Project Management Central

Please login or join to subscribe to this thread

Should employees who are to retire soon have access to development programs?
Network:1808



Some of them might show desire to get training, Please comment.
Sort By:
Page: 1 2 next>
Network:4089



Riyadh for my point of view, yes they require training in field they want to be adopted after retirement. Some organization do have these type of facilities provided to their employees.
...
1 reply by Riyadh Salih
Jan 03, 2018 2:30 AM
Riyadh Salih
...
Thanks Mansoor
Network:907



I assume that you are referring to development programs internal to, or funded by the company they work for.

a) When is 'soon'? If soon refers to a few months then it is unfortunately not seen as a good investment by the company since they will not get much in return.

b) It is quite common for retired skills to be contracted back after retirement in order to retain some knowledge for longer, especially when it is a sought-after skill. If there is a possibility of this then they should definitely be included in development programs.

c) If it is internal it is often beneficial to have them involved since they can contribute a lot about what to do, not do based on experience.

If their desire for development has nothing to do with the company they currently work for then yes, no matter what your work status, access to further development should always be available and used if possible.
Network:1808



Hi Anton, Thank you for your response which shows that you have addressed this case in more details;one side the company looks at high investment on those development programs expecting long term, high return and on the other side it is an Ethical question on how to handle that situation. Not all company offer contract after retirement nor half time job sharing to retain expertise through succession plan.
However, for compliance to keep the license updated of course they have to be included in the program but for specialized skill development it is questionable or even objectionable by most companies.
...
1 reply by Anton Oosthuizen
Jan 03, 2018 2:46 AM
Anton Oosthuizen
...
Ethics is always a difficult subject and as far as development is concerned I believe that the company has no ethical obligation, except of course if it committed to do so.

The question of retaining certification brings yet another dimension in. Certification is not only for the benefit of the employee but also for the company since most use the certification (skill level) of their employees to land contracts.

If a company decides not to invest in the development of a resource for whatever reason then ethically they also cannot use 'self-development' or expired certifications as leverage for garnering business.

If we must address the ethical question then I would say that development that contributes towards to job-related certification should be kept going until the employee no longer works for the company.
Network:1808



Jan 03, 2018 12:06 AM
Replying to Mansoor Mustafa
...
Riyadh for my point of view, yes they require training in field they want to be adopted after retirement. Some organization do have these type of facilities provided to their employees.
Thanks Mansoor
Network:907



Jan 03, 2018 2:30 AM
Replying to Riyadh Salih
...
Hi Anton, Thank you for your response which shows that you have addressed this case in more details;one side the company looks at high investment on those development programs expecting long term, high return and on the other side it is an Ethical question on how to handle that situation. Not all company offer contract after retirement nor half time job sharing to retain expertise through succession plan.
However, for compliance to keep the license updated of course they have to be included in the program but for specialized skill development it is questionable or even objectionable by most companies.
Ethics is always a difficult subject and as far as development is concerned I believe that the company has no ethical obligation, except of course if it committed to do so.

The question of retaining certification brings yet another dimension in. Certification is not only for the benefit of the employee but also for the company since most use the certification (skill level) of their employees to land contracts.

If a company decides not to invest in the development of a resource for whatever reason then ethically they also cannot use 'self-development' or expired certifications as leverage for garnering business.

If we must address the ethical question then I would say that development that contributes towards to job-related certification should be kept going until the employee no longer works for the company.
Network:1514



My point of view is that they need training as much as other employees in the organization. Perhaps the subject of the training may be different, but the need is the same.
Network:13462



It would depend on the value the development program has to both the employee and the company, and the time remaining until retirement, as there are diminishing returns for the company closer to retirement.
Network:1808



Sante, I liked your views that you have linked this on to the Law of diminishing returns.
Network:1013



Riyadh -

Should they? If it aligns with their development objectives and the company stands to benefit from this learning, then it becomes a cost/benefit decision. At least in North America, a lot of folks aren't retiring out right at the "normal" age, but continue to work part-time at least for a few years - if so, the company stands to benefit from their experience if they show them some consideration.

Kiron
Network:1529



yes
Page: 1 2 next>  

Please login or join to reply

Content ID:
ADVERTISEMENTS

"Always carry a flagon of whiskey in case of snakebite and furthermore always carry a small snake."

- W. C. Fields

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsors