86 year old Secretary sacked

[furryjammies]

There is an article in the DF today about a now 88 year old woman who sacked from her NHS Secretary job for I think fairly spurious reasons at the age of 86. She has won her case for unfair dismissal. Do you think there should be a cut off point for retirement or should you be able to work as long as you want? She wanted to work until 90.

Age discrimination is illegal but practised all the time. My DH has been made redundant four times. The first three times he found a job the next day. The fourth time was when he had hit sixty and it was clear that on merit he could have done the jobs he applied for standing on his head but that no one was going to employ a an older man.

If I were younger I would start planning for financial independence at sixty now as it will be forced on you whether or no.

To those who are calling older workers, "selfish", I think it's, "selfish" of you to presume and judge.

I have no private pension to speak of (I'm 59) and I am not a home owner. Therefore, unless I wish to live in a one bedroom flat with little or no money for any kind of leisure opportunities, (at least none that will involve interaction with other human beings) no room to ever have my kids or grand kids to stay and become depressed with the loneliness that old age brings, I will have to keep on working for as long as I am able and that is exactly what I intend to do.

Sure, I'd love to have the money to retire and be able to take up all kinds of activities I've always wanted to try but that all costs money I haven't got and am not going to have, ever, and I have to suck it up and live with it which I have, and that's fine.
I'm not grousing at my lot, only at those who would label me, "selfish". I also work with a 71 year old who is a great asset to our team and no less important than the 20 somethings with whom I also work.

I worked with a secretary who was in her early 70’s with no plans to retire imminently as she was a widow. She enjoyed both the money and the company. Unfortunately the work she did wasn’t up to her previous standards and she made numerous mistakes

Pamhill64. I inherited a secretary who was mid-thirties. She was abysmal. She made numerous spelling and grammar mistakes. This was early 90s and she had hysterics when I refused to replace her daisy wheel typewriter, instead getting a pc. I ended up managing her out as it was more effective for me to do the work myself. The point I’m making is it’s not always about age.

"The point I’m making is it’s not always about age."

You were answering a comment about a person whose performance at 70 was less good than before. In that case, it is about age.

"unless I wish to live in a one bedroom flat "

What's wrong with living in a one bedroom flat if you're single??
That's how many of us live and at least we're not hogging space that could be used by others.

I have no private pension to speak

why not.
pension should be priority for everyone.

"Neither of them can handle the idea of doing more than one thing per day. So it's doctors one day, then back into town the following day to buy a couple of bits that they need
Thats probably more to do with the fact they need to fill their days.
They dont have jobs or kids to look after.So they do 1 thing a day."

It could also be to do with remembering as the poster states. Maybe they can't multitask any more.
I remember getting some phone messages from an older colleague. Two people had called and person one's message had been written down under person 2. Not a big problem and obviously younger people do similar things like just forgetting to pass the message on at all, but this example was definitely age-related. The colleague went on for another year (part time), but knew at 71 that he couldn't do it well any more.

"I have no private pension to speak

why not.
pension should be priority for everyone."

Workplace pensions have only recently become compulsory.
Lots of people don't have the 'spare' money to invest in a private pension. I read once that you should be saving the percentage equivalent to your age when you take out the pension. No way could I put more than 40% of my income into a pension.
I'd rather just step in front of a car at 70 (though I know I'd change my mind at 60).

You were answering a comment about a person whose performance at 70 was less good than before. In that case, it is about age.

In that case yes, but the point I was making was that it isn’t always, hence my quote about my 35 year old secretary.

The issue from HR's perspective of removing the default retirement age is that you can end up having to performance manage out staff who've been good employees until they reach a certain point. It's really sad and ruins what has been a good employer/employew relationship.

However I still think best not to have a default as I know of a number of staff members who are working into their 70's and beyond without issue and it would be a pity to lose their experience when they are fit and willing to do the job.

I do like my Uncle's approach (late 70's in a law firm) where he is down to 1-2 days a week as he waits for his last few original clients to die off before he will fully retire!

For example. Not one of my university lecturers was under 40. Quite a few of them were very old and past retirement age. PhD students were graduating but there were no lecturers jobs for them.*

Not one lecturer was under 40? Jesus, is that your starting point for old-age? Does it not occur to you that experience counts for something too?

Yes, this is a very real problem, especially as the elderly profs clinging on to their jobs often contribute very little of value to the department or take their fair share of the teaching load. I get annoyed, they're clinging on and effectively denying their younger colleagues the opportunities they had when they were young. They by and large tumbled into permanent positions, often before they'd finished the PhD and in some cases never finished it.

No lecturers below 40 is a worrying sign, if you go straight through from BA to PhD you be roughly 27 when you're awarded the PhD, so that's effectively 13 cohorts of PhD students who won't get a shot at a job at the institution the pp is talking about. I completed my PhD 4 years ago and have been doing a succession of short term contracts at various ends of the country, often highly exploitative in terms of workload and terms and conditions (no holiday pay) and it has had a ruinous effect on my mental health and a big role in the collapse of my marriage and I'm one of the lucky ones to be working at all.

If the subject made mistakes further training should have been offered (perhaps she was).If continued then she would have to go through the usual disciplinary procedures. Surely management would have counselled on why she was making mistakes and the person should have seen the way for her to go. Would have applied no matter what age. There must be a lot more detail to the case.

So at what age will I become a job-hogger? Currently 50, mortgage still has 14 years to go. I work part time in NHS (admin role) and it’s bloody hard to get people who want to do my job! We’ve had staff leave and struggled to fill the role either full or part time. You are expected to remember a million things with very little training (mostly trained by other colleagues apart from the mandatory health and safety stuff), and the pace of work can be relentless - you can be entering data whilst greeting someone at reception and the phone ringing, with a consultant asking you to look something up and a nurse waiting for you to get them info. I wasn’t aware that my ability to do the job is about to fall off a cliff any day now...
There should be an “expected” retirement age where you can access your pension, but whether you continue to work should be between you and your employer, and whether you are performing as well as any employer would expect to. Which is what I believed to be the case now - retirement at 67 but not compulsory

I read once that you should be saving the percentage equivalent to your age when you take out the pension

Half your age actually, so if you're 40, it's 20%.

That's assuming you are starting from scratch at whatever age. So, if you start at 22, it's 11%. If you get payrises, as it's a %, it goes up with pay rises, but I've always suggested to people they try to add 1% every year or so anyway.

I am 50 and currently pay 50%, and am not starting from scratch, luckily I have a fairly high salary and v low outgoings (no mortgage or rent) but even with that and the base position, I am not looking at having a massive pension.
I do it to avoid the 40% tax band, might as well minimise tax now and benefit from that when I draw the pension as I'm very unlikely to be in any higher rate bands that exist then. Plus I can take the 25% tax free lump sum in five years.

But, anyway, lots of people do not have good or even any pension provision.

So at what age will I become a job-hogger?

Housemum. Well according to another poster on here you’re also a space hogger if you live alone and your home has more than one bedroom so I’d carry on hogging if I were you. I certainly am. 😄

alexa I’m space hogging as well then as will have 2 spare rooms when the adult DD moves out, and no intention of selling as that’s where hopefully one day she or her sisters might stay over with grandkids!

Last 2 jobs I applied for, I'm pretty sure I was the only qualified (or interviewed) applicant. Not sure who I was hogging the jobs from.

It's not just a matter of age. Can she actually still cope and keep up with her colleagues? If they're having to 'carry her' they may resent it and this is bound to cause difficulty.

I worked with an older lady once - she was the most temperamental drama queen in the entire department and we all had to walk on egg shells so as not to upset her. As she part-owned the place we had to put up and shut up. An unhappy situation all round.

"Last 2 jobs I applied for, I'm pretty sure I was the only qualified (or interviewed) applicant. Not sure who I was hogging the jobs from."

This would not be the case for a job like the one the lady in question had. Admin and secretarial jobs can attract 100 applicants.

"I read once that you should be saving the percentage equivalent to your age when you take out the pension

Half your age actually, so if you're 40, it's 20%."

Well, I know what I read and it advised the same percentage as your age. Others might advise something else. Both 20% and 40% are out of reach of most modest earners anyway.

"but the point I was making was that it isn’t always, hence my quote about my 35 year old secretary."

Your comment was irrelevant. Of course, there are people who aren't in the right job for them. That's a completely different thing to the natural slowing down that happens with age. It's like answering the issue of Prince Philip's driving by saying 'some 35-year olds are also bad drivers'.

Surely it very much depends on the job and the person doing it.

My exh has just had his 83rd birthday and is still working in a job that requires him to be quite active. He's recently started talking about cutting his working week down to one or two days a week.

He's not job hogging because he works for himself.

He would have been thoroughly miserable if he had retired earlier, even thought he has several hobbies, as he loves his work.

I am 70 years old and though I quite liked working I was very pleased when I retired at 64. Even though I'm fit and generally healthy I just don't want to continue going out to work. Now I can please myself. I keep busy and have hobbies I enjoy.

I love being retired but having said that, if I only had my state pension to live on I'd probably still be working if I could find a job.

Whilst it's good not to have a set age of 65 any more, you do become less productive and sick days increase with age. Part time could be an answer past 70, with 80 as a cut off.

Your comment was irrelevant.

Gwenhwyfar. In your opinion. Nobody made you the thread police.

I do think there comes a time when you really can't carry on working.

As a 70 year old I get very pissed off at the casual ageism on mn, some of it quite nasty at times, but the fact is you do begin to slow down as you get older, not just physically but mentally as well.

And whilst there are exceptions to that, most people aren't as productive or mentally agile at 70 as they were at 35 and if you're getting paid to do a job then you have to be up to doing it, or it means some is going to have to carry you and cover up your mistakes. Having said that, I supposed that could apply to lot of very much younger people as well.