[Bigiron]

“60 is the new 40” — Sylvia Lim on the important role of older workers 

https://theindependent.sg/60-is-the-new-...r-workers/

[Goldmine]

“60 is the new 40” — Sylvia Lim on the important role of older workers 

https://theindependent.sg/60-is-the-new-...r-workers/

Meaning these 60 turn 40 can work for another 20 more years. Will employers buy that?

Employers want to cut cost. To continue employing the new 40  they will not be able to do so. They will come out with reasons that these 60s' are slow, unwilling to learn and unable to adapt to change.

[Migrant]

60 is 60
40 is forty. 
Energy level is not the same.

[Blin]

Like me ,Cok can still stand can work OT.

[BigNLong]

Like me ,Cok can still stand can work OT.

Cok can still stand, but cannot go 2 round .. sumore suffer from ED.. so No stamina ans duration 

still get fired la

[EvertonDiehard]

Meaning these 60 turn 40 can work for another 20 more years. Will employers buy that? Employers want to cut cost. To continue employing the new 40  they will not be able to do so. They will come out with reasons that these 60s' are slow, unwilling to learn and unable to adapt to change.

Ageism is widely practiced by many employers who consider older workers to be more costly to hire, believe that it is tougher for them to acquire new skills and would rather invest in training and development programmes for younger staff. Workers above 40 routinely make up 2/3 of resident workers who lose their jobs every year. I doubt that the vast majority of these staff were dead wood, but were made redundant because of discrimination.

[EvertonDiehard]

“60 is the new 40” — Sylvia Lim on the important role of older workers 
https://theindependent.sg/60-is-the-new-...r-workers/

Job cuts are often made without due consideration to the senior staff’s link to the company. The years of experience, rapport with important customers and knowledge about key accounts may not have been considered by the management. Downsizing affects even younger employees who are spared; they will eventually age and fear suffering the same fate as their older colleagues. The result is increased stress, absenteeism and distrust of their management. Besides the work quality being affected, their sense of loyalty to the employer also diminishes. The lack of job security may also lead these younger employees to look elsewhere for work.

[Manthink]

Job cuts are often made without due consideration to the senior staff’s link to the company. The years of experience, rapport with important customers and knowledge about key accounts may not have been considered by the management. Downsizing affects even younger employees who are spared; they will eventually age and fear suffering the same fate as their older colleagues. The result is increased stress, absenteeism and distrust of their management. Besides the work quality being affected, their sense of loyalty to the employer also diminishes. The lack of job security may also lead these younger employees to look elsewhere for work.

Me thinks all these will be of little significance to any business consideration when A.I  becomes oil and soul of economy...

[Wy:Nox]

It is our Dignity that the Govt has ignored for many years . I’d rather continue in the same job as I can do or job level down to adjust my ability when I move from 60 to 70 or 80 years old.

[Tangsen]

Only fools wont want to work till you die or too old or sickly to enjoy life .... no thanks

I plan to retire in my mid 50s ... its coming soon 

[EvertonDiehard]

It is our Dignity that the Govt has ignored for many years . I’d rather continue in the same job as I can do or job level down to adjust my ability when I move from 60 to 70 or 80 years old.

S'poreans are not seen as individual humans by our Govt, but as economic digits to be used to drive up business, only to be cast aside once our productivity declines with age.

[maxsanic]

I don't think framing the whole thing about older workers being retrenched or unemployed as a moral issue i.e. discrimination, helps in resolving the situation at all.

Companies and business owners are pragmatic decision makers, they don't purposely do immoral things just for the sake of doing it. The reasons why older workers often get axed and cannot get jobs are structural and economic in nature:

1) Older workers are generally higher paid without any accompanied increase in value add. Experience has an accelerated diminishing return after the first few years. For e.g. Someone with 10 years experience can command $8k compared to a fresh grad at $3k. However someone with 20 years experience is often not worth $16k.

The reason this happens is because the next 10 years after the first 10 years isn't worth a lot and is mostly repetitive in nature. The only way to overcome this is for the individual to either move higher into senior management roles or dive into deeper specialism. Unfortunately the labor force mainly follows a normal distribution with bulk of the people stagnating from a development point of view at the junior management or middle specialism level.

2) Even if the pay of older workers is the same or even lower, many companies prefer to higher younger people with potential and runway to progress further. For e.g if a 30 and a 50 year old apply for a junior managerial position at the same time asking for the same pay, employers would rather take their chances with the youngster.

The logic is once again a Mathematical rather than a moral one. A 30-year-old youngster has maybe a 20% chance of progressing further whereas a 50-year-old guy applying for a junior managerial job is already a 99% gone case Peter Principle career ceiling case.

3) Older workers are far more resistant to change, this is not a put down or ageist thing, it's just how we as humans develop physically and mentally as we age. While there are always outsiders, from a company policy POV this to be true statistically speaking.

If you have ever managed diverse teams across the age spectrum or are a business owner who employs many people, you will know this to be true.

Having said all of the above, the government knows it as well. However where I disagree with is this overarching thinking that somehow all this can be overcome by simply increasing training opportunities and funding without taking some hard decisions.

Training can at best be provide supplementary support, this alone will not be able to resolve the disconnect between people needing to work longer with increasing retirement age and employers not wanting to hire older people for the above-mentioned reasons.

The only real effective measure is to compel companies to go against the stated economic principles through legislation on hiring locals and curtailing the supply of cheap foreign alternatives.

This is the obvious elephant in the room that the government pretends not to see and keep trying to convince themselves and everyone that economic principles can be violated by simply training people, consulting with employers or issuing advisory guidelines etc.

[red3]

They are talking about themselves all the 50plus and 60plus inside the parliament from the actual reality in the streets.

[Blin]

Cok can still stand, but cannot go 2 round .. sumore suffer from ED.. so No stamina ans duration 

still get fired la

One good round is good enough.

[Bigiron]

Got hidden meaning in her statement....
Since on skillfuture credit

[Oyk]

Meaning these 60 turn 40 can work for another 20 more years. Will employers buy that?

Employers want to cut cost. To continue employing the new 40  they will not be able to do so. They will come out with reasons that these 60s' are slow, unwilling to learn and unable to adapt to change.

There are reasons why companies prefer younger workers.

First off, an office that's full of young peepur is full of vitality and energy.. dressed fashionably, they add to the decor of the office.. An office of old folks smelling of wintergreen oil and wearing the clothes of a few decades ago looks like a nursing home where the seniors happened to not need wheelchairs and walking frames. And because they have seen this, done that, hardly anything excites them and so they sit there all looking very serious..

Secondly, they tend to expect higher salaries citing reasons like they have decades of sexperience and sexcuses like their cost of living is very high because a son is in poly and a daughter needs tuition for math, Chinese, Geography and English.

Third, their absenteesim with medical certificates to show is legendary. And when they do turn up for work, their eyesight and hearing are not as good as they were 40 years ago, which is to say they are not as good as someone who is 40 years younger.

If you are the employer, do you prefer to hire a young man on work permit or an old man who does not need a work permit?

Having said all these, why is Saliva bringing this up to PAP? The civil service is exemplary in retaining its civil serpents till whatever the official retirement age is. So tell them all these for fark? It's the private sector which is free to hire whoever it likes that is practising age discrimination... 

[forum456]

the main problem faced by older job seekers is ageism.

upskilling and reskilling with diplomas cannot solve the ageism problem practised by employers.

no matter how upskilled or reskilled by the older job seekers, the employers will not employ them.

why PAP always cannot find the root cause of the problem ?

[forum456]

Having said all of the above, the government knows it as well. However where I disagree with is this overarching thinking that somehow all this can be overcome by simply increasing training opportunities and funding without taking some hard decisions.

Training can at best be provide supplementary support, this alone will not be able to resolve the disconnect between people needing to work longer with increasing retirement age and employers not wanting to hire older people for the above-mentioned reasons.

The only real effective measure is to compel companies to go against the stated economic principles through legislation on hiring locals and curtailing the supply of cheap foreign alternatives.

This is the obvious elephant in the room that the government pretends not to see and keep trying to convince themselves and everyone that economic principles can be violated by simply training people, consulting with employers or issuing advisory guidelines etc.

this problem is a simple problem because it is an ageism problem.
but PAP refuses to acknowledge ageism and thus it will never be solved.

countries acknowledge ageism problem and they can minimise it.
wheras Singapore problem is getting from bad to worse

[RichDad]

Should be 40 is the new 60 lah.

[Bigiron]

Should be 40 is the new 60 lah.

Bingo....you got it right.

This what Sylvia Lim is trying to say.

[Oyk]

this problem is a simple problem because it is an ageism problem.
but PAP refuses to acknowledge ageism and thus it will never be solved.

countries acknowledge ageism problem and they can minimise it.
wheras Singapore problem is getting from bad to worse

We all know that the private sector discriminates older workers. Since when did the government refuse to acknowledge that? 

And what do you want them to do about it? Wtf can they do if the company refuaes to employ an old man?

[watchfirst9]

60 is 60
40 is forty. 
Energy level is not the same.

Some working hours for elderly have to shorten, to have more part timer roles.
Not all needs the money, some just needs the exercise...

WP unfortunately only touch the surface as usual.

[RiseofAsia]

Once we have a crap team, we got to work until die lah. Roting has become worse.

[Tangsen]

Once we have a crap team, we got to work until die lah. Roting has become worse.

Guess you did not get the CDC vouchers and assurance package 

[RichDad]

Bingo....you got it right.

This what Sylvia Lim is trying to say.

Yah. But she phrased it wrongly.

30 is the new 50.... haha.