We have been hearing of late that the Government is planning to introduce a minimum retirement age for the private sector. What is the appropriate retirement age? Or should we even have one?
I did a slight research and found that in the UK, the compulsory retirement age had recently been abolished. Australia, on the other hand does not encourage this on the grounds of discrimination to age. Singapore, on the other hand has a statute on this which is most likely the structure which the Malaysian government would adopt.
In my opinion, the retirement age should be kept low. Say for example, at 55 or 58. For the good employees, the company can keep them by offering a new fixed term contract. This is to safeguard the interest of the company/industry/economy by ensuring high levels of productivity.
However, I am quite certain that the Act would not reflect my views. It will most likely impose a high retirement age. But I have a few questions which I hope would be addressed in the legislation itself. Firstly, what happens when an employee is unlawfully retired? Can the employee seek remedies under s.20 of the IRA 1967 or would the retirement act itself impose some other form of punishment? If it does, how would it affect s.20, (ppl might forsake s.20 and claim unlawful retirement rather than unlawful dismissal because the claim is higher) and lastly and most importantly, the definition of retirement.
I will address this matter in full once I get my hands on the Bill!