Should Forced Retirement at Age 65 Be Scrapped - Assignment Example

Should Forced Retirement at age 65 be Scrapped? The purpose of this paper is to provide a critical discussion of the issue of forced retirement. Theformat that this paper will utilize is to first identify and examine some of the advantages of removing the compulsory retirement age. Secondly this paper will discuss some of the disadvantages associated with removing the compulsory retirement age. Finally this paper will conclude with a comparison of the domestic approach to compulsory retirement versus that of a foreign nation. The fact is there are significant demographic changes occurring in the modern work environment. Firstly it is the case that people are living longer. According to World Bank: World Development Indicators (2010) it is the case that a child born in1960 was likely to live 71.13 years but as of 2008 a child born in that year will likely live to be 79.9 years. What this means is that historically when a person retired at the age of 65 they were likely to only live for an additional 6.13 years whereas now an individual is likely to live 14.9 years. What this means is an additional strain on the public pension fund, moreover it is also the case that according to the CIA World Factbook (2010) the birthrate is currently 12.34 births/1,000 and the death rate is 9.33 deaths/1,000. Although this demonstrates that the population is still growing the gap between births and deaths is shrinking and it is likely that in the future there will be fewer young people to support the ageing workforce. By allowing people to work longer we are able to take some of the tax burden off of younger people and free up funds for new capital. Building on this point it may be the case that there are skill shortages I certain sectors and by forcing people (who possess these necessary skills) to retire at a certain age without a suitable replacement it may leave the community as a whole without a necessary service. Many people are required to make absences fro their careers for personal reasons such as long term health problems or several maternity leaves. Building on this point it may be that these people wish to take additional time to expand their working years to achieve some milestones in their career which may not be achievable if there is a forced retirement. Moreover there are several recent immigrants that have immigrated to the country that wish to build a ‘Nest Egg’ in order to have a comfortable retirement age. If it is the case that an individual is forced to retire they may be relegated to a lifetime of poverty. From a civil liberties perspective one could make the argument that the state should not moralistically regulate at what age somebody should retire. Some people would argue that people should be allowed to make their own decisions on when they should retire. Moreover there are a number of other options other than simply “Stopping working.” Some people opt to work part-time or take on an advisor role within an organization. Perhaps decisions are best left to the individual and not to a government regulator. In terms of arguments for mandatory retirement it is the case that many arguments are put into place for perceived benefit to the individuals. From this perspective it may be that a person believes that a mandatory retirement is exactly what a person wants/needs and if not put in place people will ultimately be driven to an unhealthy and early death. According to Lundell (2010) it is the case that some people believe that this will present new job opportunities for younger workers as well as support female and minority workers by opening up positions that were normally held by white males. It was also argued that by maintaining a mandatory age 65 retirement would ensure that a balance would be maintained with other employment practices and benefits that traditionally have been designed on the basis that retirement would around the age of 65. This ease of use practice has been beneficial for some employers who have arguably set up job roles under the assumption that people will retire at the age of 65 and seccession planning has been centered on this premise. From a performance standpoint by maintaining a mandatory age 65 pension it may be less necessary and less costly to implement human resource policies that must accommodate workers who are older than 65 owing to the fact that they may miss less work for health issues. Performance measurement protocols may not have to be highly enforced owing to the fact that many organizations would be willing to accept a decline in performance from older workers. The final section of this paper will compare and contrast the mandatory retirement regulations of the United Kingdom and a foreign nation. For the purpose of this paper the nation of Canada will be examined. Although it is the case that Canada is a Federal Parliamentary Democracy and an constitutional Monarchy with a legislature that closely resembles that of Great Britain (CIA, 2010) it is the case that the nations differ in regards to their approach to mandatory retirement. Traditionally Canada utilizes the age of 65 as a benchmark for retirement much like Great Britain however the labor laws of the country do not indicate a specific retirement age. According to The Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (HRSDC, 2010) there are only some specific examples of very specific job roles that place an upper limit for retirement for professionals in these positions however in general a person cannot be forced to retire at any age. People qualify for Old Age security pension benefits at the age of 65 and most people with private pension plans generally aim of a retirement at the age of 65 but again a person cannot be forced to retire. Moreover, at the Provincial level according to the HRSDC (2008) in the provinces of Alberta, Manitoba, Newfoundland & Labrador, Ontario, Prince Edward Island, British Columbia, Saskatchewan and the territories of Nunavut, Yukon and North West Territories the practice of mandatory retirement is discriminatory under provincial and territorial human rights legislation. In the Province of Nova Scotia, mandatory retirement is not considered to be discriminatory practice however if a complaint is made the Nova Scotia Human Rights Commission will conduct an examination which is a policy that closely resembles that of the province of New Brunswick. Federally speaking it is not considered discriminatory practice yet is not enforced. In Great Britain the situation according to the Employment Equality Regulations 2006 pertaining to Age quite specifically set a mandatory retirement at the age of 65 and are legally allowed to terminate the employment of an individual over the age of 65 for any reason. However as anybody who follows the news would be able to recognize that there are significant discussions in place amongst the coalition between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats to phase out the Default retirement age in 2011. References CIA World Factbook (2010) Canada: Profile. [online] Available at https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ca.html Accessed on December 10th 2010. CIA World Factbook (2010) Demographic Information on Birth Rates [online] Available at https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/uk.html Accessed on December 9th 2010. Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (HRSDC) 2008, Manditory Retirement in Canada. [online] Available at http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/eng/lp/spila/clli/eslc/19Mandatory_Retirement.shtml Accessed on December 10th 2010. Lundell, L (2010) Mandatory Retirement. HG. [online] Available at http://www.hg.org/articles/article_845.html Accessed on December 10th 2010. World Bank (November 24th 2010) World Development Indicators. [online] Available at http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=wb-wdi&met=sp_dyn_le00_in&idim=country:GBR&dl=en&hl=en&q=average+life+expectancy+united+kingdom Accessed on December 9th 2010. Read More