Default retirement age
Discussion
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11980214
My brother is 67. He used to be self employed, going into people's houses and completing various skilled tasks. He wanted to cut back on his workload considerably when he reached 65, just keeping a core of good customers to keep him ticking over while he enjoyed his large family.
He had insurance of course and, despite taking it out when he changed jobs after being made redundant under Thatcher, he's never had to claim on it. When he turned 65 the rate inceased nearly five-fold. It made it pointless to carry on as he'd be working at little over basic wages.
Whilst I'm in full support of doing away with the DRA for most jobs I do have the vision of an aged fireman getting halfway up a ladder and then wondering what he came up there for.
But does it's abolution mean more expence for empolyers as regards insurance and other such matters?
My brother is 67. He used to be self employed, going into people's houses and completing various skilled tasks. He wanted to cut back on his workload considerably when he reached 65, just keeping a core of good customers to keep him ticking over while he enjoyed his large family.
He had insurance of course and, despite taking it out when he changed jobs after being made redundant under Thatcher, he's never had to claim on it. When he turned 65 the rate inceased nearly five-fold. It made it pointless to carry on as he'd be working at little over basic wages.
Whilst I'm in full support of doing away with the DRA for most jobs I do have the vision of an aged fireman getting halfway up a ladder and then wondering what he came up there for.
But does it's abolution mean more expence for empolyers as regards insurance and other such matters?
I think it would have been a very good thing to modify the DRA. Someone in their late sixties is often still quite capable of working in many professions and the later state retirement age and lower private pensions means that they need to keep working anyway.
It does however represent an added burden on companies in that they have to prove that the individual is no longer capable of work. Personally I think an new age limit of 70 would have been a good compromise.
It does however represent an added burden on companies in that they have to prove that the individual is no longer capable of work. Personally I think an new age limit of 70 would have been a good compromise.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff