Mandatory Retirement

The most critical consideration for extending the generally accepted age of retirement to a mandatory age of 65 for all of society is to safeguard against the effects of old age on judges, surgeons and other professional practitioners. The age of 65 is chosen as an average age above which it is possible for people to experience problems with their physical or mental well-being. Mandatory retirement would protect against the detrimental effects that could be the result of mistakes or misjudgements by elderly professionals. Many argue that these professions have a great influence over the lives of many e.g. judicial decisions, surgical procedures, and there are at present insufficient safeguards to prevent against incompetence.

Mandatory retirement allows opportunity for more employment of younger people, especially in the top jobs. Considering the unemployment statistics in Britain, this will help to reduce youth unemployment, and vacate jobs for those who are at the age of supporting themselves and setting up a home and lifestyle, as well as those supporting a family. This is also more economically sound – surely it makes more sense to pay more pensions, supplemented with private pensions, than support the unemployed youth of the country. If they are not given the opportunity to begin a career, or become established in a company, it is far more difficult to encourage this later in life; we need to think of the long term good of the whole workforce.

By freeing up more places in our professional hierarchies, we present younger people with opportunities to reach the heights of their career. Often in medicine and law especially younger employees must wait for an elder respected judge or consultant to retire in order to progress along the career ladder. This is also fairer on the younger working population. The caveat to this argument is that this will also allow the exposure of youthful talent. A mandatory retirement age allows younger employees with new, modern ideas to infiltrate the professions.

If the basic principle is considered, it is also a matter of equal opportunities since it is unfair to force some members of society to retire at the age of 65 and allow others to work on.

A mandatory retirement age should not be considered a punishment or a reprimand of the elderly in society. Indeed, it should be viewed as a well-earned rest and reward for 40 – 45 years of work. From the perspective of health it is far better to retire early at the age of 65, and professionals at this level are often the particular people at risk from stress related illness. Furthermore, retirement should not be seen as an end to activity; the retired population can participate in a variety of rewarding activities, from pursuing new or sidelined interests, to providing a strong voluntary base for community or charity work.