applies to jerry? asking for a friend.
7 replies (most recent on top)
I think you mean company policy on internal mandatory retirement? Yes, it exists at a very high CL level….not a CL most of us need to worry about. It is usually 65, but is company discretion so can be different.
It was originally used to ensure continuity. Now it is more often the explanation for those sr leaders who are ‘retired in place’. They no longer have any motivation, regret not being allowed to leave at 55-60, and just need to maintain avg performance. If someone is retirement eligible and doesn’t want to be here, why would you force them? ….aside from maybe CEO.
A more sensible approach would be to incentivize them to announce retirement with 18mo notice so upper level continuity planning can happen on an orderly basis.
worked in japan too. they have immigrants there too. nothing compared to the usa or europe though, it's marginal. they are fu---d tho
It’s only mandatory for execs.
I retired from EM in 2016 at 64 yo. My super asked me to stay another year to finish the big project. His sup said no. My wife said no. I never hear about mandatory retirement. Maybe there was. I was just a squirtworm so I guess wouldn’t know. Ha!
@af Cool story, but this already didn’t work in Japan, and there are many immigrants doing jobs that the Japanese can’t/won’t do.
Also, not all of us are xenophobic racist nut-jobs who want to work until we die. If you like Japan so much, move there. I’m sure they’ll love you.
Source: travel there regularly and used to live there.
since we are stopping or decreasing immigration and our birth rate has dropped below replenishment level, older folks will just have to work longer. i dont like it but thats a fact. alternatively we can manage our economy like japan where the population accepted that the economy will keep shrinking, stock market is depressed due to taht but they get to retire on time and they get to keep the nation of japanese without having to import labor from countries that have surplus births (typically 3rd world countries). europe has the same problem but they are su-king up eastern europeans who in turn get sc--wed twice - their birthrate is low (losing people) and kids are leaving to work in the western europe (losing even more people). china and korea have the same problem but they kind of follow the japanese path.
This was actually a thing back in the day with private employers
Now you are free to work until you die.
Progress.
Yes. Mandatory retirement ages were once common and legally permissible for most private-sector workers in the United States, but federal law gradually restricted and then largely banned the practice. 
Historical Timeline
• Before the late 1960s: Many private employers set mandatory retirement ages (commonly 65, tied to Social Security full-benefit eligibility and pension plan norms). These appeared in company policies, union contracts, and pension plans. Estimates from the mid-20th century indicated that a substantial share of the workforce (roughly half in some periods) faced such rules. There was no broad federal ban.