It is important to maintain the vitality of an organization while treating its veteran members properly.
In a Cabinet meeting, the government decided on a bill to revise the National Civil Service Law, among others, to extend the retirement age of national civil servants to 65 in fiscal 2030. To do so, the current age, which is 60 in principle, will be raised by one year every two years.
Amid the low birthrate and aging population, it is understandable that the government aims to create an environment in which people with the ability and desire to work can do so for longer periods. It is also a response to the gradual increase in the starting age of public pension payments to 65.
In the private sector, 20% of companies have extended the retirement age to 65, while 80% have introduced a continuing employment system. The government has submitted a bill to the current Diet session calling on companies to secure employment opportunities for those aged up to 70.
It is appropriate to extend the retirement age of public servants in line with moves by private companies.
Currently, civil servants who are over 60 years old are reappointed, but most of them work shorter hours. The reality is that they cannot fully utilize their abilities or experience.
With the extension of the retirement age, the nature of the civil service itself will have to change.
The revision bill includes the introduction of an "executive age limit system," under which those turning 60 are not allowed to hold managerial positions, such as director general or section chief. They will be transferred to nonmanagerial positions, including specialist staff or assistant section chiefs.
If the opportunities of promotion for mid-career and younger employees are reduced, it might lead to a breakdown in morale. It is appropriate to decide a point at which top officials should retire from the front line.
There will be more cases in which seniors eventually become subordinates of their junior colleagues. In a bureaucratic organization with a strong seniority system, many people who fail to get promoted often leave before the retirement age. Each ministry and agency should revise these practices.
It is necessary to thoroughly evaluate employees based on their abilities and performance, and to make appropriate personnel assignments regardless of the year when they joined the organizations.
To keep the age structure from becoming unbalanced, it is necessary to maintain a certain level of fresh hiring. Thus, a temporary expansion of the total employment quota will be inevitable.
Although the government plans to cut pay to 70% for those aged over 60, total personnel expenses are likely to swell. It is feared that the burden on the public will increase. It is essential to keep labor costs down as much as possible by revising the wage curve of public servants.
The bill also calls for raising the retirement age for public prosecutors, which is stipulated in the Public Prosecutors Office Law, from 63 to 65.
In January, the government extended the retirement age for Hiromu Kurokawa, superintending prosecutor at the Tokyo High Public Prosecutors Office, who was soon to turn 63, as an exceptional case.
The government insisted that the move was necessary for the execution of the prosecutor's duties. However, its explanation of the background to the decision has changed again and again, which has brought about distrust from the people. The government must carefully provide an explanation.
-- The original Japanese article appeared in The Yomiuri Shimbun on March 15, 2020.
Read more from The Japan News at https://japannews.yomiuri.co.jp/
