You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.
Companies should encourage employees who work in a high position to leave at the age of 55 in order to give opportunities to the new generation.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples.
Model Answer 1:
I totally disagree with the idea of high-level employees leaving at the age of 55 to make room for the upcoming generation. While it is true that the energy level and fresh ideas of youth can rejuvenate a company, the steady hand of experience can still best guide a company in most cases.
In English, there is a saying, “You can’t teach an old dog new tricks.” In the fast-paced world of business, bolstered by even faster hi-tech innovations, a younger more pliant mind would seem to be able to adapt with greater flexibility, while such an environment might boggle an older more set-in-its-ways mind. Take, for example, Microsoft’s Bill Gates, whose energy and brilliant insights as a youth helped him to pioneer new territory in the computer software world and establish a digital empire. Now as a more mature CEO, this king of the “computer” mountain is constantly on the verge of being knocked down by upcoming digerati entrepreneurs. However, it is now the experience he has accumulated as an older man which keeps him on top. So, combining the vigour and innovation of younger workers with the experience of older workers would seem to be the winning hand in the world of business.
The assertion is to give opportunities to the younger generation. If everyone retires at 55, there will be a smaller pool of experience at the company. So, who will show them the ropes of the trade? It would be as if we lopped off the last few chapters of a textbook. On this point, the argument would seem to be built on false presumptions.
And think of all the other problems retirement at 55 would create. With life expectancy in many advanced nations at 70-plus years, how would the state along with private enterprises be able to support their retirement pensions? The economic repercussions of such an idea could be great.
Besides, the Western form of capitalism is built on competition and merit and not seniority according to age, and democracy is built on equality for all regardless of one’s age, so the argument clearly goes against these two pillars of Western society.
Granted, my counter-arguments are perhaps as simplistic as the original assertion itself, but without qualifying the assertion with greater supporting evidence or background information, both sides can be argued. Nevertheless, even after thoroughly considering the argument, I believe I would still adhere to my viewpoint that the assertion lacks merit for the aforementioned reasons. Besides, when I am 55 I do not fancy the idea of being put out to pasture. I think I will still be full of vitality and have a desire to work, so I hope my workplace will view me as a treasure house of valuable experience to pass along to the next generation and keep me on until I am at least 65 if not older.
(This model answer has been prepared by the site developer. However, please note that this is just one example out of many possible answers.You should be able to pick up the main points from this essay and organise in your own style)
Model Answer 2:
Unemployment is one of the leading problems in many overpopulated countries. Owing to this, few companies offer voluntary retirement services to the staff members above the age of 55. I strongly agree with the given statement. Offering positions for younger generation has major benefits. Firstly, the young people work faster, stronger than the elders, who are weaker and slower at work. Just as the companies which are based on labour work require stronger and healthy labourers. Secondly, they are competitive and creative work sectors which enable the projects to grow at a faster pace. Such as in IT companies most of the employees are under 55. Lastly, the selection of new personnel can reduce the problem of unemployment to some extent.
However, on the other hand, it is argued that older generation should be allowed to extend their services. They have experiences in particular kinds of work, in which the new staff may lack knowledge and proper experiences. For instance, many businesses require experience in particular field to compete with the opponents and they prefer experienced and aged people. Next, it could be insensible to terminate the honest and worthy members. Therefore most of them would like to continue with the old workers. Finally, they serve as the best resource of knowledge and skills, which is essential for the community survival.
Overall, it is clear that elderly contributes a lot to the companies. However, they cannot be extended to work for longer times. Therefore I believe that older generation needs to be replaced by the youth.
[ by – Mohana]
Model Answer 3:
There is a widespread belief that modern society should replace workers in the large institutions who already became 55. Some people are in favour of this viewpoint while many others oppose this idea. Some crucial arguments will be covered in this essay.
To begin, people over the age of 55 tend to get tired and exhausted extremely fast, therefore it can affect the quality of work they yield. Not only employees would feel exhaustion, but performance quality would also be significantly decreased. Moreover, advances in technology can engender some misunderstandings among workers. Commonly the majority of employees aged 55 and more can not domesticate new program on a computer or modern technological terms. In order to teach employees, these aspects companies have to contribute money and waste a lot of time.
Nevertheless, workers, who have been working for decades on a company, have enough experience to deal with hard responsibilities. Moreover, managers can easily rely on employees, who work for the same company for sufficient time. In addition, the qualified workers aged 55 plus are more dutiful than the inexperienced workers who have just joined the organisation. For instance, my mother does not confide important documents to young workers at work. Not only because of inexperience but also due to the fact that unskilled employees sometimes do not understand the importance of some assignments, they perform poorly. In professions like law, teaching, research people with decades’ experiences many times outperform the younger people, unlike the technological fields. In these areas, people should not be replaced as soon as they reach the age 55 since there are still many contributions those aged people can give.
To sum up, according to above-mentioned arguments I strongly disagree that new generation could alter employees aged 55 and more. Young society should try to work harder in order to achieve goals by themselves.
[ by – Alima Imanbayeva]
Model Answer 4:
Whether senior employees who are over 55 years old should be encouraged to take a retirement or not has aroused a contentious issue among concerning people. Despite the argument of some advocators that senior workers should be retired, it is my personal perspective that they are by no means inessential. The reasons for it are twofold.
Initially, senior employees, with their working experience, are necessary to strengthen the thriving development of companies. Indeed, on the ground of undergoing many years commitment in career, people cultivate and deepen their understanding about the specific field such as market segment, marketing strategies and competitions of the organisations they work for. Meanwhile, the young who may perform innovatively and dynamic working style, however, are seen deficiencies of true experience and need to seek for judicious advice from the elder. In other words, lacking such experienced people may put companies in jeopardies. Let‘s take Samsung electronic corporation as a typical example, no sooner did the company dismiss their contract with senior generations to replace by younger ones than they witness a considerable deterioration in their competitiveness.
Further and even more significantly, a soon retirement causes several social problems. Firstly, the sooner citizens take retirement, the bigger tax burden to existing worker. Irrefutably, when inhabitants are no longer working, they demand social welfare to survive, resulting in more major expenditure from government’s spending. Additionally, these days, thanks to the development of sciences and technologies, senior people could reduce pressure by applying modern methodologies to work. Besides, with better nutrition, employees at age of 55 are strong enough to be in charge of their positions.
By the way of conclusion, I once again reaffirm my opinion that organisations should continue hiring senior employees since it takes both companies’ stabilisation and social concern into consideration. Only by co-operating between the experience of the old with the creativity of the young, do organisation and society keep stable development.
[ by – Đông Nguyễn]
Model Answer 5:
It is in favour of the company to inspire the old employees to retire who are still working at higher positions at the age of 55.That will benefit the company as well as the employee. In my view, there are several reasons for which the old employee should take retirement at age 55.
First of all fresh talents will improve the production. Young employees are energetic and fast. They are inexperienced but they are capable of doing work with more dedication. Even some are so fast that they can do many tasks at once. Due to increases in technological usages and complexity companies are required for persons who have good skills and talents to run the company according to market demands. In my making company analytical calculation is done in excel sheet instead of paper and it is proven that young people are better in computing and other technologies compared to the aged people.
Moreover, it will improve cooperation in the workplaces. Employees have developed good relationships with higher authority due to prolonged years of working together, so they avoid working or do little and always seek favours of their boss. This is a hurdle in a workplace and it keeps away other loyal and hardworking people to progress. This will be ended by hiring new young employees at higher posts. The junior employees will more supportive and the young supervisors and management will readily coordinate him. At my son’s school, a newly appointed teacher got the award of the best teacher within two years and it shows the necessity of young workers at workplaces.
Finally, it is respectable for the employees over 55 years old to retire timely. With the increase of age, the mind will not remain as efficient and sharp. Employees start making mistakes and lag behind in their assigned tasks when they get old and as a result higher managements force them to retire. The person also becomes the victim of fellow employees and junior workers jokes like “slug doing work with speed” etc.
Finally, it is clear that company should make places for young peoples and encourage old people to retire. This will not only increase company’s production and cooperation but also will save respect for the old employee.
[ by – Tersem Bhadwal]
Model Answer 6:
Nowadays, many companies encourage old employees to retire to make up room for the young ones. The above point is certainly true; this essay will contain some reasons that support my suggestion.
First of all, the new generation has multiple advantages that outweigh the old generation, because the world we live in currently is based on the fast, frequently-generated technology. The new generation is more adapted to become updated with the modern releases of it. They master advanced technology and have greater energy to exploit than senior employees due to many aspects including the physical strength of each party. Plus they are more capable of rejuvenating their concepts as they are gaining experience. Moreover, young employees would have the opportunity, just like the older ones had theirs once in the past, to show off their skills to their boss. Eventually, by allowing the younger employee to become more involved in a beneficial way in their community, the spread of corruption would decrease gradually. As a result, the society will witness a great deal of sustainable economic production in the country.
Undeniably, old employees must have left an influential impact on today’s trade. And their achievements that had been accomplished in the workforce force should be appreciated after they retire. Therefore, responsible organisations should work on arranging educational centres and beneficial events for the retired senior citizens. They would fulfil their free time usefully and efficiently, like pursuing in their personal hobbies.
At last, our community is based on a mixture of various age parties. For each period of time, each party obtains heir right to possess an effective role in the society. However, commercial and big companies prefer young employee because they infuse the work atmosphere with lots of young blood.
[ by – Lama Al]
Model Answer 7:
Nowadays, there is a hot debate going on the topic whether the executive workers should retire at the age of 55 years or not. Though the senior citizens are respected by the society, in my opinion, we should give opportunities to the youngsters.
First of all, unemployment and overpopulation are some of the leading problems that the world faces in this era. When employers allow its employees to work after 55 years of age, it is, in turn, increases the unemployment. Because of overpopulation, many well-educated young people are wandering jobless. As a result of this, social evils like theft, crime, terrorism have raised in the recent few decades. Second, new generations are more productive and energetic. They can work enthusiastically and with greater aspirations. Moreover, the companies will get better output from their younger workers as they are mentally and physically strong. Thirdly, young people have new ideas and technical skills. Young people are not only adaptable but also flexible with their work. Even they can work longer time and shift duties. As middle-aged people are healthy there will be less absence from the work. In India, Government has made a law that those who work in the public sector must leave the job at the age of 55 years. This provides more opportunity for the newcomers in that country.
On the other hand, experience makes a man and overall society perfect. An experienced man might have gone through many hurdles and know how to handle the situation smoothly which a new employee often lacks. Another thing: a senior employee holding a higher position is financially well settled and most of his family responsibilities like children’s education, marriage has got over. Furthermore, most of the countries have a pension scheme for their senior citizens after their retirement. Lastly, senior people are unfit to work due to ageing and ill health.
Even though senior employees have more experience, in my view companies should encourage them to leave at the age of 55 in order to provide opportunities to the young generation.
[ by – Synu Jacob]
Model Answer 8:
Although the young workforce usually has the enthusiastic spirit and always keen for making changes, but I disagree with giving the higher positions for the younger stuff.
It is kind of common sense that the more you work the more you learn and the more your experience accumulates and letting go of older people at an early age like 55 is such a waste of valuable asset which is: experience.
I strongly support the idea of giving the young workers second-in-command posts or apprenticing positions where they can watch and learn from experienced staff and they might also be given an advisory role so we can mingle the expertise with enthusiasm.
On the contrary, I strongly believe that companies should give the experienced stuff stimulation to stay in order to harness their experience. On one hand, some may argue that retiring at the age of 55 will give the chance to the younger employees, but on the other hand, this will have many disadvantages: since leaving the work when being able to is a waste of capabilities, not to mention all the moneys that will be paid for social security in return for no work aside from leaving the job at 55 when taking into consideration the life expectancy in most of the developed countries which is in average 75 years is considerably low.
For the young people assuming high positions is regarded as a high risk, since they usually lack the experience and the know-how to handle the pressure these positions usually have.
In conclusion, companies should tap both the experience of the old stuff and the keen-spirited young through working side by side.
[ by – Ahmed Swidan]
Model Answer 9:
Nowadays, many organisations are still dominating by older employees. Some managers are ages 50s and above and still managing big companies even they feel some health problems. For this instance, other people believe that companies should require employees who work in a high rank to have early retirement at the age of 55 to give way to the younger generation.
In my opinion, I strongly agree that the person with high level in an establishment should give up work at the age of 55 in order to provide opportunities to younger people. Because new generations are more aggressive and brave to try and experiment variety of solutions to problems and discover new projects to contribute to the success of an industry, they always become the de facto for the success of a company. Young people are also more physically fit and less vulnerable to some illnesses, unlike to those who are old. Having a good health in managing business has a significant value in order to be productive and maximise the working hours of an employee. Furthermore, younger people are easy to jive on which is a good characteristic of a leader to promote harmonious relationships in an organisation.
However, old manager, although they are very experienced and competent in a running a business, are easily fatigued and cannot handle long time period of work that may result in decrease productions and output. They are also more prone to develop diseases related to age that may interfere and delay meetings and transactions. Moreover, their decision making is also old fashioned and they are afraid to discover something new and stick only in one baseline which may decline the improvement and popularity of a company.
In conclusion, institutions should urge people who work at a high level to stop working at the age of 55 in order to give the chance to the succeeding generation.
[ by – Princess Maidas]
Model Answer 10:
Nowadays the discussion about whether the businesses are supposed to prescribe the retirement age at fifty-five to offer more job vacancies for younger generation has become a controversy. Some believe that is a perfect attempt to support the young, others claim that this is not the case.
Admittedly, encouraging the workers to retire at age of fifty-five to release the positions for younger job seekers has some merits. Firstly, fresh graduates are likely to bring a number of practical and applicable ideas to meet the current needs of the organisation. This is because they have been instilled and imparted the most updated knowledge and skills at universities. Secondly, having a larger proportion of young adults could enhance the working effectiveness and efficiency. Compared with aged staffs, younger employees are often physically stronger and energetic which enables them to carry out heavy workload to meet the deadline.
However, sacrificing the senior members to save the young workers poses several negative influences. From a personal level, it fosters a sense of unfairness between the older and younger generations. It is undeniable that every person within the business enterprise has the rights to precede their work as long as they are capable of doing it, disregard the age and physical capacity. From a social perspective, massively forcing the early retirement would be one of the financial burdens of the local government. For example, sufficient pension payments and regular medical care should be given and arranged for the senior citizens after they have been imposed to terminate their employment permanently.
In conclusion, even though the introduction of the early retirement has some benefits, it is convincing that it would generate a sense of discrimination among different age groups and increase the government financial pressure accordingly.
[ by – Ice]
Model Answer 11:
While there are grounds to argue that it would benefit society and young people themselves, if companies choose youngsters for higher positions instead of their senior most staff, it can equally be argued that this would be an infringement on highly positioned older people’s rights as they are forced to retire from their jobs. Therefore, I do not completely favour the view that the older generation must fall back from their job positions for the new ones.
One argument in favour of selecting youngsters to the tertiary level is that it would benefit society. It is certainly true that there is a shortage of labour in many fields, and if young people get this positions more easily, then the staggering percentage of the workforce can be allotted, and which, in turn, reduces the unemployment issues up to an extent. In addition, young brains work more efficiently, and whereupon, organisations bring in remarkable profits. For instance, although there are middle-aged employees in IT fields, most of the IT field’s managements are likely to pick out young and proficient talents in order to achieve better results.
There is also, however, strong counter-arguments for appointing youngsters to management level positions and encouraging early retirement of top most employees. One significant reason is that the older people who are highly experienced will play a vital role in companies; this is due to the fact that the necessary skills for top level positions such as leadership skills could only be developed through firsthand knowledge, which could only be improved by the years of service. Besides, sending them away from their current positions are morally wrong because each and every company is obliged to have some commitments towards their workforce.
To put it in a nutshell, despite having real merits on both sides of the argument, I believe, the moral part against forcing older generation to retire early slightly outweigh the benefits of the younger generation. Hence, in my opinion, youngsters should get the experience thoroughly before attempting to acquire higher positions.
[ by – Syama Stephen]