My Turn: Retirement Delay Syndrome

Judge Alvin Hellerstein of the Southern District of New York is 92 years old and, according to a recent New York Times article, prone to nodding off during trials. Among his current cases is the prosecution of Venezuela’s leader Nicolás Maduro, which has extraordinary importance internationally. Several members of the Supreme Court are in their 70s, with Clarence Thomas the eldest at 76. NBC reports that 24 members of Congress are 80 or over and more than half of those are running for reelection. In June President Donald Trump will turn 80 and, like Judge Hellerstein, he is reported to fall asleep during White House meetings.

The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) of 1967 prohibits applying age as a negative criterion in hiring, firing, pay, promotions and other work-related actions. The law permits exceptions when there is a “bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ) reasonably necessary to business operations.” In addition, the ADEA does not protect elected officials, their staff or appointees. Persons involved in safety related work, like pilots, police and firefighters, also are not protected.

As a country, we have chosen to allow many other individuals to exercise free will when it comes to retirement. In the absence of these protections, aging workers were subject to every manner of bad treatment. The downside is that some individuals will put off their retirement past the point that they have started to experience the limits of aging, which is especially troublesome when they hold positions of power for which cognitive clarity is essential. They suffer from what we might call Retirement Delay Syndrome (RDS).

The critical question is, what gets in the way of individuals making the leap into retirement? For some, it is just not economically feasible to lose a regular paycheck. But for many others it is the negative view of retirement that discourages them from moving away from work. Although ending a lifetime of employment is sugarcoated as a time for leisure and freedom, it is all too easy to see retirement as the beginning of the end. Economic insecurity, physical and cognitive decline, loss of friends and family, isolation — these are all worries on the mind of anyone contemplating retirement.

These concerns are entirely appropriate for the average citizen and the best way to address them is to take them one at a time and find good solutions. However, none of these legitimate worries explain the decision of political and judicial figures to remain in office. They are addicted to the power and prestige that comes with their positions. Unless the electorate votes them out of office or term limits are passed by Congress (unlikely), they will remain on the public dole right to the point that disability makes it impossible to masquerade as still active. There has to be a public movement to force politicians and judges to limit their careers and get out the way for new generations of leaders. A good start is to support those who explicitly advocate for term limits and/or mandatory retirement. Voters also can demand independent evidence of competence.

My great grandfather was the first Dean of Letters and Sciences at UCLA. As he neared what was at the time a mandatory retirement age, he told his students that he didn’t feel old or infirm. He also said that he might be experiencing the illusion of the long-distance runner who is convinced they are rapidly closing in on the finish line when they are, in fact, just “bobbing up and down.” He admitted that the university’s rule was sensible. I wish our politicians and judges had his wisdom.