Economic Objectives (II) – The Eaglesforesight

Third, the casual labor system constitutes a terrible and destructive psychological attack on the self-respect and human dignity of those who work under the system. They feel inferior and are treated as inferior to their fellow citizens who hold permanent and pensionable positions. Fourth, the insecurity of tenure, which is inseparable from the system of temporary employment, inevitably leads to inefficiency and low productivity on the part of temporary or daily paid employees. Since it is more than likely that they will be laid off after the completion of a particular project, the employees involved, out of sheer and excusable self-interest, are naturally inclined to limit production in order to stay on the job as long as possible. the project, resulting in a loss to the economy. Fifthly, it follows that the system of causal labor is inhumane, uneconomical and wasteful.

There is therefore a strong call for this kind of discrimination to be abolished in the People’s Republic of Nigeria; and all employees should be entitled to a non-contributory pension under a comprehensive and compulsory social insurance scheme.

5. Retirement age

One of the things we inherited from our British colonial masters, which should be abolished, is the mandatory retirement age of 55. In their wisdom, the British Imperialists decided that those of their subjects who chose to live in their tropical overseas, widely regarded as the “tomb of the white man,” should leave with a fat pension at age 55, so as to extend their longevity. would be preserved and the good among them could still render valuable services to their homeland.

In this regard, it is well known that when Britons return home at 55, they very quickly start looking for other jobs, with the good guys being appointed as senior executives in big companies. It is also known that here in Nigeria not a single Nigerian who is forced to retire at the age of 55 leads a life of permanent rest and inactivity. Indeed, after mandatory retirement, they either find their way back to government in some capacity or go into successful businesses or ventures. Then why do we continue with this policy of mandatory retirement at age 55, post-independence?

It is not denied that life expectancy in Nigeria is relatively short. But my own personal observation leads me to conclude that Nigerians who live to 55 are among the strongest on the planet: the majority of them invariably live to a great age. In other words, the process of natural selection is usually completed here in Nigeria well before the age of 55.

Related News:

2023: INEC Announces New Deadline For Collection Of PVCs

Peru’s president supports elections later this year

Portuguese school staff are marching for better wages and working conditions

It has been suggested that a person’s efficiency tends to decline significantly after age 55. Not only is there no scientific basis for this statement, but the observed facts are diametrically opposed to it. We know that the self-employed in trade, in the liberal professions, in agriculture, in industry, etc. never retire at 55. In the vast majority of cases, they just keep going, with increasing success, until they eat too. tired of going on, or drop dead at an average age of 65 to 80 years. We also know that civil servants who are rehired in some capacity (usually in the same or higher capacity) are as efficient as possible, while those engaged in private companies are more often than not more successful in their careers than when they were in served by the government.

Moreover, the public service in Nigeria cannot be an exception to the common and general experience that when a person arrives at the age of 55, he is simply mature and mature enough, in every sense of the word – that is, if he is a completely good – to give of his very best to the nation. At this age he has gained a lot of experience and has become an expert in his chosen field; he is no longer overburdened with the cares and worries of this world, nor is he more overly tormented by the tyrannies of the flesh. It can be seen physiologically and psychologically that at this age he fails, even if he tried, to arouse the desire to engage in these cares, worries and tyrannies. In the circumstances, he is now more determined, more committed and tends to be more efficient in his career

or profession than ever before, especially as he is now more free than ever from the social distractions that have taken their toll on his physical and mental fitness and resourcefulness in years gone by. And it is at this moment that he is asked to go whether he likes it or not.

What applies to HE, of course also applies to SHE, but with more force. From the age of 50, SHE no longer runs the risk of needing three months of maternity leave. In addition, unless she started her pregnancy career too late, at the age of 55, she is almost completely freed from household worries and worries. This is indeed the age when SHE and HE can devote much more time to their studies and careers without suspecting the other of neglect or infidelity, and without the children suffering from lack of parental care.

It is therefore an excessive waste of manpower to force a man or a woman to retire at age 55. pointless as unsustainable. A government spokesman had stated that the aim of the reduction was to make way for thousands of young boys and girls who drop out of school each year. Surely it cannot be maintained that the several hundred men and women who have retired would make enough room for the thousands – even tens of thousands – of young school leavers looking for work. In fact, as we now know, they made no room at all. In addition, some of the retired civil servants were almost immediately reassigned to other sectors of the civil service. In an enlightened society and planned economy, the remedy for school dropout unemployment is to create more employment, not to force the early retirement of civil servants at the peak of their efficiency.

For all these reasons, I advocate raising the mandatory retirement age to a minimum of 65 and a maximum of 75, depending on the type of work.

I did not choose this age range at random. At present, Supreme Court judges and lecturers at our universities are not required to retire until they are 65 and 60 respectively, with a 5-year extension option for the latter. It will be generally agreed that there is no profession that requires more strenuous mental effort than judge and teacher. It is therefore extremely unreasonable to ask teachers in below-university level educational institutions, civil servants and the like, state attorneys, etc. to be required to retire at any age earlier than 65 years.

CONTINUE NEXT WEEK

ALSO READ FROM NIGERIAN STAND