Why 68 is too late
Earlier this week, David Gauke (Conservative MP for South West Hertfordshire), the current Work & Pensions Secretary, announced that the move to raise the state pension age to 68 would take place 7 years earlier than planned, in 2037 rather than 2044. Those born after 1970 have already seen the age of which they can claim their state pension rise from 65 to 67.
A two or three-year change in the eligibility age is significant, unfair and dangerous-and here is why:
1. Many people already stop being able to work before the age of 65, let alone 67 or 68. This is especially true for police officers and firefighters, as well as members of all the various armed forces, whose jobs are very physically demanding to the point where they generally must retire from those jobs (and possibly from other work as well) before they even reach 60. Even those in well-paid academic or white-collar occupations such as university lecturers and senior executives, will eventually not be able to continue working any longer because aging itself brings physical and mental stresses to some degree, regardless of earnings and consequently higher security and stability.
2. Work just is not there for older people. It is very difficult for unemployed people over the age of 55 to find new work, even with the Equality Act 2010 in place. Even though many have the experience, many are also unwell or have acquired disability or chronic illness as they age, especially if their occupation was particularly stressful. Also, older people are less likely to have extensive experience with newer technologies required to perform many new tasks; computerisation and automation not only make jobs redundant but also increase the level of skill and technical knowledge needed to perform other jobs. In any case, forcing people to work longer also makes it harder for younger people to enter the job market and increases unemployment overall.
3. Poorer people will not be able to enjoy their retirement-and even those who can will it find it shortened sharply: The poorest inner-city areas in Britain (especially those in London and Glasgow) have average life expectancies well below the current retirement age of 65, even for those who are not unemployed. The average life expectancy in the UK is at present 78 years for a man and 83 years for a woman, so losing three years of retirement is considerably detrimental, especially when working for three extra years will also cut life expectancy.
4. People should not be forced to work until they drop. It is also wrong to keep forcing people to work longer and longer, especially when new advances make it unnecessary and when it is often not possible in any case. The raising of the retirement age is yet another measure that hits honest people like you and I hardest, and it will not affect the wealthy who can retire early anyway.
A two or three-year change in the eligibility age is significant, unfair and dangerous-and here is why:
1. Many people already stop being able to work before the age of 65, let alone 67 or 68. This is especially true for police officers and firefighters, as well as members of all the various armed forces, whose jobs are very physically demanding to the point where they generally must retire from those jobs (and possibly from other work as well) before they even reach 60. Even those in well-paid academic or white-collar occupations such as university lecturers and senior executives, will eventually not be able to continue working any longer because aging itself brings physical and mental stresses to some degree, regardless of earnings and consequently higher security and stability.
2. Work just is not there for older people. It is very difficult for unemployed people over the age of 55 to find new work, even with the Equality Act 2010 in place. Even though many have the experience, many are also unwell or have acquired disability or chronic illness as they age, especially if their occupation was particularly stressful. Also, older people are less likely to have extensive experience with newer technologies required to perform many new tasks; computerisation and automation not only make jobs redundant but also increase the level of skill and technical knowledge needed to perform other jobs. In any case, forcing people to work longer also makes it harder for younger people to enter the job market and increases unemployment overall.
3. Poorer people will not be able to enjoy their retirement-and even those who can will it find it shortened sharply: The poorest inner-city areas in Britain (especially those in London and Glasgow) have average life expectancies well below the current retirement age of 65, even for those who are not unemployed. The average life expectancy in the UK is at present 78 years for a man and 83 years for a woman, so losing three years of retirement is considerably detrimental, especially when working for three extra years will also cut life expectancy.
4. People should not be forced to work until they drop. It is also wrong to keep forcing people to work longer and longer, especially when new advances make it unnecessary and when it is often not possible in any case. The raising of the retirement age is yet another measure that hits honest people like you and I hardest, and it will not affect the wealthy who can retire early anyway.
Comments
Post a Comment