working on a mouse and keyboard is giving me repetitive strain . I will not be able to do this in my 60s nevermind 70