Senator De Lima wants to increase PNP compulsory age retirement from 56 to 60 years old
Senator De Lima wants to increase PNP compulsory age retirement from 56 to 60 years old
Senator
Leila M De Lima has filed a bill increasing the compulsory retirement age of
members of the Philippine National Police (PNP) from 56 to 60 years old.
De
Lima said that the proposed amendment will enable the law to be dynamic and responsive
to change – especially because the educational requirement in the Philippines
was significantly affected by the K-12 program.
At
a compulsory retirement age of 56, officers and personnel of the Philippine National
Police (PNP) are considered “too young”
to retire, especially when taking into consideration the relatively short terms
of those who were appointed to the highest rank in the service.
Senate Bill No.1899 seeks
to address the issue and increase the compulsory age of retirement age for
officers and non-officers of the PNP from fifty-six (56) to sixty (60) years
old.
De
Lima cited the example of the former PNP Chief Police General Camilo Cascolan who
only served about two months or November 10 following his appointment on 2
September.
“Even if his (Cascolan) term
is extended for another year, as the law allows, that would still be just 14 months
in office,” De Lima added.
Indeed,
this stint for the former PNP Chief is too brief of a time to establish continuity
in PNP’s programs and develop a working relationship with one’s subordinates.
The
perpetual volatility caused by early compulsory retirement in the upper
echelons of the PNP’s hierarchy can be a detriment to its organizational stability
in the long run.
In
a recent statement. Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG)
Secretary Eduardo Año said that extending the retirement age would ensure better
and more experienced men at the helm of the PNP.
He
went on to lament that the relatively early compulsory age of retirement means
that by the time a senior officer who is most qualified and experienced is
promoted to the position, his term in service would already be coming to an end.
In
her explanatory note, the senator noted that: “The proposed measures produce some sort of savings for the government
because by increasing the age of compulsory retirement, the government may save
money by not paying retirement benefits so early.”
“Furthermore, the State
would also benefit from retaining experienced officers who could share the
learnings and training they have accumulated over the years to their juniors.”
“In prematurely ending the
careers of the police force with a 56-year-old retirement age, the younger
generation of policemen and women are deprived of mentoring opportunities by
their seniors who still possess sharpness of mind, high level of fitness,
agility, and strength of the body.”