“Let them rest, worship, spend time with their families, and enjoy their remaining years; the younger generation should be given the space to carry on the nation’s development.”
– Hasrol Husain, content creator
THE recent proposal by Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform), Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said, to raise the retirement age for civil servants from 60 to 65 has received a backlash from the younger generation, particularly newly graduates.
Should we keep older workers longer in the system or make room for the youth eager to enter the workforce?
Azalina’s argument may seem reasonable; after all, many Malaysians today live longer, healthier lives. She suggests that keeping older civil servants employed would not only help them remain economically productive but also give them more time to boost their pension savings. But scratch beneath the surface, and the cracks begin to show.
Critics, including economists, youth leaders, and ordinary Malaysians, have rightfully pointed out that this move could block job opportunities for younger workers, strain public resources, and force ageing employees to stay in the workforce against their physical and mental will.
This is not just a matter of adjusting a number on paper. It’s a decision that carries serious socio-economic implications, especially in our country, where the youth unemployment rate is already hovering around 10 per cent, which is a stark contrast to our overall unemployment rate of about 3 per cent. And in this context, Azalina’s proposal risks doing more harm than good.
Malaysia officially became an “ageing nation” in 2020, when over 7 per cent of our population crossed the age of 60. By 2030, we are expected to reach “aged nation” status, with 15 per cent of Malaysians in that bracket.
This demographic reality is not unique to us. Countries across the globe, from Japan to Germany, are facing similar shifts. However, their strategies in dealing with the ageing population are often backed by stronger welfare systems and a more flexible labour market.
Let’s not kid ourselves! Most Malaysians grow old long before they grow rich. While the idea of remaining productive into one’s 60s might work for professionals in air-conditioned offices, what about teachers, enforcement officers, nurses, and clerks who face the daily physical grind?
The reality is far less rosy. Many civil servants I’ve spoken to say that by the time they hit 55 or 60, they’re already struggling with chronic conditions, fatigue, and a general decline in stamina. Extending their working life by another five years may only exacerbate these issues.
As one retired police officer told the South China Morning Post, “Sixty is a time to hand over power and responsibility to those who are younger. Enough is enough.”
Azalina argues that 60-year-old Malaysians are still “fit and able”. But this is a sweeping generalisation that ignores the health aspect in ageing populations.
According to the World Health Organisation, one in three individuals over the age of 60 faces some form of physical limitation. Many suffer from non-communicable diseases like diabetes, hypertension, and heart conditions; issues that significantly hamper workplace productivity.
In fact, anecdotal accounts from civil servants reveal a rising trend of employees in their 50s routinely taking medical leave or requesting reduced workloads due to health issues. If we force them to work until 65, we may not only see a decline in efficiency but also place greater stress on the healthcare system and workplace dynamics.
Perhaps the most pressing concern with raising the retirement age is its potential impact on youth employment. Malaysia produces more than 300,000 graduates every year, many of whom face long periods of underemployment or joblessness.
According to the Malaysian Youth Council, the increase in retirement age from 55 to 60 in 2013 was linked to the loss of nearly one million job opportunities for new entrants into the workforce.
With the job market already tight, pushing the retirement age further risks locking out even more young people. These are individuals who are full of ideas, skilled in the latest technologies, and hungry to make a mark. Keeping older employees in their positions longer stifles this pipeline of talent and delays leadership renewal.
Critics of Azalina’s proposal, including the Malaysian Youth Council, have described it as “lacking sensitivity towards the realities of the generation gap”. The council rightly points out that raising the retirement age is not just about whether someone can work, it’s about whether doing so creates a just and fair economic environment for all segments of the population.
Let’s talk money. Malaysia spends a staggering RM32 billion annually on civil service pensions. Increasing the retirement age could further inflate this figure.
While supporters of the proposal argue that longer employment could mean increased contributions to pension funds, this theory doesn’t hold up when juxtaposed against the cost of higher medical claims, seniority-linked salaries, and the broader fiscal burden of sustaining an ageing civil service.
Unless accompanied by comprehensive reform to the pension system, healthcare subsidies, and performance-based assessments, raising the retirement age could backfire economically.
To be fair, the argument for longer working lives is not entirely without merit. In a column titled ‘Is 65 the New 40?’, academic Dr Siti Munirah Mohd Faizal Lim points out that Malaysians are living longer and may require extended employment to maintain financial security.
She cites the example of global figures like Warren Buffett, 93, and our own Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, 77, as proof of the power of age and wisdom.
Her argument is also backed by data. A report from Khazanah Research Institute revealed that only 36 per cent of EPF members meet the minimum savings threshold of RM240,000 by age 55. Given that Malaysians’ life expectancy is nearly 80 years, many retirees face the frightening prospect of outliving their savings.
In this context, some older Malaysians do want to continue working. But that is precisely the key: it must be a choice, not a mandate!
Dr Siti suggests a more balanced, voluntary, and health-based approach, where retirement can be flexible depending on one’s health, productivity, and willingness to continue working. Such a model allows experienced workers to contribute meaningfully without blocking opportunities for the young or placing additional burdens on the system.
It is time to reframe the conversation not as a binary between young versus old, but as a multi-generational collaboration where older employees are encouraged to mentor, coach, and share institutional wisdom with younger workers before they leave the workforce. This is how we build continuity, not redundancy.
We also need to foster a new workplace culture where succession planning and knowledge transfer are built into the structure of public institutions. Instead of holding on to senior roles until the last day, experienced civil servants should be incentivised to prepare younger colleagues for leadership through structured transition plans.
Ultimately, this debate should not be clouded by sentiment or isolated examples of ageing billionaires and political leaders still in office. We must look at the averageMalaysian and craft policy that reflects the lived reality of our people.
Policymakers should consult stakeholders’ youth organisations – labour economists, healthcare professionals, and of course, the civil servants themselves – before making a blanket decision. A policy that affects millions of Malaysians cannot be pushed through based on anecdotal evidence or demographic panic.
If the government wants to address the ageing population issue seriously, it must do so holistically, which is by investing in age-friendly infrastructure, improving pension adequacy, encouraging flexible work arrangements, and supporting job creation for both old and young workers.
Raising the retirement age to 65 may appear to be a progressive policy on the surface, but for now, it feels like a quick-fix solution that risks deepening existing problems. Yes, some older Malaysians are still able and willing to work, and they should be given the opportunity to do so.
However, making this compulsory across the board, especially in a civil service already grappling with bloated staffing, stagnant wages, and sluggish digital transformation, is a step in the wrong direction.
Instead, the government should aim for a flexible, dignified retirement system; one that empowers older workers without paralysing the dreams of the young. After all, sustainable growth must include opportunities for every generation, not just the one clinging on to its last pay cheque.
The views expressed here are those of the columnist and do not necessarily represent the views of Sarawak Tribune. The writer can be reached at rajlira@gmail.com