They can accept, retire, or find another job. The concept of "partial retirement" seems to be widespread in Japan, in white collar jobs at least. People are rehired but return without their seniority, at the bottom of the pay scale, and work in a more limited capacity. The flip-side is that at 60+ the person being rehired is often happy to take the trade - reduced pay for reduced workload/responsibility/stress while still having something to do all day to make them feel useful.
The leverage will vary. If younger people are waiting in line to take your job who can do it better than you can then there's little option but to suck up it and take the pay cut or retire. On the other hand, I know shops that are desperate for highly skilled/trained personnel and would gratefully hire people 60+ at full salary. There are also teaching and consultancy positions. So, case-by-case I guess.
But... That's the whole premise behind this system. Old people are slower and less productive. If productivity is the same, how can they justify a pay cut??
Most guys I talk to do consulting via former clients who want them to continue taking care of things on the back end while still dealing with the former company on the surface.
Yeah we've got the same policy. There was an employee vote a few years ago to change it to 62 (mostly driven by HR who were tired of going through the approvals and contracts) which to my surprise failed...
I'm surprised that became a no, but i suppose some people just want the option of retiring earlier. Working up to 62 just means you work full-throttle up to 62 (as best as you can at that age anyway). Retiring at 60 and working at 50% capacity for 40% less pay sounds pretty good to a lot of people.
It's so hard to get away with putting minimal effort as a Seishain in most JP companies though. The peer pressure is so insanely high. Have you seen people at your company like that?
Varies by company, but absolutely. It really depends on the financial situation of the company as well as the balance of hires etc. I’d say the larger companies have a lot of space to fit into where people are just halfassing it
Agreed, bigger companies definitely. I think if it's obvious you're not putting in the effort, people at small companies will bully or at the very least shun you in a way that makes it very uncomfortable to be there lol
Would disagree on personal observation. Smaller companies usually have flater and laxer hierarchy which makes them less managed in personal goals etc. In the smaller places I was working it was usually setting 1 to 2 goals for the financial year and it you got there and made the minimum it was fine. There was no enforced flows and people tracking. At a bigger company review system with 6 goals per half year that are tracked and noted throughout the months on the system. And those aren't part of the daily usual workscope one has to deliver. If just slightly someone gets off track would be caught quickly by their next higher up/team leader and one would have to bring up a report analyzing why this happened and improvement steps (obviousy not for a very small thing). Those were all Japanese companies by the way.
1st one locally ~20 people (globally a few more under same owner who split into different businesses but barely related), 2nd ~30 people. HQ abroad with probably few hundreds of people but also pretty much independent from our operation. Big one without giving too much info, going into above 1000 with globally few presences.
> At a bigger company review system with 6 goals per half year that are tracked and noted throughout the months on the system. And those aren't part of the daily usual workscope one has to deliver. If just slightly someone gets off track would be caught quickly by their next higher up/team leader and one would have to bring up a report analyzing why this happened and improvement steps (obviousy not for a very small thing).
This is exactly how my big company does things; when I'm feeling cynical, I think it's a way to artificially push older workers who don't have promotion potential and aren't their managers' darlings out the door. Particularly the latter: when in your manager's favor, that manager will be instructing you on what they want you to learn; when you're not, you'll be given vague "you should be able to think of some goals yourself" instructions.
> You’re assuming that the Gen Xers in the average Japanese office aren’t already putting in 50% for 100% salary.
My experience is that these people are putting in 100% effort and getting paid 50% of what they're worth. And anyone who joined the work force before about 2015 was probably putting in a ton of unpaid overtime, too; it's only in the last few years that companies have done an about-face on that.
All the companies I've worked for (all of them global corporations headquartered in EU or US) had this in the employment rules. But I know one guy who escaped this dark fate:
It was in my previous company, he was an older American gentleman working as APAC IT Director based in Japan. He'd been there for at least 10 years so he'd long been downgraded from an expat contract to local employee. When he hit 60, HR came to demote him and cut his salary. He used his network at HQ to claim blatant ageism which is against the global company *feel-good* "diversity, inclusion and belonging" which was being strongly pushed for a couple years now.
He somehow managed to prevail with the following deal:
* stay employed until 65
* keep same salary
* change from manager track as director to individual contributor as principal, all his team was re-assigned to a newly nominated director based in India
* the whole deal had to be kept secret from other Japanese employees so as not to instigate a revolution
So yeah, I've seen it done, but only at a gaishikei and you'd better have a lot of political capital with HQ to pull it off.
Man, dudes an asshole. I understanding arguing for your own needs, but to actively hide your deal so others continue to work a bad deal unknowingly is such an asshole move.
Mr White Knight here.
Sorry but I’m pretty sure anyone in the same position would just take the money. The asshole here isn’t him, it’s Japanese and global HR making ageist rules that go against their own shiny ideals which they tout loud and high to the outside world “look at us! we’re an awesome progressive company” to get bullshit GreatPlaceToWork™ awards.
An "APAC IT Director" with connections to headquarters strong enough to pull strings that only privileges him above everyone else is not "just an employee". They are very much part of the upper echelons of the compant with the ability to accomplish far more.
That'd be like doing the good old woe be upper management trope.
Also, he signed the paper. Boohoo, he gets judged for the deal he signed.
It seems that age 60 is the mandatory requirement age that the majority of companies have set (it is the minimum age that they can legally set).
"But companies are required to keep the workers employed in some form until age 65 if the individuals wish. Since fiscal 2021, they also are required by law to make an effort to offer employment until age 70."
They can challenge it but I wouldn't expect anything. Your friend's company is already giving the workers a chance to work. The reduced salary is also probably due to a cut in hours.
I just did a brief search, but you can look more online by searching "Japan mandatory requirement age" and the laws related to it. Note that not all companies are required to have a retirement age, but it's super common.
It seems there was an amendment to the law in 2021:
https://www.asahi.com/sp/ajw/articles/14656889
https://hrmasia.com/japan-approves-law-raising-retirement-age-to-70/
You can search for the actual law online if you want to read it.
Not likely, since it was probably mentioned in the job offer contract.
The company I work at has a similar policy. Once 60, you get converted to contractor status and over 65, you would get a 25% pay cut, but you only have to work 4 out of 5 days of the week. I have never seen anyone over 70 at the company so I don't know what happens then.
Oh sure, if you are a productive type yes. Total ripoff. I am a Sr. Product Manager. I am definitely not interested in doing my current job for even 5 percent less.
But there are different types of workers. It probably makes sense for some.
Many companies with large numbers of mid level salary men will offer roles at 40 to 50 percent cuts.
There was a time when 60 was the traditional retirement age but that's fallen by the wayside because of labor shortages caused by the declining population and the cost of living keeping people working into their senior years.
That company is likely just exploiting the traditional retirement age and then hiring them back as contract or part-time workers as a way to cut costs. Your friend can inquire at the labor office or consult with an attorney but there's probably nothing that can be done.
Isn’t 60 way too young to retire in this day and age? Unless of course you have a solid pension and lots of interests / hobbies to keep you entertained.
This is common practice.
At my small private uni, faculty go till the March 31st after their 65th birthday. For the administrative staff, it's 60. That's not by 'contract', it's in the school rulebook (everyone was seishain). Faculty that are good, or that they like, get hired on till 70, if lucky, sometimes only 1-2 more years till they find a replacement. Same for staff, but I think they then only go to 65.
Another school I know of, it's 60 for everyone.
It depends on what you can offer. If you've built a career that you can leverage into consulting then consider that option instead.
If you've built a career that is mostly focused on one company and that is where a lot of your value is, then it might be the best offer you are going to get. Also depends on what your salary is... If you're making 20mil now then working a few more years for 12mil isn't exactly a terrible thing, you're still going to be making a lot more than you would with a pension. Of course if you're making 4m now then working for 2.4m looks a whole lot less attractive. You could make as much or more doing eikaiwa gigs.
> Of course if you're making 4m now then working for 2.4m looks a whole lot less attractive. You could make as much or more doing eikaiwa gigs.
Hopefully OP is making enough that this shouldn't be an issue, but minimum wage laws still apply for these kinds of jobs, so if you're making less than (100/60) of the minimum, they can't cut you all the way down to 60% of your old wage.
This is one of the rare times that the normalization of *minashi zangyō* can work in the employee's favor. Where I work, salaries are per month, but there is an internal calculation that assumes 197.5 hours per month: presumably 160 + (30 \* 1.25), where 160 is eight hours times 20 days, and 1.25 is the multiplier for the 30 OT hours). Until recently, Tokyo's minimum wage was 1013 yen, which looks like an unusually non-round number until you plug the very-round 200,000 yen per month into this calculation; you get 1013 per hour. Today, 220,000 yen per month gives us the current Tokyo minimum of 1113, though this time they're rounding down.
TL;DR if OP's friend lives in Tokyo and works full-time under these conditions, his wage cannot be lowered below 220,000 yen per month, so the company cannot enforce those rules if he is making less than 366,667 yen per month now. The national average salary of 4.5M yen per year isn't much more than this, which shows that ordinary people really can't afford to have their companies taking advantage of them like this.
I’ve known people who continue on reduced pay. However the clever thing is to switch companies if you can. Mid career is taking off here the last 5 years. A 60 yo may be a contract for a couple of years at best previous pay (assuming they weren’t an executive). A colleague of mine did this. Moved to a competitor and did the same job for same pay.
Sometimes there is an elite course where you can get a higher position but larger companies are aiming to reduce the number of high ranking oldies as much as possible mostly to give the younger staff a chance. If yoj reach 60 and still want to work there then strictly work only the hours and take all your holidays…
60 seems slightly earlier than other companies, might be able to negotiate for a few extra years, but ultimately I think it will depend on the type of company and their policy. I'd say it's generally unlikely that they would feel comfortable changing the policy for a single person.
No 60 is pretty standard. I am closing in on that age and I have older friends that have been through it. My own contract says I retire at 60, but the HR manager said they are looking into amending it. How they will amend it is another question. My wife works at one of the biggest companies in Japan and they also do 60 but changed their policy recently such that they assume you will be continuing as a contractor from 60 to 65 as opposed to you having to apply to do so.
Ultimately I’m pretty sure a lot of companies may still be willing to retain you full time if it’s actually worth it. A lot of the 60s at my partners company are not actually doing much work, just holding onto high salaries from bubble era and excess management positions that aren’t actually doing much. Apparently some will literally be sleeping at their desks half the time while the low salary standard employees work their asses off.
So if someone is actually still providing the value that their pay would mean the company may try to find a way, but most of the time they’re happy to cut costs
It's like elderly kindergarten. They don't really expect you to do anything productive but will keep you on salary.
I don't think there is another option. No corporation really wants to hire elderly so there's not so much room for negotiation.
Sure. They can negotiate; hopefully you’ve been productive at your job and have kept up to date on skills and such. I’m retirement age and my company had a ‘retire at 60’ provision, at which point I took a taishoku-kin and negotiated a 10% pay increase. I’ve also been offered lucrative jobs at very -very- good salaries at companies desperate for skilled workers in my field.
OP, can I ask your friend for a favor toward any subordinates he may have? At 59, and facing this gigantic salary cut, he's probably pretty angry, as my former boss was at age 59 in that position. My old boss was raging at the smallest things, screaming at subordinates all the time, slamming desks, and basically taking out his frustrations anywhere he could, which meant on anyone below him.
Eventually (around age 61-62, in his new department) he settled down and became buddies with his old co-workers again. But for about a year, he was a nightmare to be around. It's not these 59-year-olds' fault that the rules do this to them, and I wish the system would change.
Depends on his situation, but I'd advise planning around that being what happens. I've known a few different people who've basically mapped their long-term financial plans to the expectation they'll be getting less money from around 55/60. One guy made decently high level management but at 55 he'll be getting demoted to a lesser role with a pay cut. It was some sort of business continuity/planning thing.
First of all why would you or anyone want to work for that long? Do you want to hate your life or something? Lol
Retire in 30s and enjoy your life. Travel, take on hobbies etc.
They can accept, retire, or find another job. The concept of "partial retirement" seems to be widespread in Japan, in white collar jobs at least. People are rehired but return without their seniority, at the bottom of the pay scale, and work in a more limited capacity. The flip-side is that at 60+ the person being rehired is often happy to take the trade - reduced pay for reduced workload/responsibility/stress while still having something to do all day to make them feel useful.
My boss expects the same output and didn't take kindly when I suggested 30% less effort for 30% less pay.
Hmm. Time to find a new job.
At 60+...?!?
The leverage will vary. If younger people are waiting in line to take your job who can do it better than you can then there's little option but to suck up it and take the pay cut or retire. On the other hand, I know shops that are desperate for highly skilled/trained personnel and would gratefully hire people 60+ at full salary. There are also teaching and consultancy positions. So, case-by-case I guess.
In 30 years, that's going to be half the workforce.
There’s always the alternative of working as a consultant for dramatically more. That’s what the supposedly-retired guy in my team does.
Do not stay at this job.
Oh to hell with that.
But... That's the whole premise behind this system. Old people are slower and less productive. If productivity is the same, how can they justify a pay cut??
Don't say that part out loud. And take some knowledge with you that only you have
Most guys I talk to do consulting via former clients who want them to continue taking care of things on the back end while still dealing with the former company on the surface.
Your boss may want 150% effort and 30%. I want a Ferrari on my driveway. Your boss and I have something in common.
At 50++ I’d welcome any job!
Yeah we've got the same policy. There was an employee vote a few years ago to change it to 62 (mostly driven by HR who were tired of going through the approvals and contracts) which to my surprise failed...
I'm surprised that became a no, but i suppose some people just want the option of retiring earlier. Working up to 62 just means you work full-throttle up to 62 (as best as you can at that age anyway). Retiring at 60 and working at 50% capacity for 40% less pay sounds pretty good to a lot of people.
You’re assuming that the Gen Xers in the average Japanese office aren’t already putting in 50% for 100% salary.
It's so hard to get away with putting minimal effort as a Seishain in most JP companies though. The peer pressure is so insanely high. Have you seen people at your company like that?
Varies by company, but absolutely. It really depends on the financial situation of the company as well as the balance of hires etc. I’d say the larger companies have a lot of space to fit into where people are just halfassing it
Agreed, bigger companies definitely. I think if it's obvious you're not putting in the effort, people at small companies will bully or at the very least shun you in a way that makes it very uncomfortable to be there lol
Would disagree on personal observation. Smaller companies usually have flater and laxer hierarchy which makes them less managed in personal goals etc. In the smaller places I was working it was usually setting 1 to 2 goals for the financial year and it you got there and made the minimum it was fine. There was no enforced flows and people tracking. At a bigger company review system with 6 goals per half year that are tracked and noted throughout the months on the system. And those aren't part of the daily usual workscope one has to deliver. If just slightly someone gets off track would be caught quickly by their next higher up/team leader and one would have to bring up a report analyzing why this happened and improvement steps (obviousy not for a very small thing). Those were all Japanese companies by the way.
[удалено]
1st one locally ~20 people (globally a few more under same owner who split into different businesses but barely related), 2nd ~30 people. HQ abroad with probably few hundreds of people but also pretty much independent from our operation. Big one without giving too much info, going into above 1000 with globally few presences.
> At a bigger company review system with 6 goals per half year that are tracked and noted throughout the months on the system. And those aren't part of the daily usual workscope one has to deliver. If just slightly someone gets off track would be caught quickly by their next higher up/team leader and one would have to bring up a report analyzing why this happened and improvement steps (obviousy not for a very small thing). This is exactly how my big company does things; when I'm feeling cynical, I think it's a way to artificially push older workers who don't have promotion potential and aren't their managers' darlings out the door. Particularly the latter: when in your manager's favor, that manager will be instructing you on what they want you to learn; when you're not, you'll be given vague "you should be able to think of some goals yourself" instructions.
My company definitely don’t expect people to put in 100% at all
The term 窓際族 exists for a reason.
> You’re assuming that the Gen Xers in the average Japanese office aren’t already putting in 50% for 100% salary. My experience is that these people are putting in 100% effort and getting paid 50% of what they're worth. And anyone who joined the work force before about 2015 was probably putting in a ton of unpaid overtime, too; it's only in the last few years that companies have done an about-face on that.
All the companies I've worked for (all of them global corporations headquartered in EU or US) had this in the employment rules. But I know one guy who escaped this dark fate: It was in my previous company, he was an older American gentleman working as APAC IT Director based in Japan. He'd been there for at least 10 years so he'd long been downgraded from an expat contract to local employee. When he hit 60, HR came to demote him and cut his salary. He used his network at HQ to claim blatant ageism which is against the global company *feel-good* "diversity, inclusion and belonging" which was being strongly pushed for a couple years now. He somehow managed to prevail with the following deal: * stay employed until 65 * keep same salary * change from manager track as director to individual contributor as principal, all his team was re-assigned to a newly nominated director based in India * the whole deal had to be kept secret from other Japanese employees so as not to instigate a revolution So yeah, I've seen it done, but only at a gaishikei and you'd better have a lot of political capital with HQ to pull it off.
Man, dudes an asshole. I understanding arguing for your own needs, but to actively hide your deal so others continue to work a bad deal unknowingly is such an asshole move.
Mr White Knight here. Sorry but I’m pretty sure anyone in the same position would just take the money. The asshole here isn’t him, it’s Japanese and global HR making ageist rules that go against their own shiny ideals which they tout loud and high to the outside world “look at us! we’re an awesome progressive company” to get bullshit GreatPlaceToWork™ awards.
That's life amigo
It's amazing you'd rather blame the employee than the company
An "APAC IT Director" with connections to headquarters strong enough to pull strings that only privileges him above everyone else is not "just an employee". They are very much part of the upper echelons of the compant with the ability to accomplish far more. That'd be like doing the good old woe be upper management trope. Also, he signed the paper. Boohoo, he gets judged for the deal he signed.
It seems that age 60 is the mandatory requirement age that the majority of companies have set (it is the minimum age that they can legally set). "But companies are required to keep the workers employed in some form until age 65 if the individuals wish. Since fiscal 2021, they also are required by law to make an effort to offer employment until age 70." They can challenge it but I wouldn't expect anything. Your friend's company is already giving the workers a chance to work. The reduced salary is also probably due to a cut in hours. I just did a brief search, but you can look more online by searching "Japan mandatory requirement age" and the laws related to it. Note that not all companies are required to have a retirement age, but it's super common.
Hello. Source for the 70 age effort law please? Thank you.
It seems there was an amendment to the law in 2021: https://www.asahi.com/sp/ajw/articles/14656889 https://hrmasia.com/japan-approves-law-raising-retirement-age-to-70/ You can search for the actual law online if you want to read it.
Not likely, since it was probably mentioned in the job offer contract. The company I work at has a similar policy. Once 60, you get converted to contractor status and over 65, you would get a 25% pay cut, but you only have to work 4 out of 5 days of the week. I have never seen anyone over 70 at the company so I don't know what happens then.
Wow, 25 percent cut is pretty generous from what I hear.
But only a 20% cut in hours? Seems like a ripoff to me.
Oh sure, if you are a productive type yes. Total ripoff. I am a Sr. Product Manager. I am definitely not interested in doing my current job for even 5 percent less. But there are different types of workers. It probably makes sense for some. Many companies with large numbers of mid level salary men will offer roles at 40 to 50 percent cuts.
I’m going to go with “no”
There was a time when 60 was the traditional retirement age but that's fallen by the wayside because of labor shortages caused by the declining population and the cost of living keeping people working into their senior years. That company is likely just exploiting the traditional retirement age and then hiring them back as contract or part-time workers as a way to cut costs. Your friend can inquire at the labor office or consult with an attorney but there's probably nothing that can be done.
Public servants in my city have the same policy in place. That’s what happened to my former supervisor
Isn’t 60 way too young to retire in this day and age? Unless of course you have a solid pension and lots of interests / hobbies to keep you entertained.
This is common practice. At my small private uni, faculty go till the March 31st after their 65th birthday. For the administrative staff, it's 60. That's not by 'contract', it's in the school rulebook (everyone was seishain). Faculty that are good, or that they like, get hired on till 70, if lucky, sometimes only 1-2 more years till they find a replacement. Same for staff, but I think they then only go to 65. Another school I know of, it's 60 for everyone.
Does he get 退職金？ That can be a lot.
It depends on what you can offer. If you've built a career that you can leverage into consulting then consider that option instead. If you've built a career that is mostly focused on one company and that is where a lot of your value is, then it might be the best offer you are going to get. Also depends on what your salary is... If you're making 20mil now then working a few more years for 12mil isn't exactly a terrible thing, you're still going to be making a lot more than you would with a pension. Of course if you're making 4m now then working for 2.4m looks a whole lot less attractive. You could make as much or more doing eikaiwa gigs.
> Of course if you're making 4m now then working for 2.4m looks a whole lot less attractive. You could make as much or more doing eikaiwa gigs. Hopefully OP is making enough that this shouldn't be an issue, but minimum wage laws still apply for these kinds of jobs, so if you're making less than (100/60) of the minimum, they can't cut you all the way down to 60% of your old wage. This is one of the rare times that the normalization of *minashi zangyō* can work in the employee's favor. Where I work, salaries are per month, but there is an internal calculation that assumes 197.5 hours per month: presumably 160 + (30 \* 1.25), where 160 is eight hours times 20 days, and 1.25 is the multiplier for the 30 OT hours). Until recently, Tokyo's minimum wage was 1013 yen, which looks like an unusually non-round number until you plug the very-round 200,000 yen per month into this calculation; you get 1013 per hour. Today, 220,000 yen per month gives us the current Tokyo minimum of 1113, though this time they're rounding down. TL;DR if OP's friend lives in Tokyo and works full-time under these conditions, his wage cannot be lowered below 220,000 yen per month, so the company cannot enforce those rules if he is making less than 366,667 yen per month now. The national average salary of 4.5M yen per year isn't much more than this, which shows that ordinary people really can't afford to have their companies taking advantage of them like this.
Just curious what is the pay scale at age 50-60?
Pay is merit-based, so there's no simple answer to that.
I’ve known people who continue on reduced pay. However the clever thing is to switch companies if you can. Mid career is taking off here the last 5 years. A 60 yo may be a contract for a couple of years at best previous pay (assuming they weren’t an executive). A colleague of mine did this. Moved to a competitor and did the same job for same pay.
Sometimes there is an elite course where you can get a higher position but larger companies are aiming to reduce the number of high ranking oldies as much as possible mostly to give the younger staff a chance. If yoj reach 60 and still want to work there then strictly work only the hours and take all your holidays…
60 seems slightly earlier than other companies, might be able to negotiate for a few extra years, but ultimately I think it will depend on the type of company and their policy. I'd say it's generally unlikely that they would feel comfortable changing the policy for a single person.
No 60 is pretty standard. I am closing in on that age and I have older friends that have been through it. My own contract says I retire at 60, but the HR manager said they are looking into amending it. How they will amend it is another question. My wife works at one of the biggest companies in Japan and they also do 60 but changed their policy recently such that they assume you will be continuing as a contractor from 60 to 65 as opposed to you having to apply to do so.
Ultimately I’m pretty sure a lot of companies may still be willing to retain you full time if it’s actually worth it. A lot of the 60s at my partners company are not actually doing much work, just holding onto high salaries from bubble era and excess management positions that aren’t actually doing much. Apparently some will literally be sleeping at their desks half the time while the low salary standard employees work their asses off. So if someone is actually still providing the value that their pay would mean the company may try to find a way, but most of the time they’re happy to cut costs
Yes, most of the companies in my employer's group have upped the age in the last year, but not the one that employs me...
I think this is pretty standard.
It's like elderly kindergarten. They don't really expect you to do anything productive but will keep you on salary. I don't think there is another option. No corporation really wants to hire elderly so there's not so much room for negotiation.
Sure. They can negotiate; hopefully you’ve been productive at your job and have kept up to date on skills and such. I’m retirement age and my company had a ‘retire at 60’ provision, at which point I took a taishoku-kin and negotiated a 10% pay increase. I’ve also been offered lucrative jobs at very -very- good salaries at companies desperate for skilled workers in my field.
Completely normal. At my company, it’s 62.
I thought this was pretty typical. Honestly surprising they didn't start trying to push them to retire before 60 and rehiring at a lower rate.
OP, can I ask your friend for a favor toward any subordinates he may have? At 59, and facing this gigantic salary cut, he's probably pretty angry, as my former boss was at age 59 in that position. My old boss was raging at the smallest things, screaming at subordinates all the time, slamming desks, and basically taking out his frustrations anywhere he could, which meant on anyone below him. Eventually (around age 61-62, in his new department) he settled down and became buddies with his old co-workers again. But for about a year, he was a nightmare to be around. It's not these 59-year-olds' fault that the rules do this to them, and I wish the system would change.
Depends on his situation, but I'd advise planning around that being what happens. I've known a few different people who've basically mapped their long-term financial plans to the expectation they'll be getting less money from around 55/60. One guy made decently high level management but at 55 he'll be getting demoted to a lesser role with a pay cut. It was some sort of business continuity/planning thing.
First of all why would you or anyone want to work for that long? Do you want to hate your life or something? Lol Retire in 30s and enjoy your life. Travel, take on hobbies etc.
Oh my god, you’re right, why didn’t I think of that before?
Maybe because I’m *very* good at what I do and I enjoy it? I would hate to be in a job I didn’t like.