Wednesday, April 8, 2015

New German "retire at full benefits at 63" numbers bad for the country?

Sorry, but the blogster has zero (0) sympathy for the kind of bread and no butter writing popping up now that German retirement at 63 is almost one year old.

To the credit of the writer of the linked piece as well as others like him and as a measure of humility: it is hard to get a deep sense of the subject you are writing about. We know, bro, been there, done that.

Those opposed to the conservative and social democratic German coalition's 2014 law allowing people to retire at full benefits at age 63 point to the latest German labor market numbers with a big: told you so.

For the first time in almost ten years, the number of Germans age 60 to 65 in regular "payroll tax eligible" employment is decreasing.

This drop correlates with the introduction of the law.

What does this mean?

Proponents of the law can praise it in one sentence: You need 45 years of contributions to social security in order to get full benefits at age 63, so deserve retirement, you worked for for it.

Opponents have a whole host of reasons to hate the law - not a single one of which acknowledging what it means to have worked for s steady 45 years when you turn 63.

Opponents point to the record employment level in Germany (at over 42 people) and to the "demographic change" (citizens are getting older) and say: older Germans can work, let them do so, it will benefit everybody.

Next in their mantra are: Experienced, often highly trained workers are hard to find these days anyway, the younger generations have to pay more in contributions to support those early retirees.

The association of Family Owned Businesses is clear about the effects of the law, saying the law entices the experienced workers we need to badly into early retirement.

Let's have a look at the opponents' arguments.

They can work, let them...
That one is true, but not universally so. The other day, a job counselor explained some of the difficulties of older workers in this succinct phrase: after 20 years at the assembly line, you are pretty much done. Secondly, the raw numbers of retirement at 63 do not include forced retirement by the government. As disheartening as it may sound: the German government can and does retire private sector workers at at 63 and with reduced benefits. It works like this: you become unemployed at, say, age 62 but have worked enough (26 or so weeks in the last year) to get unemployment. You do not find a new job, the government puts you on means tested benefits - and then you turn 63. The government can then retire you without recourse, and since you did not make it to 65, some of your benefits are lost forever (up to 14% or so).
The figure of people who applied for the full benefit at 63 package do not break out how many of these are being retired by their government.

Experienced workers are hard to find...
True in many sectors but by no means limited to that age group. Even inexperienced workers can be hard to find as we have seen just recently when a lady moved from six years of means tested benefits into a minimum wage job: her new employer treated her extremely well compared to the generic "old days" in German industry - because of a shortage of applicants.
Plus, in very small businesses, one or two workers of the 60 to 65 group are often highly independent uber workers who need no supervision at all, doing job planning and execution without so much as a peep and without extra pay. No wonder family owned businesses are complaining bitterly.

Younger generations have to pay more...
True, but again, there are finer points: old folks retiring today receive way less in retirement benefits than those who left the labor force even ten years ago. Retirement pay used to be tax free, it no longer is. Germany, the fourth largest economy on the planet, has reduced social security pensions to a level under the average European Union level.
What many companies really want is that old folks can continue to work without social security deduction. Which would not bring down the contributions of younger workers anyway.
Last year, the additional cost headlines warned of some 160 billion Euros of costs if the measure were signed into law. Only in the very small print did you find out that this was the projected cost for the whole first decade of the law.

Necessity can be the mother of invention, although idle time deserves as much credit, and it has been in the past.

Guess what happened after the plaque ravaged England?

Women did jobs previously reserved to men. That was forgotten later, and look how many centuries it took to get close to this open labor market.

Maybe German workers will benefit a little bit from their country shrinking, maybe they won't, after all, today you can just import cheap labor from as far away as you need.

The blogster recommends to those who have never worked in wind, rain, or sleet, in scorching heat or on high voltage power lines, in mines or near rock and bone crushing machinery: shut the f*** up when someone who has paid a consecutive 45 years of social security benefits gets to retire at benefit levels you would never accept for yourself.

No comments:

Post a Comment