Pensioner's dole
Sir: The SPECTATOR appears to be one of the few publications willing to give an airing to a possible injustice being done to a minority group without voting influence. I would, therefore, like to draw your attention to a recent report, including recommendations, published by the National Insurance Advisory Committee.
Basically, the main recommendation will withhold unemployment benefit from anyone retired on an occupational pension at fifty-five unless he has satisfied a special test by working for twenty-six weeks in employment which demonstrates his intention of continuing to fol- low regular employment. The report says that there is extensive criticism based on the view that people who have retired with substantial pensions, especially when living at the seaside or in the country, have really left the employ- ment field, and that many who claim benefits have no real intention of taking another job. I do not know the concrete evidence on which the committee has based its findings and recom- mendations, but as one who has just retired from the Royal Navy in flag rank I must pro- test, and I am sure there must be many with occupational pensions who feel as I do.
I base this protest on two counts: first, that the withholding of this benefit is unjust, and second, that the difficulties of finding employ- ment at the age of fifty-five or over appears to have been completely ignored by the committee.
With regard to the first point, the so-called occupational pension is part of the terms of employment and is taken into account when determining the rates of pay and general con- ditions of service. The person compulsorily re- tired at the early age of fifty-five who may still have considerable family commitments suffers a marked drop in his income. He has qualified for unemployment benefit and is subject to the same rules for drawing it, including the length of time for which it may be drawn, as anybody else. The decision whether to forego the benefit or not should be a matter for the individual.
I believe, however, that the major problem is the second one. I find it hard to believe that there are large numbers who have been compul- sorily retired round about the age of fifty-five who have no wish to continue working. At the age of fifty it is difficult enough to be accepted and at the age of fifty-five the barrier is virtu- ally impassable. The irony of the situation is that one is worse off by having been successful in one's originally chosen career, thereby achiev- ing successive promotions and with them com- mensurate length of service.
I believe that the national interest would be best served by continuing to use the talents of these 'occupational pensioners' which, I am sure, is what the vast minority wish, rather than by taking up parliamentary time to introduce yet another piece of discriminatory legislation.
Previous page
