Currently showing: Funding longer lives > Long-term care


02 Sep 13 13:06

In our bowl we discussed a lot about paradigm shift – on an individual, but also corporate level. So imagine how the world looked like, if chronological age became much less important, but we went through different phases in life! The countdown to 65 (or whatever your planned retirement age is) will be non-existent and getting to this age doesn't mean you have the right to get a pension and literally lay back! It much more means you continue to have obligations and responsibilities, which will be adapted to your life phase. To go successfully through the different phases, we would need to diversify ourselves, think of different types of work that correspond to each phase.

Our salary will peak at a certain point in time, and when our family engagement gets smaller because our kids earn their own lives, will shrink with time. This shall not mean that our work is of less quality, obviously. In contrary, the respect towards the work and achievements of 'the wise' will be truthful, and corporates will have the responsibility to offer positions to employees in all life phases.

We have heard an example from Israel, where retired army commanders have a high intrinsic motivation to take on a second career, where they can apply the experienced, as a teacher or CEO for example. Also, it was stated in this context that it was not allowed to pension off collaborators that were motivated to work, due to their age.

Intra-generational care or education was a suggestion of sustainable jobs that support in the same time individual diversification and the option of new career paths. Also, in countries where population size is stagnating or shrinking, the opportunity of accepting migration and support migrants to develop skills and expertise should become much more obvious, according to our discussions.

So, do you think we are ready to change our mind set?

How diversified has your career been until now?

Would it be o.k. for you to be 'promoted backwards' after having reached seniority?


Category: Funding longer lives: Long-term care, Pension/retirement


1 Comment

Alicia Montoya - 12 Sep 2013, 7:29 p.m.

Oh, I'm ready! Not that I think we have a choice, mind you. The economics of the situation will dictate how long we need to work, right?

I also think there are tons of people who would like to work past their retirement age and are not allowed to. That seems insane to me. Again, let the market dictate that. If you're willing and able, and are still providing value, hell, who is anybody to stop them?

However, I'm more interested in the competitiveness aspect brought about by intergenerational skill transfer.
Why not combine the highly skilled mature pros with the young and dynamic youth with tons to learn? Jayne Plunkett explores this idea in her blog "Defusing the demographics time bomb": http://business.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/24/defusing-the-demographics-time-bomb/


If you would like to leave a comment, please, log in.