I had earlier thought of “quitting” writing about older persons. I may have burned-out readers who find no sense to worry about aging which is an inevitable process in life.
But the recent discussion of House Bill No. 206 about lowering the optional retirement age from 60 to 56 years among government workers get me thinking. Would this excite the majority of these workers at this time of economic uncertainties?
Perhaps, only those government workers of retirement age who are already free of financial obligations like housing loans, car loans, hospital bills, educational loans, and so on may opt for early retirement and enjoy life when the same benefits are extended when one reaches the mandatory retirement age. This is primarily the intention of the bill–to enhance their well-being without work-related stress.
The authors of the bill believe that government workers need more rest to live longer based on the premise that Filipinos compared to other nationals have a shorter life expectancy.
There is no more reason to work harder and wait until they reach 65 years old, particularly when they already served for at least 15 years. A good pension package is waiting for them to avail of earlier.
But this is not true for many of the government workers with lower ranks and most likely saddled with so many loans to pay.
More so, among those who are still supporting their children, even married, without a stable occupation and living with them. Some are also sending grandchildren to school and yet far from getting degrees.
This reality must be similar to the private sector where the monthly pay and retirement pension of workers are much lower than in the government.
So why do workers opt for the mandatory retirement? They have the urgency for regular source of income amid the fear of miserable retirement for lack of savings and meager monthly pension.
However, they have reduced their passion for the job compared to in the past. There is no aspiration to move up the rank but to earn and still enjoy work-related benefits. The meaning of work is lost because the worker either experienced burnout and unhappy but refused to retire early.
Nevertheless, those who enjoy their works and confident of wonderful retirement still enthusiastically perform their tasks and look for ways they could sustain their relevance.
The strategies include moving to other offices, if they have experienced burnout, where they could impact more the lives of others until they reach the mandatory retirement age.
Not retiring early despite the monetary benefits could be aptly called quiet quitting. I apply this term coined by Brian Creely (https://greekreporter.com/2022/11/21/rise-quiet-quitting/) because they stay but work only within the descriptions of the job within a prescribed schedule. They are unwilling to go beyond work expectations as long as they receive the corresponding pay.
It is not being lazy, but avoiding work-related stress to enjoy life even before retirement. Their colleagues explain this behavior: hapit na man gud siya mo-retire (He is almost retiring).
If a random survey would be conducted now, I hypothesized that not so many government workers may take the 56 years optional retirement age because of economic reasons. But they may be exerting less effort in work avoiding work-related stress, which is not good for the health of older persons.
Quiet quitting could be a coping behavior to some retiring workers, but this is contagious in a workplace if the symptoms are not being attended to by the management or administration.
_____________________________________
Author’s email: enriquegoracion@su.edu.ph
