Comments on: Default retirement age to be scrapped http://www.libdemvoice.org/default-retirement-age-to-be-scrapped-20510.html Our place to talk - an independent website for supporters of the Liberal Democrat party in the UK. Sun, 12 Feb 2012 01:36:11 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Brian Moyle http://www.libdemvoice.org/default-retirement-age-to-be-scrapped-20510.html#comment-135465 Brian Moyle Sat, 31 Jul 2010 17:17:49 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=20510#comment-135465 It is high time discrimination such as the default retirement age is scrapped. However, to ensure that there is no no unfair advantage for an employee who is working beyond 65, compared to those who are not sixty five, we should ensure that those continuing beyond sity five continue to pay full national insurance contributions. And to put reticent employers in a more positive mood about these changes, perhaps the employer should not contribute to N.I. for those over sixy five. It is high time discrimination such as the default retirement age is scrapped. However, to ensure that there is no no unfair advantage for an employee who is working beyond 65, compared to those who are not sixty five, we should ensure that those continuing beyond sity five continue to pay full national insurance contributions. And to put reticent employers in a more positive mood about these changes, perhaps the employer should not contribute to N.I. for those over sixy five.

]]> By: Sesenco http://www.libdemvoice.org/default-retirement-age-to-be-scrapped-20510.html#comment-135367 Sesenco Fri, 30 Jul 2010 10:13:36 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=20510#comment-135367 This is marvellous news. A major human rights deficit has been removed, and not before time (the USA got rid of its mandatory scrapheap age in the 1980s). I think future generations will regard this decision in much the same light as the enfranchisement of women, the passing of the Race Relations Act, the legalisation of homosexual conduct, the abolition of the death penalty, etc. Given the presence of two cabinet ministers who have passed the mandatory scrapheap age, it would have been very hypocritical of the Coalition government not to take this action. The Labour government had two opportunities to do this, and funked it twice, under pessure from big business who see it as a loss of opportunity to employ cheap labour. Nonetheless, I think a Labour government would have got round to it eventually. Forcing millions to live in extreme poverty is surely not what socialism is about. This is marvellous news. A major human rights deficit has been removed, and not before time (the USA got rid of its mandatory scrapheap age in the 1980s). I think future generations will regard this decision in much the same light as the enfranchisement of women, the passing of the Race Relations Act, the legalisation of homosexual conduct, the abolition of the death penalty, etc. Given the presence of two cabinet ministers who have passed the mandatory scrapheap age, it would have been very hypocritical of the Coalition government not to take this action. The Labour government had two opportunities to do this, and funked it twice, under pessure from big business who see it as a loss of opportunity to employ cheap labour. Nonetheless, I think a Labour government would have got round to it eventually. Forcing millions to live in extreme poverty is surely not what socialism is about.

]]> By: Laura http://www.libdemvoice.org/default-retirement-age-to-be-scrapped-20510.html#comment-135347 Laura Thu, 29 Jul 2010 22:01:52 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=20510#comment-135347 I think the second comment is unduly dismissive of the concerns and interests of young people. While I agree that this change is important from a liberal perspective as well as in terms of encouraging a shift towards working longer that will probably be necessary as our population shifts (personally I don't see why we can't just encourage immigration, but that's by the by), we do need to accept that in the short- and medium- term this is going to have a detrimental effect on young people, who are already suffering most from the recession. As a young, unemployed person myself, I need to be hearing that this concern is understood, and that efforts will be taken to mitigate it's effect. I think the second comment is unduly dismissive of the concerns and interests of young people. While I agree that this change is important from a liberal perspective as well as in terms of encouraging a shift towards working longer that will probably be necessary as our population shifts (personally I don’t see why we can’t just encourage immigration, but that’s by the by), we do need to accept that in the short- and medium- term this is going to have a detrimental effect on young people, who are already suffering most from the recession. As a young, unemployed person myself, I need to be hearing that this concern is understood, and that efforts will be taken to mitigate it’s effect.

]]> By: Malcolm Wood http://www.libdemvoice.org/default-retirement-age-to-be-scrapped-20510.html#comment-135336 Malcolm Wood Thu, 29 Jul 2010 19:56:05 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=20510#comment-135336 Somewhat bizarrely, the front page of the Daily Express today screams "Workers can be forced to retire at 65". It's possible that they've only just noticed. Somewhat bizarrely, the front page of the Daily Express today screams “Workers can be forced to retire at 65″. It’s possible that they’ve only just noticed.

]]> By: Andrew Duffield http://www.libdemvoice.org/default-retirement-age-to-be-scrapped-20510.html#comment-135335 Andrew Duffield Thu, 29 Jul 2010 19:54:42 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=20510#comment-135335 Liberalism in action surely? Next stop, a Citizen's pension, followed - ideally - by a Citizen's Income, replacing all tax allowances and welfare benefits. Choice, freedom, equality. This is good news. Liberalism in action surely? Next stop, a Citizen’s pension, followed – ideally – by a Citizen’s Income, replacing all tax allowances and welfare benefits. Choice, freedom, equality. This is good news.

]]> By: Patrick Smith http://www.libdemvoice.org/default-retirement-age-to-be-scrapped-20510.html#comment-135328 Patrick Smith Thu, 29 Jul 2010 19:24:02 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=20510#comment-135328 The rights of individual employees in any job to choose as to whether they want to work past 65, without being forced to retire at the default age line is important for a number of good reasons. 1. Individuals should have the individual employee rights to choose and not be laid off by companies and employers if they themselves choose to continue working and are deemed competent. 2.The BBC report points out that merely because the age retirement line i.e. 65 years is removed, there is no evidence across the EU at the moment that people are actually choosing to work longer, if that work option exists.. 3.The ratio of 1 worker for each retiree is expected to close to 1-2 in 30 years and thus if this demographic does n`t change, will undoubtedly place a much greater burden on those younger persons in work,in future years,who will have to pay taxes to keep greater numbers of older people,including their own parents and grandparents. 4.Surely,it is also important for Government to encourage `Healthy Lifestyles' and greater mobility and leisure pursuits and improved pensions for over 65 year olds and the rising over 80 year olds. 5.The vaster number of retirees able or free to choose to retire in good health, will likely remain proportionately greater then those remaining actively part of the workforce in the future but individual choice or necessity without choice, is the key component in the matter.. The rights of individual employees in any job to choose as to whether they want to work past 65, without being forced to retire at the default age line is important for a number of good reasons.

1. Individuals should have the individual employee rights to choose and not be laid off by companies and employers if they themselves choose to continue working and are deemed competent.

2.The BBC report points out that merely because the age retirement line i.e. 65 years is removed, there is no evidence across the EU at the moment that people are actually choosing to work longer, if that work option exists..

3.The ratio of 1 worker for each retiree is expected to close to 1-2 in 30 years and thus if this demographic does n`t change, will undoubtedly place a much greater burden on those younger persons in work,in future years,who will have to pay taxes to keep greater numbers of older people,including their own parents and grandparents.

4.Surely,it is also important for Government to encourage `Healthy Lifestyles’ and greater mobility and leisure pursuits and improved pensions for over 65 year olds and the rising over 80 year olds.

5.The vaster number of retirees able or free to choose to retire in good health, will likely remain proportionately greater then those remaining actively part of the workforce in the future but individual choice or necessity without choice, is the key component in the matter..

]]> By: Christine Headley http://www.libdemvoice.org/default-retirement-age-to-be-scrapped-20510.html#comment-135321 Christine Headley Thu, 29 Jul 2010 18:26:06 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=20510#comment-135321 More jobs not going to the young. All those young graduates, up to here in debt, under- or unemployed, while the golden oldies add more and more to their pension pots. Given that it has been difficult for young people to find jobs for a couple of years and so many jobs that are suitable for school leavers are going to graduates, the timing of this idea is unfortunate. More jobs not going to the young. All those young graduates, up to here in debt, under- or unemployed, while the golden oldies add more and more to their pension pots. Given that it has been difficult for young people to find jobs for a couple of years and so many jobs that are suitable for school leavers are going to graduates, the timing of this idea is unfortunate.

]]>