Retirement is predetermined factor that starts on the day one when one joins some service or the other as a source of sustentation. Once this age used to be 55 in government undertakings, was extended to 58 and then in certain undertakings it was raised to 60. This rise was mainly based on health rate in the country getting better and it was logical to conclude that with a better state of health it was possible for the employees to perform more efficiently. The considerations that worked for raising the retirement age earlier changed to a different dimension later assuming a politically based criterion or in other words a vote oriented measure.Work is a must for all and any better performance workwise is possible with good health only unless there are undue accommodations. Various trade unions representing workfore in different undertakings have been raising a demand for quite some time that the age for retirement be extended beyond what it is today and they are correct to a considerable extent in the sense that theirs is not a demand to accommodate individuals but allow a legitimitately eligible class of workforce otherwise found physically fit.Central Government indicated only sometime back that the age for retirement of Central Government employees is to be raised to 62 which deci
sion was obviously hailed from different quarters of the workforce. Their jubilation was however shortlived as it didn't take much time for the system succumbing to political pressures and clarify that there was no such decision. They ofcourse gave feelers that the view earlier taken was likely to affect the unemployed youth of the country.It is all a number game. Strengthwise the people eligible for benefit of extension in age are far behind compared to current unemployed generation who obviously count much from votes point of view. OK if you talk of health, performance, efficiency or any factor that counts for nation's development but to opt for a basis that works as a vote catching device is neither fair not honest by any measure.