(de-news.net) – In the ongoing discussion of extending working life for civil servants, divergent positions have emerged between academic institutions and public sector unions. While the Pestel Institute has advocated for a recalibration of retirement age based on statistical life expectancy, representatives of civil servants have categorically rejected such proposals.
The German Civil Servants’ Federation (DBB) expressed strong reservations regarding the notion of prolonging civil service careers. The federation’s leadership criticized the debate for its lack of methodological precision, citing the considerable variability in individual life expectancy as a factor that renders uniform policy measures untenable.
Similarly, the Police Union (GdP) voiced unequivocal opposition to any increase in the duration of service. The union underscored the substantial occupational burdens borne by its members, particularly those engaged in shift work and operational duties, and noted that despite rigorous initial health screenings, their life expectancy remains below the national average. In lieu of extending working life, the GdP has called for targeted policy interventions aimed at optimizing existing labor resources — such as enhanced investment in early childhood education, vocational training, and the facilitation of skilled labor migration.
The Pestel Institute had argued that civil servants should be subject to longer working lives due to their statistically superior life expectancy compared to manual laborers. According to a study conducted by the institute, male civil servants live on average five and a half years longer than their counterparts in manual occupations from the age of 65 onward. The study also identified significant disparities in life expectancy between salaried employees and civil servants, as well as between high-income and low-income groups. These discrepancies, the researchers contend, have been insufficiently addressed in current pension policy.
As a corrective measure, the institute proposed a socially tiered pension framework, whereby benefits for low-income earners would be substantially increased, while those for high-income individuals would be moderately curtailed. Such a reform, the scientists argued, would enhance distributive justice without necessitating an extension of civil servants’ working lives.
