Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

The question - Pensions


The Government's Pensions Commission last week recommended that between 2030 and 2050 the age at which you can draw a state pension should be increased to 68.

Workers will also be taxed more so that state pensions rise in line with earnings rather than inflation.

What do you think?

Unpalatable, but necessary. What kind of a society would we be if we don't care for our grandparents?

Alex Pendleton, 34, consultant, London In our industry, manual workers' capabilities begin to tail off in their 50s, so how can we ask them to extend their physical working life beyond their current retirement age- Rather than forcing older people to work longer, the balance should be sought through much larger contributions that are mandatory in the private and public sector.

George Miezitis, 55, operations team leader, Fife.

I think that working longer before drawing a pension is a sensible way to solve the pensions crisis, and let's face it, the increase is pretty modest. But I do object to state pensions being means tested - if we've all contributed during our working life, we are entitled to expect a state pension.

Charis Fowler, 33, principal engineer, Derby Lord Turner's report findings do make sense, but the government should also encourage flexible working arrangements, such as job share, for people reaching retirement age. Reduced salaries could be subsidised from the pension pot.

Jonathan Fearnley, 32, manager, Nottingham I'm afraid that such measures are necessary, given that we live longer and expect a certain standard of living. At least Britain is brave enough to make that choice. Here in France, politicians are light years away from having the courage to introduce similar measures - like changing the fact that train drivers retire at 50.

Luc Koefman,35, windfarm engineer, France This government has a woeful record of making those already making fair provision for their future pay for those who don't.

With means testing and other mechanisms, the government appears intent on disincentivising individual responsibility.

Mat Toy, 40, principal engineer, south east England Before considering the prospect of retiring at 66, 67 or 68, it is worth noting that figures from the insurance industry give life expectancy of 18 years for those who retire aged 60, but only seven years for those who retire aged 65. In other words, working to age 65 instead of 60 shortens your life expectancy by six years.

So increasing the retirement age is not a stealth tax, it is a sensible economic step to prevent paying pensions for too long.

Paul Jameson, 51, head of highways, Worcester We all know of people who've had many job changes and reached their 50s without savings or a good continuous pension record.

The basic state pension is a safety net full of holes. Mobility of employment is a way of life for many civil engineers, but be sure you plan for your own retirement at an early age - after paying off your student loan, of course.

Philip Norris, 60, managing director, Tutbury

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Please note comments made online may also be published in the print edition of New Civil Engineer. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.