Prepare to Care: A Resource Guide for Families was developed by AARP to help make the job more manageable. Here’s how to obtain a free copy.

Reply
Silver Conversationalist
0
Kudos
973
Views

Re: Argument for Mandatory Retirement

973 Views
Message 1 of 11

I applaud you for your insight. You are exactly on point to the conversation. Thank you. 

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
973
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
1197
Views

Re: Argument for Mandatory Retirement

1,197 Views
Message 2 of 11

@dl73698250 wrote:

@nyadrn wrote:

@dl73698250 wrote:

This is a good example of conflating two unrelated subjects. It might be true that in general, older employees slow down or less likely to be updated in their proficiency. But that's not necessarily tied to age alone. Dismissing an employee for not keeping up with the job, is not age discrimination; it's based on job performance. Mandatory retirement is based on age, and not job performance. See the difference? Penalizing good performers for belonging to a general group unrelated to job performance is what's wrong. That's also how a lot of staticians get ther "data" wrong. They call their results "scientific", when it really shows their inability to interpret the data right. Until that problem is recognized and fixed, we'll continue to suffer this injustice.


What injustice?  Right now, you cannot be fired for age alone... that was the point of the article.  Only by tying the two together would a company be able to take action.  This article is an argument for why we possible should allow mandatory retirement based on age alone.

 

 


Exactly. "This article is an argument for why we possible should allow mandatory retirement based on age alone.". I'm saying it's a bogus argument for the very reasons I said. Nobody ever mentioned "fired". The end result is loss of employment due to age alone, regardless of how it's diguised/labled.


yes!

Life's a Journey, not a Destination" Aerosmith
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
1197
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
1201
Views

Re: Argument for Mandatory Retirement

1,201 Views
Message 3 of 11

@nyadrn wrote:

@dl73698250 wrote:

This is a good example of conflating two unrelated subjects. It might be true that in general, older employees slow down or less likely to be updated in their proficiency. But that's not necessarily tied to age alone. Dismissing an employee for not keeping up with the job, is not age discrimination; it's based on job performance. Mandatory retirement is based on age, and not job performance. See the difference? Penalizing good performers for belonging to a general group unrelated to job performance is what's wrong. That's also how a lot of staticians get ther "data" wrong. They call their results "scientific", when it really shows their inability to interpret the data right. Until that problem is recognized and fixed, we'll continue to suffer this injustice.


What injustice?  Right now, you cannot be fired for age alone... that was the point of the article.  Only by tying the two together would a company be able to take action.  This article is an argument for why we possible should allow mandatory retirement based on age alone.

 

 


Exactly. "This article is an argument for why we possible should allow mandatory retirement based on age alone.". I'm saying it's a bogus argument for the very reasons I said. Nobody ever mentioned "fired". The end result is loss of employment due to age alone, regardless of how it's diguised/labled.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
1201
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
1210
Views

Re: Argument for Mandatory Retirement

1,210 Views
Message 4 of 11

@dl73698250 wrote:

This is a good example of conflating two unrelated subjects. It might be true that in general, older employees slow down or less likely to be updated in their proficiency. But that's not necessarily tied to age alone. Dismissing an employee for not keeping up with the job, is not age discrimination; it's based on job performance. Mandatory retirement is based on age, and not job performance. See the difference? Penalizing good performers for belonging to a general group unrelated to job performance is what's wrong. That's also how a lot of staticians get ther "data" wrong. They call their results "scientific", when it really shows their inability to interpret the data right. Until that problem is recognized and fixed, we'll continue to suffer this injustice.


What injustice?  Right now, you cannot be fired for age alone... that was the point of the article.  Only by tying the two together would a company be able to take action.  This article is an argument for why we possible should allow mandatory retirement based on age alone.

 

 

Life's a Journey, not a Destination" Aerosmith
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
1210
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
1229
Views

Re: Argument for Mandatory Retirement

1,229 Views
Message 5 of 11

This is a good example of conflating two unrelated subjects. It might be true that in general, older employees slow down or less likely to be updated in their proficiency. But that's not necessarily tied to age alone. Dismissing an employee for not keeping up with the job, is not age discrimination; it's based on job performance. Mandatory retirement is based on age, and not job performance. See the difference? Penalizing good performers for belonging to a general group unrelated to job performance is what's wrong. That's also how a lot of staticians get ther "data" wrong. They call their results "scientific", when it really shows their inability to interpret the data right. Until that problem is recognized and fixed, we'll continue to suffer this injustice.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
1229
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
1334
Views

Re: Argument for Mandatory Retirement

1,334 Views
Message 6 of 11

@VinnyD983161 wrote:
While I am against mandatory retirement in general, I do understand that if people were forced to retire at a certain age, it would open up a lot of jobs for younger people. I do not know how many think about that.

Our young people complain that they cannot find jobs but if more retired earlier that problem would be mitigated. Yet to force people out who need to work, is unfair.

And what makes you think those jobs will be filled?  More and more jobs just end as automation replaces them. 

 

 

Life's a Journey, not a Destination" Aerosmith
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
1334
Views
Conversationalist
1
Kudos
1338
Views

Re: Argument for Mandatory Retirement

1,338 Views
Message 7 of 11
While I am against mandatory retirement in general, I do understand that if people were forced to retire at a certain age, it would open up a lot of jobs for younger people. I do not know how many think about that.

Our young people complain that they cannot find jobs but if more retired earlier that problem would be mitigated. Yet to force people out who need to work, is unfair.
Retiring is trading one boss for the one you married.
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
1338
Views
Conversationalist
1
Kudos
1378
Views

Re: Argument for Mandatory Retirement

1,378 Views
Message 8 of 11
I am retiring this week at age 67. That is going to open up two jobs at my company. I do not want to force people to retire. However looking at it from a job perspective, if people choose to work longer there are less jobs for the younger people.

Perhaps of rewarding people to retire later, we should reward them for retiring earlier as that opens up more jobs. I am of mixed mind on this as I can see how it affects both the young and the old.
Retiring is trading one boss for the one you married.
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
1378
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
2931
Views

Re: Argument for Mandatory Retirement

2,931 Views
Message 9 of 11

I hope he is right that the law will not change to allow this.   

 

There are well founded reasons for aging discrimination laws.  This opinion has some positive aspects but imho it is doubtful that business would be a helpful partner in any employment contract without legal boundaries.

 

What do you think?

Life's a Journey, not a Destination" Aerosmith
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
2931
Views
Highlighted
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
2932
Views

Re: Argument for Mandatory Retirement

2,932 Views
Message 10 of 11

The author says

"I want to build an argument in favor of dismantling the part of our legal system that effectively bars retirement at a set age, even if agreed upon. Within limits, employers and employees should be able to contract as they like, even if this means that some workers will be required to retire at a specified age. Employers might be more willing to hire older job applicants if it is permissible to set their terms of employment.  

 

I love my job and have no plans to retire, so the argument developed here is against my own self-interest, but right for society at large. There is good reason to allow retirement by contract. But it is doubtful that law will do the sensible thing.

 

Conventional (and insightful) wisdom is that when employees receive training in their early years at a firm, they must be “overpaid” later on in order to keep them from moving to other firms that did not bear the cost of training and that will try to hire them away from the employer that provided training. At some point, the workers might shirk or just stay on the job past their most productive years in order to continue to collect these back-loaded, high wages. To combat this problem, employers can structure wages so they increase with seniority, but then start decreasing when the worker is mature and when diminished productivity is likely, or lateral hiring is unlikely.

Life's a Journey, not a Destination" Aerosmith
Report Inappropriate Content
Tags (3)
0
Kudos
2932
Views