What should I do for the next few years before retirement?

So while I was off for a long break the company moved my role to a new team, nice manager but fierce enthusiastic. All sorts of mad ambitious plans. I just don’t have the energy. I’m 64 in a couple of months and the thought of a five year action plan leaves me cold!

I wasn’t asked, I was told, lots of new technical work and mention of courses and qualifications and doing new stuff… and travel to meetings in London and Europe and networking events I need to get stuck into and people I need to connect with.

I will break it to him gently and give him 2 months notice.

We’ve enough cash to cope until I get my pension and AVCs next year. With any luck I can get pay related unemployment assistance as well. Even if they make me wait 9 weeks that’s fine as it’d run out before my pension starts anyway.
 
Good move Annie, I am not too far behind you, (63 next May) and the thought of getting into something new at this stage just has no appeal. Mind, I really need to look at what I am going to do with myself with all this time on my hands
 
No chance of a payout. On principle they’d rather have someone sitting around doing nothing than write a cheque.

It did occur to me that the new boss was trying to scare me away. If so it worked… I’m outta here!

One course suggested costs thousands and I’d need time off to do it… actually reading that now maybe that was intended to get me to leave. lol… it worked… I could not face the thought of a classroom and exams, writing a dissertation would be the easy part. But a day a week out of the office might be nice. It’s a 10 grand course though like why would you invest that in someone my age?
 
Annieindublin said:
Even if they make me wait 9 weeks that’s fine as it’d run out before my pension starts anyway.
Click to expand...
Telling DSP/SW that you quit due to stress/burnout/fatigue or whatever will almost certainly mean that they won't defer your claim.

If you're not already on course to have the necessary reckonable PRSI contributions/credits for a full contributory pension at 66+ then see here.

Key Post - PRSI and planning retirement

This Key Post is in the form of a FAQ where I don't know many of the answers. I will update the post as I get answers. 1. PRSI payable on reaching state pension age Answer: 0 (Class M) 1a. Does this relate to the start of the tax year in which you become 66? Or to after your birthday? Answer...
www.askaboutmoney.com
 
But with the pay related job seekers benefit being relatively attractive the social welfare must know that alot more people are going to actively seek it than before when it was 220 per week. Therefore they probably need to take a harder line and enforce the rules. Maybe if you are in your 60s it could be different though. I notice that the unemployment rates have actually increased slightly, could this be one reason people are going for this new social welfare and dropping out of work for a bit?
 
Hey I’ll happily take on a new job, happy to demonstrate job seeking too… im just not happy in the job I have. Wayyyy too stressful. I could retrain… and while pay related benefit is supposedly 80% the cap means it is more like 20% for me…so not really that attractive. Not going to push me to choose under normal circumstances. But work isn’t normal for a lot of mature employees
 
Last edited:
joe sod said:
I notice that the unemployment rates have actually increased slightly, could this be one reason people are going for this new social welfare and dropping out of work for a bit
Click to expand...
Or it might have to do with the general economic headwinds.
 
Annieindublin said:
so not really that attractive
Click to expand...
My sceptical mind is telling me that JPRB will become a lot less attractive in the future.

The three nicely rounded off maximum payments were not increased in the last budget, when JB and other welfare payments were.

I reckon JPRB maximum payments will remain unchanged into the future.

Just like age tax credits, the 9k increase in the 20% tax band for married couples with only one working partner, capital gains yearly exemption and lots of other stealth tricks.
 
Last edited:
Fortune said:
don't think it's particularly attractive to anyone not living in the imagination of right leaning people
Click to expand...
Thats a load of baloney, it is well known that high social welfare rates act as a disincentive to work.
By the way im not being critical of the op, actually i think she is right to benefit from it, i could do the same myself.
I would have preferred the original jobseekers though than this new pay related one.
Thats why my point that they are probably going to be much more restrictive and enforce all the qualifying criteria.

If you qualify for pay related social welfare you are not going to be out there looking for a minimum wage job are you?

Therefore my point that it probably results in increased unemployment rates at the margins is valid.
 
joe sod said:
Therefore my point that it probably results in increased unemployment rates at the margins is valid.
Click to expand...
JPRB is not all it appears to be.

The rates taper off 3 times during the 9 months payments period.

There are no extra payments for dependant spouse and children.
This results in lower payments to many marginalised unemployed people when compared to JB.

JPRB only applies to people who are fully unemployed. A worker who suffers a reduction in working hours is only entitled to JB.

JPRB is an ingeniously thought out stealth scheme.
 
Last edited:
Robovac rider said:
JPRB only applies to people that are fully unemployed. A worker who suffers a reduction in working hours is only entitled to JB.

JPRB is an ingeniously thought out stealth schem
Click to expand...
So in effect it is reducing access ro jobseekers altogether, only if you are genuinely unemployed, (decided by your employer) are you really unemployed.
 
An employee whose employment has been forcefully reduced by their employer, for example put on a three day week, is not entitled to JPRB, but is entitled to JB.

An employee can still decide to fully cease their employment. These people are entitled to JPRB but may suffer a 9 week reduction to the payments period if they are considered to have ceased without good reason.

The introduction of JPRB has also interfered with the qualification rules for workers on short term contracts.

For example if a worker who meets the prsi contribution rules for JB takes up a full time employment contract for a period of less than 26 weeks, they may no longer be entitled to any form of unemployment benefit when their contract ends.

They are not entitled to JB because they are fully unemployed. (Before the introduction of JPRB they were entitled to receive JB)

They will not be entitled to JPRB if they don't have the necessary 26 class A contributions in the previous 12 months. They very likely won't meet this rule.

There was a very annoyed poster about a year ago who was caught out by this rule. They were ex public sector and had returned to a 3 month public sector contract. When the contract ended they were refused unemployment benefit.

The introduction of JPRB is a masterstroke in deception.
 
Last edited:
Annieindublin said:
Wayyyy too stressful
Click to expand...
From reading your thread Annie I think you should consider going to GP and getting certified off on stress leave. You could get several months and when you go back employer couldn't really force you off on some new training or meetings in Europe.

If they are suggesting all these changes to try and scare you off and quit they are playing games as well. So don't feel bad about getting a cert. + you're not as worried at your stage of getting a referral from employer.

I took stress leave last year from an employer who was messing me about and it was best decision I ever made.
 
Annieindublin said:
One course suggested costs thousands and I’d need time off to do it… actually reading that now maybe that was intended to get me to leave.
Click to expand...
Ridiculous strategy for someone retiring in a year. Where's the payback for them.

No sensible company or Manager would be suggesting this.
 
I think the new manage was spitballing ideas for how his new team might work, this was one of many suggestions and really the most ridiculous one. But at no point did anyone ask if I was interested in this. This guy loves a spot of networking and has never found a webinar idea he couldn’t embrace. Or a networking opportunity he couldn’t get into.

Which is fine, for him, but to blithely assume that I am interested in this is really poor form.

I’m waiting for the new job description. Not sure it’s in writing yet
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top