SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Is 65 too old to stay at the helm of a major research center?
[...] Bréchot, who previously led INSERM, the French biomedical research agency, aspires to a second term, but he will turn 65 in July 2017. Under the governing statutes of the foundation that runs the Paris center, that disqualifies him for the renewal, Pasteur's 21-strong board of directors has concluded. Angered by the board's refusal to change the rules, Pasteur's General Meeting, a parliament-style governing body, dissolved the board in June. Now, Bréchot's future is in limbo.
[...] The board, which includes six Pasteur scientists, would not budge. Changing Article 12 would be a lengthy affair that requires government involvement and could lead to a complete review of the foundation's statutes to align them with those of other French foundations, says board chair Rose-Marie Van Lerberghe. That could damage Pasteur, she adds: For example, Bréchot earns a sizable salary but typical foundation statutes require an unpaid president, which would make it difficult to recruit a top candidate.
How old is too old for this job and others?
Would making the position unpaid like other foundation actually make it "difficult to recruit a top candidate"?
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/08/dispute-over-presidents-age-tears-pasteur-institute-apart
(Score: 3, Insightful) by bradley13 on Thursday August 04 2016, @04:14PM
Fixed retirement ages, like a requirement to stop working at age 65, is surely ageism? Discrimination based on age is supposed to be illegal?
It's all well and good if you are able to stop working at a certain age. Personally, I intend to "retire" by working less in a few years. But stop completely? Whatever for, if you like what you do, and are able to continue?
"...and are able to continue", aye, that's the rub. Sometimes the person themselves may not realize that their performance is no longer what it once was. That's where the people around them, specifically, the people hiring them, must be honest.
Which was it in this case? Stupid regulations saying "65 is a magic number"? Or a board that is using these regulations as a way of telling the guy that it's time to move on?
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 04 2016, @04:41PM
"...and are able to continue", aye, that's the rub.
As a 52 y/o aspiring porn star I agree that ageism should be banned. And I can continue (up to four hours according to my prescription).
(Score: 3, Insightful) by JNCF on Thursday August 04 2016, @04:52PM
Sometimes the person themselves may not realize that their performance is no longer what it once was.
And even then, their past-prime state may be better than many individuals' peak performance.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by bob_super on Thursday August 04 2016, @04:56PM
> Discrimination based on age is supposed to be illegal?
France has rules to push old geezers out of top positions and clear the room for younger people (using the logic that old geezers should enjoy their retirement benefits instead of keeping younger people from rising up or straight unemployed).
That's the kind of discrimination that gets made legal by evil left-wing people when your unemployment stays stuck around 10% (not he same math as the US).
(Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 04 2016, @09:41PM
OK, but we're not talking about France.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 04 2016, @09:43PM
and I think this is exactly the sort of situation that they wanted to avoid, with a geezer holding on to a ruling position.
while it's true that for scientists a lot of productive work can take place after 65, I really think they should only be allowed to be the equivalent of postdocs if they insist on doing research.
they should definitely not be allowed in a decision making position.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by DeathMonkey on Thursday August 04 2016, @05:49PM
I was going to point out that in the US (my understanding was) it's illegal.
But when I went to grab a reference I noticed this on the Wikipedia entry for the Age Discrimination in Employment Act [wikipedia.org]:
Mandatory retirement based on age is permitted for: Executives over age 65 in high policy-making positions who are entitled to a pension over a minimum yearly amount.
So it looks like it's kosher here, too. TIL.
(Score: 3, Informative) by subs on Thursday August 04 2016, @06:49PM
By international agreements, all commercial pilots over the age of 65 are subject to mandatory retirement. And that's a good thing.