Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Actuarial Discussion Forum > Pension - Social Security
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions

Salary Surveys
Property & Casualty, Life, Health & Pension

Health Actuary Jobs
Insurance & Consulting jobs for Students, Associates & Fellows

Actuarial Recruitment
Visit DW Simpson's website for more info.
www.dwsimpson.com/about

Casualty Jobs
Property & Casualty jobs for Students, Associates & Fellows


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #401  
Old 01-09-2017, 09:24 AM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 75,780
Blog Entries: 6
Default

WEST BENGAL, INDIA

http://indianexpress.com/article/edu...achers-mamata/

Quote:
West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee on Saturday announced that the retirement age of college and university teachers in the state would be increased to 62, and that they would also be included within the health scheme. She also announced setting up of a new varsity near the centrally-funded Visva Bharati University (VBU) in Shantiniketan. Mamata was addressing professors from various universities and colleges at a state-level convention here when she announced the Biswa Bangla University plan at Bolpur, close to the Visva Bharati campus.
Reply With Quote
  #402  
Old 01-09-2017, 09:25 AM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 75,780
Blog Entries: 6
Default

BELARUS

http://eng.belta.by/society/view/bel...ge-97644-2017/


Quote:
Belarus raises retirement age

MINSK, 3 January (BelTA) – The changes to the retirement age regulations became effective as of 1 January 2017, BelTA informs. Belarus President Alexander Lukashenko signed decree No. 137 on the improvement of the pension system on 11 April. The document entered into force on 1 January 2017. In accordance with the decree, the standard pension age will be gradually increased by six months every year until it reaches 63 years for men and 58 years for women. There will be the same increase in the retirement age (by three years during the period of six years) for those entitled to preferential, long-service and military pensions. According to the estimates, the old-age pension will be awarded to approximately 55,000 people annually in the period before the year 2022. As the retirement age increases, the pre-retirement age will be increasing accordingly.
It doesn't mention what the prior retirement ages were.

According to Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retirement_age

It's 55 for women and 60 for men
Reply With Quote
  #403  
Old 01-10-2017, 10:51 PM
MooBeay MooBeay is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,193
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by campbell View Post
BELARUS

http://eng.belta.by/society/view/bel...ge-97644-2017/




It doesn't mention what the prior retirement ages were.

According to Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retirement_age

It's 55 for women and 60 for men
Correct and it did state a 3 year increase over 6 years. Subtract that from new age and you'd have the prior age
Reply With Quote
  #404  
Old 01-11-2017, 05:22 AM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 75,780
Blog Entries: 6
Default

I don't trust reporters to do math properly.
Reply With Quote
  #405  
Old 01-16-2017, 03:02 PM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 75,780
Blog Entries: 6
Default

SINGAPORE

http://www.straitstimes.com/singapor...e-67-from-july

Quote:
Older workers can work until age 67 from July

In another change, employers won't be allowed to cut salary of staff who turn 60

Older workers will be able to work until age 67 from July this year.

If employers cannot find work for such workers in their companies, they can transfer them to their subsidiaries or another employer with the workers' consent, or give them a one-off payment as a last resort.

Employers will also not be allowed to cut the salary of workers who turn 60 from July.

These changes to the Retirement and Re-employment Act, passed in Parliament yesterday, will apply to Singaporeans and permanent residents who turn 65 from July.

Employers will be required to re-hire these workers if they have satisfactory work performance and are healthy and able to continue working.


The move will benefit the increasing ranks of older workers who want to continue to work, said Manpower Minister Lim Swee Say.

The proportion of residents aged 60 and above in the labour force increased from 5.5 per cent in 2006 to 12 per cent in 2015.

"As we live longer, we can expect this proportion to continue to grow," Mr Lim told the House.

Allowing employers to transfer older workers to another employer benefits both workers and employers, he added. "The employee will have more opportunities to be re-employed... The second employer will benefit from hiring an employee with experience," he said.

On removing the law that allows employers to cut the pay of workers at age 60, Mr Lim said that joint efforts by unions, employers and the Government have been successful in getting companies to move away from a wage system where they peg salaries to years of service.


http://www.todayonline.com/business/...xperts-divided

Quote:
Time to retire Singapore's retirement age? Not so fast, some experts say

SINGAPORE — With the re-employment age raised to 67 from 65 come July, some have questioned the need for a statutory retirement age as the evolving economy has made it possible for older workers to stay relevant and productive.

In Parliament on Monday, Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC MP Zainal Sapari said there is a need to “be bolder to work towards removing the retirement age and allow a worker to work as long as he or she could”.

However, Manpower Minister Lim Swee Say said that doing away with a retirement age would, among other things, affect the career aspirations of younger workers.

Experts TODAY spoke to yesterday were divided on the need for a statutory retirement age — kept at 62 at present — in the current Singapore labour landscape with an ageing workforce and slowing population growth.

Those in favour of retaining a retirement age argued that it serves as a way for businesses to rejuvenate their headcount, while those who oppose said economic productivity is not solely defined by one’s age.

CIMB Private Banking economist Song Seng Wun said the concept of a retirement age has become more ambiguous as the Singapore population has become more educated and technologically savvy, and enjoys longer life expectancy — factors that allow workers to continue contributing meaningfully well into their golden age.

“We are not only going to have uncles and aunties to do menial labour work, but we will have uncles and aunties who know technology, who can use technology and who have skill sets that can still be relevant regardless of how old they are,” he said.

Mizuho Bank’s senior economist Vishnu Varathan said that as Singapore moves towards a knowledge-based economy, many jobs have become less labour-intensive, and this allows elderly employees to be as productive as their younger counterparts.


Reply With Quote
  #406  
Old 02-08-2017, 10:30 AM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 75,780
Blog Entries: 6
Default

UNITED KINGDOM

https://www.theguardian.com/membersh...ension-savings

Quote:
Flexible retirement age: an idea whose time has come?

What caused one of the worst military disasters ever faced by the Roman empire? Retirement, says Mary Beard, professor of classics at Newnham College, Cambridge. In AD14, the imperial power increased the retirement age and decreased the pensions of its legionnaires, causing mutiny in Pannonia and Germany. “Things got pretty bloody,” Beard tells me. “The ringleaders were rounded up and disposed of but not before the soldiers had offered the throne to one of the imperial princes and he’d had to make a show of saying he would kill himself rather than be disloyal.”

Retirement, then, is an ancient concept. But the threat of mutiny when it appears threatened apparently remains alive. “Retirement has been stolen. You can pay in as much as you like. They will never pay back. Time for a Grey Revolution,” wrote one commenter below part three of this series.

But are we really being cheated of the retirement we deserve – or have our expectations become unrealistic? In this fourth part of my exploration of the changing nature of retirement, I’m considering what history can tell us about what it might look like in the future.

Firstly, we should recognise that retirement has only recently been presumed to be a financially secure stage of life. Pensioner poverty began to improve only in the late 70s as the value of the state pension rose and an increasing number (mainly men) were able to benefit from occupational pension schemes, explains Chris Phillipson, professor of gerontology at the University of Manchester and co-director of the Manchester Institute for Collaborative Research on Ageing.

While the first contributory, flat-rate pension in the UK was introduced for women who reached 60 and men who reached 65 by the 1946 National Insurance Act, for most of the 1950s and 1960s, those without an occupational pension – the majority of working-class pensioners – were condemned to eke out their old age on the margins of poverty. “The reality is that the 1950s and 1960s were a time of great poverty for the majority of older people,” says Phillipson.

....
At the same time, the old trajectory of education–work–retirement began to crumble, never to recover. By the 90s, it was clear that the “jobs for life” culture had been replaced by part-time and flexible working, and the idea that people might have second – and third – careers.

It was in these decades, argues John Macnicol, a visiting professor at the London School of Economics and author of Neoliberalising Old Age, that a “socially elegant mythology of the prosperous pensioner was constructed in the face of empirical evidence that showed exactly the opposite to be the case”. This, he believes, is when the idea of pensioners moved from being poor, frail, dependent and deserving – to prosperous, hedonistic, politically powerful and selfish.

Since the 1970s – and particularly since the early 1990s – old age has been redefined almost out of existence in the name of agelessness, Macnicol says. “In the final analysis, the right to retirement is being undermined: more coercive, stricter labour market activation is presented as providing new ‘opportunities’, removing ‘barriers’ to working, bestowing greater ‘inclusion’ and even achieving upward social mobility,” he said.

As we have seen throughout this series, some people approaching retirement consider this flexibility and opportunity to keep working essential. Others can’t wait to stop, new “opportunities” or not. One reader, Christopher, who is 68 and still working, emailed me to say: “Please take care in this series to recognise the element of free choice … For many, we should recognise the pension as a hard-earned and self-paid relief from physical labour. We should not see a longer working life as an expected way of life.”

.....
Already we have what Alan Walker, professor of social policy and social gerontology and the director of the New Dynamics of Ageing Programme at the University of Sheffield, calls a “desperately low basic state pension”, and for the 3 million older people with no second pension or sufficient savings, retirement means poverty.

And a rising state pension age could mean that in future, some don’t ever receive it. “Many groups of workers will not benefit from a period of retirement because they will die before the state retirement age or will have insufficient income to be able to leave what may be precarious work in their 60s and early 70s,” says Phillipson.

....
Perhaps we should go back to the history books. It was in 1881 that the German chancellor, Otto von Bismarck – despite his impeccable rightwing credentials – made a radical speech to the Reichstag, calling for government-run financial support for those aged over 70 who were “disabled from work by age and invalidity”.

The scheme wasn’t the socialist ideal it is sometimes assumed to be: it was actually a disability pension, not a retirement pension as we understand it today, and a retirement age of 70 just about aligned with life expectancy in Germany at that time. Bismarck, however, had a further a vision that was genuinely too radical for his era – and remains too radical for this one, although many readers who have got in contact with me directly and in the comments say they would welcome it: a pension that can be drawn at any age at which the contributor is judged unfit for work.

Like Bismarck, the economist William Beveridge recommended a flexible retirement age, whereby higher pensions were paid to those who felt able to defer retirement. It’s an idea that is being discussed in various forms: the New Economics Foundation (NEF) is arguing for a shorter working week via a “slow retirement”, with those in work giving up an hour of work from their weekly routine every year from the age of 35, to allow a steady handover of retained wisdom.
Reply With Quote
  #407  
Old 02-08-2017, 03:13 PM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 75,780
Blog Entries: 6
Default

UNITED KINGDOM

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...hed-again.html

Quote:
State pension age could be pushed back yet again: Experts say young people could work until they are 74

The state pension age could be pushed back yet again and young people may have to work until they are 74, experts are warning.
It may rise by nearly ten years by the 2060s, hitting workers currently in their 20s and future generations, the Office for Budget Responsibility forecasts.
Workers in their late 40s and early 50s could also face delayed retirement, the Treasury’s independent watchdog reports.

That is because several extra rises could be imposed in the 2030s, as a result of the ageing population.
It predicts the state pension age may rise to 68 for both men and women as early as 2031 and then to 69 in 2034 and 70 in 2037.
By 2063 the state pension age could be as high as 74, the OBR says.
That would mean anyone born after 1989 would have to wait until they are 74 before they can receive the state pension.
The OBR notes the life expectancy of a 74-year-old in the mid-2060s could be 100 and there are likely to be one million aged 100 or over by then.

Reply With Quote
  #408  
Old 02-14-2017, 10:54 AM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 75,780
Blog Entries: 6
Default

CANADA



http://www.moneysense.ca/save/retire...etirement-age/

Quote:
Advisory council calls for higher retirement age

OTTAWA— The Trudeau government’s economic advisory council is recommending Ottawa raise the age of retirement eligibility and explore a national child-care program as ways to deliver a much-needed participation boost for the country’s workforce.

The proposals were among a collection of new suggestions released Monday by the government’s hand-picked growth council.

The ideas fall under five themes and are widely expected to help the government frame parts of the upcoming federal budget.


The advisers zeroed in on what they called a need for Canada to increase labour-force participation from under-represented groups such as indigenous people, lower-income earners, women with kids and older people.

To encourage older Canadians to work longer, the council recommended raising the age of eligibility for old age security and the Canada Pension Plan.

The idea contrasts with the Liberal government’s move to reverse a controversial decision taken by the former Conservative government and return old age security eligibility to 65 from 67.

Raising the eligibility age so that it closes the gap between Canada and industrialized countries with the highest labour participation rate among workers 55 and over could add $56 billion to the gross domestic product, the council’s report said.




http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repor...ticle33993910/

Quote:
Politics trumps evidence when it comes to adjusting the retirement age


Last Monday, Finance Minister Bill Morneau’s economic growth advisory council suggested the government consider raising the retirement age. The council’s advice is a year too late, since the Liberals already fulfilled their rash election promise to reverse the previous Conservative government’s changes to raise the age of eligibility for Old Age Security to 67.

The advisory group’s recommendation brought me back to my final days working in the Prime Minister’s Office after we lost the 2015 election. I recall sitting with a group of close friends discussing our most important policy achievements in government. I had been involved in many significant international trade accomplishments, including the conclusion of trade agreements with Europe, South Korea and the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

But for me, one of the most important domestic policy initiatives was raising the age of OAS. As an academic researcher, being part of an effort to translate research evidence into public policy – in the face of strong political opposition – was akin to climbing Mount Everest. That we accomplished reforms to OAS that reflect the long-term public interest despite the short-term challenges involved was extremely rewarding.

.....
But Canada shares the reality that citizens are living longer and generally need to work longer as a result. As Mr. Morneau’s growth council has outlined in their report, for both good reasons and bad ones, Canada’s future economic growth will rely heavily on encouraging more Canadians to enter and remain in the labour force. Since the evidence demonstrates that pension eligibility is associated with earlier retirement, then delaying eligibility for OAS is one of the few levers the government can pull to encourage delayed retirement.

Before fortysomethings like myself feel too ripped off by the idea of working a few years longer, we should remember that our generation started our careers much later than our parents and grandparents, thanks to longer periods in education. Even if we retire at 70, most of us will still work less (in both absolute and relative terms over the life course) than they did.

When OAS was first introduced in 1927, it was limited to those 70 years and older who had little to no other income. Its purpose was quite literally to keep widowed women and war veterans out of the poor house in their final years of life. Nearly a century later, OAS is available at 65 and serves as a modest income supplement to the average senior for nearly 20 years. While a small minority of low-income seniors rely on OAS and the Guaranteed Income Supplement for financial security, protecting these vulnerable seniors can be achieved without offering unnecessary benefits to the broader cohort.

So it comes as no surprise that the Finance Minister’s advisory council has suggested the government recalibrate the age of eligibility for OAS to reflect modern realities. What is surprising is that the Liberals reversed course on this in the first place. Stephen Harper had already paid the difficult political price, and Canadians who would be impacted by the modest change beginning in 2023 had been given a decade to adjust.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...ticle33939854/

Quote:
Ottawa rejects recommendation to raise retirement age

A day after the federal Liberals’ economic advisory council recommended raising the age of retirement eligibility, the government is turning the idea down flat.

The council advised the government on Monday to raise the age at which workers can collect old age security and Canada Pension Plan benefits in order to keep people in the work force longer.

But Social Development Minister Jean-Yves Duclos says the government will stick to its election promise to set the age at 65 — a reversal of the previous Conservative government’s plan to raise the age to 67.


Duclos says moving back to age 67 would throw vulnerable seniors into poverty.

But he also says the government is looking at other incentives to keep workers in the work force longer, if they’re able and willing.

The growth council argued that raising the eligibility age would boost labour participation and add $56 billion to the country’s gross domestic product.

“We are not going to change that because we believe it’s important to protect our vulnerable seniors, those who find it impossible, for all sorts of reasons, to continue their labour force participation,” Duclos said after a cabinet meeting Tuesday morning.

“And second, we’re going to look very hard into ways to improve the incentives that other workers who are able and willing to continue their labour force participation can receive and benefit from in order to continue growing our economy.”

Recommendations from the growth council have had a lot of sway with policy makers in the past, and are expected to heavily influence the upcoming budget.

Reply With Quote
  #409  
Old 02-14-2017, 10:57 AM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 75,780
Blog Entries: 6
Default

UNITED KINGDOM

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017...e-pension-age/

Quote:
Brexit migration cuts could push state pension age up

ritons may have to work longer if immigration is cut in the wake of Brexit, according to a warning from the Government’s pension adviser.

John Cridland, a former CBI director reviewing the state pension age for the Government, said the “Brexit Factor” had made the future of the state pension uncertain.

The Government’s decision on pension changes, due in May, will be informed by Mr Cridland’s report to be published one month earlier.

New calculations reveal a “hard Brexit” in which migration is greatly reduced, could push up retirement ages, potentially forcing people to work well into their mid-70s.

Mr Cridland’s forthcoming report will be based on the latest Office for Budget Responsibility forecasts, which do not take Brexit into account, meaning it could quickly become outdated.

However, he told an audience at an International Longevity Centre conference that the future ratio of pensioners to working age people – a major factor affecting the cost of the state pension – was now “unpredictable” due to three factors: life expectancy, fertility and post-Brexit migration policies.

Projections calculated by actuaries at Hymans Robertson show a “hard Brexit” could result in the state pension age needing to be raised by 18 months for people currently under 40.

The calculations are based on projections by researchers at King’s College London which assume national insurance number registrations by migrants fall after “extreme” Brexit migration policy from around 600,000 to 140,000 in three years.

Eventually this would lead to over a million fewer under 70 paying the pensions of over a million more over 70.

Prof Sarah Harper, director of the Oxford Institute of Population Ageing, said: “The state pension may well have to be revised and this will come as a nasty surprise to many.”

Reply With Quote
  #410  
Old 02-17-2017, 04:09 PM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 75,780
Blog Entries: 6
Default

AUSTRALIA

http://www.econotimes.com/FactCheck-...d-world-539784

Quote:
Is Australia on track to have the oldest pension age in the developed world?

.....
As the government seeks to balance the budget and looks for ways to trim the social services bill, the Coalition has proposed raising the pension age to 70 by 2035.

The current eligibility age is 65 years, and will gradually increase to 67 years between July 2017 and July 2023. But what happens after then is up for debate.

The government has recently reaffirmed its commitment to a policy, first proposed in 2014, to boost the pension age to 70 between 2025 and 2035. This measure would affect people born after June 1966, and is yet to be legislated.

Labor’s Jenny Macklin said that increasing the pension age to 70 would mean that Australia will have oldest pension age in the developed world. Is that right?

.....
Macklin’s office has provided a good source (the OECD report) to support her assertion. But because her quote is making a prediction about the future, the situation is a bit more nuanced than may first appear.

......
The data suggest that if the Coalition’s measure were implemented, a pension age of 70 in Australia would indeed be higher than in any other developed countries.

But it’s not just Australia pushing up pension ages. Developed countries are continually legislating for higher eligibility ages. The trend has been around since the 1990s due to growing pension bills for governments, in part caused by increasing life expectancy, the increases in which are routinely underestimated.

It’s beyond the scope of a FactCheck to say with any certainty what will or won’t happen in the future – policy in Australia or other developed countries may change between now and then. But let’s see what the available evidence says about how things might look by 2035.

......
Since 2015, several countries have legislated pension age increases not reflected in the OECD data, including Germany and Canada, which will both increase it to age 67 by 2029.

The Czech Republic, for example, has also legislated to raise its pension age faster than the OECD reported. It will raise pension age to 67 by 2044 and by two months every year thereafter. Therefore, a Czech person who entered the workforce aged 20 in 2014 would be 69.8 when they could access the pension (just under our threshold of 70).

Countries that index pension age to life expectancy are also seeing their retirement ages go up. These countries include Denmark, Cyprus, France, Netherlands, Portugal, Slovak Republic and the UK.

Each nation that indexes their pension age has a slightly different formula to work out when, and by how much, it changes.

But given that people in the developed world are living longer and longer, it’s probable that a number of countries will have pension ages of 70 or above by the middle of the century.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
pension, retirement, retirement age

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:49 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.33220 seconds with 12 queries