Mandatory retirement

N

nobbie48

Well-known member
Site Supporter
Forum Sponsor
IIRC a person can't be turned out to pasture when the turn 65 (Age discrimination). While most people relish the idea of the life of ease some have no identity outside of work so have no desire to quit. Some need the money.

The kicker in this is a company loses young, up to date employees to other firms because they don't see the advancements on the horizon. Dinosaurs don't make good CEO's.

Outside of massive bribery (Packages) how do companies rid themselves of the dead wood? It also happens in the government where there are doorstops on the sunshine list.

Are we "righting" ourselves into bankruptcy?
 
perhaps make part time positions for retiree's instead of full time positions.. that way young blood can rise up through the corporate/career ladder, and the retiree's whether out of habit or necessity have SOME work to do... say 20 hours max allowed should do it...older staff may not be up to date on the latest in tech but their experience is priceless... can end up saving the company/employees from making alot of very expensive/dangerous mistakes.

for example nothing beats experience when it comes to creating a safe work environment on a factory floor...use the old geezers to train/mentor the younglings.

agree/disagree?
 
Last edited:
Let companies create their own policy and keep gov't meddling out of the private sector.
 
crankcall said:
Let companies create their own policy and keep gov't meddling out of the private sector.
Click to expand...


This. We have a guy at my work who's about to be 68 who literally does absolutely nothing all shift and yet makes the same money as the rest of us. It infuriates the employees because we have to pick up his slack but my "plant manager" is a spineless ***** and sticks to the excuse of age discrimination. He could easily transfer him to an area that he wouldn't like and thus he'd go but instead he comes in for free money every day.
 
Roomie said:
He could easily transfer him to an area that he wouldn't like and thus he'd go but instead he comes in for free money every day.
Click to expand...

That would render the company liable for a lawsuit for constructive dismissal.

The best way to go forward would be to offer the unwanted employee a decent walk-away package.

Alternately the company could lay that employee off with an appropriate severance package, but to avoid still being accused of age discrimination the company would also have to lay off other younger employees such as yourself to provide a layer legal cover. How does that work for you?
 
Roomie said:
This. We have a guy at my work who's about to be 68 who literally does absolutely nothing all shift and yet makes the same money as the rest of us. It infuriates the employees because we have to pick up his slack but my "plant manager" is a spineless ***** and sticks to the excuse of age discrimination. He could easily transfer him to an area that he wouldn't like and thus he'd go but instead he comes in for free money every day.
Click to expand...

The 68yr old is simply training you kids how it's done later in life.
You'll be him, A LOT sooner than you think.
GL.
 
Demographics are against it. After 2008 too many Boomers can't afford to retire as planned and will need to hang on in the workforce a while longer yet. Even if that wasn't necessary, it's the older crowd who're voting and they're not about to vote in mandatory retirement on themselves.

Anyway, blanket bans like that are silly because people are individuals. Lots of older guys are still able to put in a good day's work just fine and want to keep going. I always remember the old usher at Maple Leaf Gardens; he was still working at 97. They asked him why doesn't he didn't retire and he joked "Because if I stop, I might not get going again." Even though he was kidding, that's truer for some people than you might realize.
 
nobbie48 said:
IIRC a person can't be turned out to pasture when the turn 65 (Age discrimination). While most people relish the idea of the life of ease some have no identity outside of work so have no desire to quit. Some need the money.

The kicker in this is a company loses young, up to date employees to other firms because they don't see the advancements on the horizon. Dinosaurs don't make good CEO's.

Outside of massive bribery (Packages) how do companies rid themselves of the dead wood? It also happens in the government where there are doorstops on the sunshine list.

Are we "righting" ourselves into bankruptcy?
Click to expand...

So I'm curious, are you for or against age discrimination? (see your bolded, and apparently conflicting wording)
 
Roomie said:
This. We have a guy at my work who's about to be 68 who literally does absolutely nothing all shift and yet makes the same money as the rest of us. It infuriates the employees because we have to pick up his slack but my "plant manager" is a spineless ***** and sticks to the excuse of age discrimination. He could easily transfer him to an area that he wouldn't like and thus he'd go but instead he comes in for free money every day.
Click to expand...

The plant manager does not care, he's getting his volume and not rocking the boat, maybe likes the old dude. If you guys are picking up slack your enabling the old dude.
 
Make teaching/mentoring/succession planning a key component in their performance review. They'll adjust. That is, make the senior guys performance rating partially scored on how well his direct reporting juniors perform (and how many if you really want to grind them down). If the senior guy can't groom his replacements he's out.
 
Roomie said:
This. We have a guy at my work who's about to be 68 who literally does absolutely nothing all shift and yet makes the same money as the rest of us. It infuriates the employees because we have to pick up his slack but my "plant manager" is a spineless ***** and sticks to the excuse of age discrimination. He could easily transfer him to an area that he wouldn't like and thus he'd go but instead he comes in for free money every day.
Click to expand...

perhaps the old guy is tired because he built it for you to have a job today
just saying, you don't know what he went through
maybe he saved some senior exec's rear and they owe him
just sayin'
 
crankcall said:
Let companies create their own policy and keep gov't meddling out of the private sector.
Click to expand...

This.

If they're a productive worker, doesn't matter if they're 18 or 68.
 
When did the private sector become a social program? It's almost like "Don't lay off so and so, he has eight kids".
 
inreb said:
When did the private sector become a social program? It's almost like "Don't lay off so and so, he has eight kids".
Click to expand...


thats not the point.. its called employee/employer loyalty... you take care of your own..obviously does not apply to dead weight or someone who is simply taking advantage of their fellow co-workers... good employees should be rewarded for their life long service...as long as they are productive team members i would prefer to create a part-time.. leadership/mentoring program so they (oldies) can stay and teach the next generation over simply packaging them out(to me they would be family)... i totally get how for some people work is where they end up having most of their friends/family( thats still alive).. as long as they are able to work... use them as an assets instead of viewing them as liabilities..

for example most of us were new/young riders at some point..we thought we knew everything.. then one fine day a fellow older/wiser rider showed us a trick or two which saved our behinds god knows how many times.. same applies to the work environment in my view..i would have no problem retaining a retiree as part-time trainer/mentor.. especially during the summer season(seasonal/student workers come in this time).

it has nothing to do with a social program .

its simple being human... we need to have a lil bit of humanity within us in order to be human... without it we are some mindless/heartless machines.

obviously your view may differ based on your cultural/professional background.. as well as your upbringing...
 
Last edited:
Laughoutloudfu(Kingnewsflash: under what rock does a young apprentice ever listen to an old guy? Are we in Mayberry now? Geewillikkers Wally.
 
hey its upto you to take advice.. company can say.. look we provided a mentor to help better train our new employees.. if the young one still managed to chop his hand off.. not out our fault.. we provided the PPE/training/plus a mentor to oversee progress and any room for improvement...

i am not saying younger employee HAS to listen... i am saying it would be WISE to listen...if you don't its your risk and your reward... don't come crying for a job later when you are short a limb or two due to your own stubbornness... like is said no dead weights or abusers..

rewards your good employees and dump your bad employees.. thats how progress is achieved same goes for process/machinery/product.

THATS BUSINESS.
 
Last edited:
How did 65 all of a sudden become a magic number? Some people are fried at 50 or earlier. Others are vibrant way past 70. Let the company decide, they're paying the freight.
 
inreb said:
How did 65 all of a sudden become a magic number? Some people are fried at 50 or earlier. Others are vibrant way past 70.
Click to expand...

i agree.. its upto the individual to decide when to retire.. but if they are able and willing then we shouldn't be forcing them out of a job.
 
Last edited:
one of my contractors retired at 65, he came back as a contractor, not because he needs the money, but because he loves the work. He will be 70 this year, and there is no way any young kid would work half as hard as this guy, aslo there is no one even close to his experience. If he had of packed it in fully at 65 we would of been in a world of hurt.

Sent from my GT-N8010 using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom