Originally Posted by
km101
I figure this whole pension/retirement issue is going to explode soon, not just for AC, but for all employees.
We live longer and hope to retire sooner while maintaining the same or better lifestyle that we have while working.
While I agree that we all want to live as long as possible, we cannot expect a company or government to pay our expenses for 20, 25, 30 years of retirement.
Think about this scenario. You work at 1 company starting at 30 and work there for 30 years, retiring at 60. you might reasonably expect to live till 75. Will 30 years of pension contributions cover you for 15 years of payments????
Companies are not expanding, the population of Canada is not growing as it once did. People are not having 3-6 kids to replace older workers. Something will have to give.
Just something to think about.
There is a moral principle being overlooked here.
If I hire a person with a specialized skill then I expect certain things from that person and vice versa. If that was a pension and then 10 yrs down the road I suddenly reneg on the committment I made to that person when I hired them, I wouldn't blame them all if that person then sought damages for the lost opportunities that they could still have with a competitor.
I don't offer a pension so the situation is rhetorical, but I do understand that folks with specialized skills do make sacrifices and leaps of faith when making a long term committment to company or institution. Maybe the chemist would have pursued a accounting degree instead if they knew how replaceable or redundant they were or would have gone to my competitor? If everybody thought that way (renegging on the initial obligation) then I wouldn't have been able to hire the chemist in the first place. They would have cost me a lot more or there wouldn't be any quality ones available - they'd have all switched their majors to be dime a dozen accountants or finance types.