Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Retirement age to be scrapped

  • 5 Comments

Plans to encourage people aged 65 and over to work for longer rather than forcing them to retire have been welcomed by employers.

The default retirement age will be phased out by October 2011 and the plans were introduced due to ministers arguing that people were living longer, healthier lives.

It is one of a number of measures to help people to work for longer, and other steps include a proposal to increase the state pension age to 66.

Employers can currently make staff retire at 65, and despite the plans, a compulsory retirement age may still be in place for certain professions, including police officers, after October 2011.

The Department for Business said: “Although the government is proposing to remove the [default retirement age], it will still be possible for individual employers to operate a compulsory retirement age, provided that they can objectively justify it. Examples could include air traffic controllers and police officers.”

The consultation on the proposals will run until October this year.

Businesses have welcomed the government’s proposals, and the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development said it was a “breakthrough” following years of campaigning against the policy.

  • 5 Comments

Readers' comments (5)

  • I find this hard to equate with the cries of no jobs for young people. Natural wastage provides jobs for those following on behind. Or are we happy to have huge numbers of young unemployed with no hope of ever becoming employed because they won't have 'experience'. Or is the government happy to support the youth on benefits?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • That should help balance the books. Will this new law apply to nurses if it won't apply to police officers? I disagree with the poster above, all this law will do is say that you can carry on working if you want to (apart from raising the state retirement age by 1 year which wouldn't have a dramatic effect on jobs available to young people). And while many people are happy to carry on working beyond 65, many will still want to retire as soon as they can.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Is this going to mean threats of litigation for the employer if a worker wants to work beyond the age of retirement but the employer doesn't actually want them to since they are now too slow, not up to date, not even up to scratch, making excuses not to do certain jobs due to their bad back/knees/neck etc? I think it is silly to block jobs which the young should be able to have - they have their whole lives in front of them and need to get the job experience, and also bring in new ideas etc to the workplace. I'm only 50 but my memory is terrible now sometimes what will it be like by the time I'm retiring?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I am 52 and hope to retire in 7 years time as by then I will have worked 40 years as a nurse. I think thats long enough in this job! Though depending on how I feel I may do the odd shift here and there.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • excuse me - but only the rich who can afford to retire, live longer... the poor with ill health live shorter and this article was written by MONKEYS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.