We cannot say there is a permanent retirement age for employees considering their talents, effectiveness and the quality results they deliver. The 65 years retirement age limit is a regulation in the employment contract set by nations and companies forcing people to stop working. However, there are calls to retire compulsorily considering many unemployed people or low-level position frustrations as stated in Ministry of Manpower (2015).
Age only is no assurance of ability. We may say that old workers at late 60s are better off running families, countries or corporations, but the same individuals have massive amounts of knowledge and experience which can be absent to a company if they are made to retire (Schill & Anita, 2011). Their ability is crucial in that they are exceptionally loyal employees and are more eager to implement company policies than younger less dedicated staff.
Younger workers also have more experience or skilled than elderly staff, who may have been static in one part or unit for most of their working lives (Markusen 2006). Having enforced retirement allows innovations in an organization. Also, without age restrictions, however arbitrary, many people would endlessly work because they do not have any other plans or roles. Hence getting older people to work indefinitely is not always a good strategy. According to Catherine (2014), the society should reward them for their works effort by giving them substantial pensions and the independence to enjoy their leisure.
Retirement can affect the individuals’ liberty and right to work as outlined by Greenhouse (2008). It makes them feel that being forced to resign or retire at 65 indicates that the society values less their participation and that the productively useful life is over. Without robbing the community of outstanding individuals, experience, and insights, workers should be given more flexibility and choice over their retirement age (Atkinson, 1984).