There is no doubt that the retirement age of people in an organisation is a controversial issue. It is argued that companies should relieve workers who are 55 years in order to give room for the younger generation. Personally, I completely agree with this viewpoint because of its many benefits.
In this era, it is important for organisations to retire older people of 55 years and above to give room for younger ones who have modern ideas that can push a company forward. This is because, older people may still practice ancient routines which might not appeal to the public. Furthermore, employing younger people will in fact encourage a balanced population of young and middle ages, which is important to drive performance and diversity in the workplace. For instance, a recent survey carried out in Access bank shows that most of the innovative ideas brought forward were made by younger people within the age bracket of 25 to 30.
An argument brought forward by critics is that relieving people based on their ages are an unfair practice because some elderly people might still need to earn more money to cater for their family. However, I would argue that at the 55 years old, many adults should have saved money enough to sustain them. In addition, retiring people at this age will give them ample time to rest and spend time with family. To illustrate, my grandfather retired from Guaranty bank at 55 years old, this afforded him with enough time to send with his grandkids.
Finally, retiring older people in a company will reduce the number of unemployed youths in the society. For instance, a local survey reveals that many people will not retire if there was no age-limit, and this could hinder the employment of young adults.
In conclusion, I strongly agree that there should be an age limit to retirement of people in an organisation to give younger people a chance to showcase their ideas and to reduce job unemployment.
There is no doubt that the retirement
age
of
people
in an
organisation
is a controversial issue. It
is argued
that
companies
should relieve workers who are 55 years in order to
give
room for the
younger
generation.
Personally
, I completely
agree
with this viewpoint
because
of its
many
benefits.
In this era, it is
important
for
organisations
to retire older
people
of 55 years and above to
give
room for
younger
ones who have modern
ideas
that can push a
company
forward. This is
because
, older
people
may
still
practice ancient routines which might not appeal to the public.
Furthermore
, employing
younger
people
will in fact encourage a balanced population of young and middle
ages
, which is
important
to drive performance and diversity in the workplace.
For instance
, a recent survey carried out in Access bank
shows
that most of the innovative
ideas
brought forward
were made
by
younger
people
within the
age
bracket of 25 to 30.
An argument brought forward by critics is that relieving
people
based on their
ages
are an unfair practice
because
some
elderly
people
might
still
need to earn more money to cater for their family.
However
, I would argue that at the 55 years
old
,
many
adults should have saved money
enough
to sustain them.
In addition
, retiring
people
at this
age
will
give
them ample time to rest and spend time with family. To illustrate, my grandfather retired from Guaranty bank at 55 years
old
, this afforded him with
enough
time to
send
with his
grandkids
.
Finally
, retiring older
people
in a
company
will
reduce
the number of unemployed youths in the society.
For instance
, a local survey reveals that
many
people
will not retire if there was no age-limit, and this could hinder the employment of young adults.
In conclusion
, I
strongly
agree
that there should be an
age
limit to retirement of
people
in an
organisation
to
give
younger
people
a chance to showcase their
ideas
and to
reduce
job unemployment.
7Linking words, meeting the goal of 7 or more
7Repeated words, meeting the goal of 3 or fewer
7Mistakes