For the policy of delaying retirement, it can be said that "several families are happy and several families are worried." I also understand the views of post-70s, post-80s and post-90s on delayed retirement. Except for some post-90s newcomers who think that retirement is still a distant matter and there are not many objections, most post-80s, especially post-70s, are opposed to delaying retirement.
Among those who oppose delayed retirement, those front-line workers who are engaged in manual labor are particularly opposed, and the starting point given is also very real and grounded: "If I can easily make money in my post, if I am not a manual worker, I also support delayed retirement"!
Yes, it is understandable that front-line manual workers oppose delaying retirement. They are tired of working in the assembly line, carrying goods and digging mines every day. Decades of hard work is nothing more than raising children and enjoying the old-age life after retirement. To tell the truth, anyone can persist in front-line manual labor for several years, but 15 years? For 25 years? Suddenly one day, when you are nearing retirement, you are asked to work for another five years. Who can stand it?
In addition, to be honest, there are people around me who support delayed retirement, but I have counted and found that these groups are mainly technicians, cadres of government agencies and institutions, and mental workers in enterprises.
For example, I have a 56-year-old technician around me who is in favor of delaying retirement. His current job is to do routine performance tests of rolling equipment in steel mills. His working hours are no more than eight days a month, and only three or four hours a day. Although fighting in the front line, he always goes out to work in a suit and tie. If there is anything wrong with the equipment, he can directly ask the supplier's employees to dismantle it, repair it and maintain it. He just needs to find the problem according to his own experience. How can a skilled worker like a "manual worker" not support delaying retirement? If I were you, I would also like to continue to "shine" at work, not only to earn fame, but also to work at home, mainly to get a high salary. I can continue to pay my old-age insurance and get a higher retirement pension when I retire.
However, skilled workers, brainworkers and leading cadres in government agencies and institutions are a minority after all, and most of them are ordinary front-line workers. The physical strength of these groups has been seriously overdrawn, and their health is getting worse every year. Even many people have fallen into occupational diseases. To tell the truth, it is to "burn incense", not to mention delaying retirement, that is, to work normally until the age of 60.
So have the policy makers who suggest delaying retirement considered the practical difficulties of this group? From the bottom of my heart, I don't want to see a one-size-fits-all delayed retirement policy. Even if there are deep-seated considerations, such as ensuring an adequate supply of labor in the future and maintaining the balance of payments of social security funds, delaying retirement is specific to everyone, which harms the relevant interests of individuals to some extent.
Therefore, it is fundamental to formulate a delayed retirement policy suitable for the vast majority of people. For example, workers who are not forced to retire at a certain age and are healthy enough to continue working in their posts and engage in mental work can choose to postpone retirement as long as they can meet the basic requirements of their jobs.
But do manual workers who have worked all their lives also have the right not to choose to postpone retirement? For example, the retirement age is "flexible" and is set at 60 to 65 years old. As long as you choose to retire at any time at this age, you can retire early if you have physical problems, and you can retire late if you are in good health. Isn't it killing two birds with one stone?
In addition, while delaying retirement, we should also keep up with some basic guarantees, such as medical insurance, work injury insurance and unemployment insurance. If the security can't keep up, then the elderly will have no advantage in competing with young people for jobs. For example, how can elderly workers ensure that their jobs are not taken away by young people in their prime? What if the employer dismisses you on the grounds of "old age" before you reach retirement age? Can you find a new job at this age? Can you find another job? Who will protect the interests? It is "empty talk" to postpone retirement unilaterally without protection.
Of course, the details of delaying retirement are still at the discussion level, and the specific rules have not really been implemented. No one knows what the specific policy is. Here, I just give my own opinion in my personal capacity.
I believe many people understand the profound consideration of the country's delayed retirement. It is irresponsible for our generation not to solve some difficulties. I only hope that relevant departments and decision makers can give more policy inclinations to front-line manual workers so that they can enjoy their old age after retirement.
Whether the delay in retirement is due to the lack of workers in the front line or the need for social security is a problem that needs to be clarified. If the front line is short of manpower, then reducing the employment requirements will certainly be met. Nowadays, large enterprises always require high education, even the front desk reception requires doctors and so on. If it is because of the lack of social security funds, then we need to talk about it. Now the retirement fee is increasing every year. These are social security funds, and social security is very difficult. Why does the retirement fee rise year after year? It should be because the price has gone up too fast. Then the key to solve the problem is not to delay retirement, but to reduce prices, and to ensure that the wages of retirees are in direct proportion to the price ratio is the fundamental to solve the problem.
How about solving those who don't have to pay social security pension first, and then talking about delaying retirement? Those who don't have to pay for themselves certainly want to postpone retirement.
Those who support delayed retirement should be placed in front-line jobs at the age of 30, laid off at the age of 40, and then find their own jobs and buy their own pension insurance. They must work until they are 65 years old, and then, as the case may be, as long as they can still move, they have to push them to work and exert their residual heat.
Who are the people who support delayed retirement? I think it's those who work in offices. I won't talk about the specific industry, which is easy to offend people. Simply put, do you dare to let an old driver over 60 drive a bus? Do you agree to let an old doctor in his sixties give you injections and infusions? My mother needed an infusion at home when she was ill. My brother found an old doctor who runs a clinic, which saves trouble. He just looked for blood vessels for nearly 15 minutes. Fortunately, the elderly are not sensitive to pain, but the people we see are very distressed. After the needle was inserted, he was sweating. It was the twelfth lunar month. There is also the construction industry, not to mention letting you take part in manual labor, that is, letting you stand at a high temperature of 35 degrees or a low temperature of MINUS ten degrees and do nothing for eight hours a day. Can you stand it? You can't stand the seemingly easy job of sweeping the road, and the climate is unbearable. One of my classmates is 60 years old and hasn't had time to sweep the road for others. In summer, he suffered from heatstroke and no one saved him. It is said that the competent authorities have lost more than 300,000 yuan, and delaying retirement across the board may not work. It is impossible to rely solely on personal wishes. Must have a physical examination and sign a new contract. Except for three young women, five or six other men in charge of life in my unit did not live to be 65 years old.
People who shout about delaying retirement every day are all people who go to work, drink tea and read newspapers all day, while those who struggle in the front line of production can't do anything, that is, they are over 60 years old. Delaying retirement can only increase the burden on oneself and the unit, but it has made a contribution to the national pension institution.
Unfortunately, people who make and support policies can work in their posts until they are seventy or eighty years old.
Those who support the extension of retirement are helpless people, telling them to go to the front line with their mouths and ensuring that they will not live beyond 65. Unfortunately, it is not the ordinary working people who formulate the policy of delaying retirement, but the above-mentioned class. They just take it for granted that they will make decisions according to their own best interests, protect their own advantages, and will not pity ordinary people who are bleeding and sweating. Delayed retirement should be based on the interests of the people and their living conditions, not on a few people. Taking into account the public interest and steadily promoting delayed retirement are acceptable to the people.
It is unreasonable and unreasonable for front-line workers in enterprises, organs, organizations and factories to postpone retirement across the board. Although the average life expectancy has been prolonged, the health status of the human body is not as good as before. Experts and researchers do not personally visit and experience the current situation of workers. Chairman Mao: Only after investigation and study can we have the right to speak, and we should be cautious in everything.
China's national conditions are different from those of developed countries. How many hours do China and Germany work every year? Do they work at night? Do they have holidays on Saturday and Sunday? What do they eat every day? How many times do workers eat beef every meal (few people can afford pork in the canteen)? The current level of development is only suitable for retirement at the age of 60. China is only a developing country, while China is not a developed country. Do you know who supports extending retirement time? Forget the hard work of most of my life. Delay retirement, you will die, and then your pension will have a surplus. Who will be in it in the end? At present, the pension gap is large, so it is really not suitable to postpone retirement according to policy adjustment. Only some civil servants, experts and professors, celebrities, doctors, teachers, police, leaders and others may agree to postpone retirement. It can be said that it is definitely a minority. According to news reports, the monthly income of 600 million people mentioned by the Prime Minister is only 1 10,000 yuan. Why do you think of these 600 million people? However, according to medical data, the vast majority of wage earners, farmers, factory workers, security guards, waiters and coal workers in China belong to the onset syndrome when they are 50 to 60 years old. If they are not careful, they will lose their lives. After all, years of fatigue and neglect of health care have caused physical defects and caused various diseases, and the rural labor force aged 50 to 60 has the highest cancer rate. So many people looked down on the disease and finally lost their lives. Enterprise workers work 8~ 1 1 hour all year round, and even work overtime all night, without rest, and work at night shift. The migrant workers at the bottom of China have been working very hard. I don't know who put forward the suggestion of delaying retirement, but I want to tell the truth, please don't base your happiness on the suffering of others. Now most old people help to take care of their children and grandchildren. It's really hard for middle-aged people to find a job after 35. Who dares to hire you over 60? Those who want to postpone retirement can understand the meaning of this sentence. Remember, China is a populous country, not as developed as Europe and America. It is more important to raise the pension for 60-year-old retirees now, rather than delaying retirement.