Do Not Extend the Retirement Age Beyond 60

With reference to Mr. Upali Weerasinghe’s letter of 30.06.2025 [DM], I must strongly oppose his suggestion to extend the retirement age of all government employees beyond 60 on the basis of  “what is good for the gander is good for the goose”, citing the proposed extension for judges.

My seniors’ association is totally against this move. Here’s why: 

1.  It blocks promotions for the entire service. If senior officers stay 2 more years, those in line for promotion will be frozen at their current grade and salary point. This creates a promotion traffic jam from the top down, demotivating officers who have waited 25-30 years for their next step.

2.  It shuts the door on youth employment. With no vacancies at the entry level, thousands of young men and women who have just passed O/L or A/L will be denied quick entry to government service. 

3.  It breaks the original contract of service. When we joined the government, age 60 was clearly stated in our Conditions of Service. We planned our finances, housing loans, children’s education, and retirement obligations around that date. A mid-service change forces us to work 2 extra years without having planned for it.

4.  New points to consider: A.  Youth vs. Experience imbalance.  Govt already faces criticism for an “aging cadre”. Extending retirement will increase the average age, reduce fresh ideas, and slow down digital/digitalisation efforts that require younger staff.  

B.  Pension fund pressure: 2 extra years of salary + pension contributions delay payouts and increase the salary bill at a time when the Treasury is under strain. C.  Health & productivity: Many officers at 60+ face health limitations. Forcing 2 more years risks higher sick leave, lower productivity, and unfair workload on younger staff covering for it. Judges are a small, specialised cadre. Comparing them to 1.5 million public servants is not valid.

Retirement at 60 was the agreed rule. Keep it. 

Sumith de Silva 

[email protected]