Retirement age

Need we say that, leading a reasonably good life most government officials remain fit at 57? To top it off, they are vastly experienced at that age. We talk of capacity building and meritocracy in the services but if government servants are retired at 57 we are losing out on both -- in terms of proven reserves of capacity and merit.

At present, when government servants are superannuated, they are given contracts to continue for limited periods of time. Such contractual offers have often been stigmatised by political favouritism with considerations of merit or integrity playing a second fiddle in the public eye. Retaining retiring government officials on contract has generated resentment in the administration; for, it is regarded as having blocked the promotion prospects of next-in-line officers. In truth, the proliferation of contractual assignments has impacted negatively on the efficiency and morale of the officialdom, especially because of the bottled-up situation.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

But that is not the sole reason why we should raise the retirement age. The latter deserves to be revised upward on its own merit. The corporate sector has benefited immensely from people above 55 years. They are not only repositories of experience and leadership qualities but also creative by the same token.

To say that the raising of the service age will create administrative clogs is downright foolhardy. For, it would be uniformly beneficial to all government servants with each taking his or her turn in moving up the ladder?