Evening star., 1933-11-02
The Forty-Year Limit.

Apparently the storm of protest
against the establishment by the Civil
Service Commission OF q 10TW'JeN aGt
limit for examinations for the public
service has been effective. for the head
of the commission indicates that the
original announcement of policy relative
to ages was misunderstood and that
there is no intention to apply the forty
year restriction in general. This Is well.
But it would be better If there were
further explanation and withdrawal of
all suggestions of age limits for appl-
cants.
The extreme sensitiveness manifested
on this score by advocates of free
chance for appointment regardless OF
age is probably incidental in part to the
present distressing economic conditions.
1t is hard enough for anybody to get
along, to find job if idle and to hold
q job if occupied, without having the
matter of years interposed as a barrier
to employment. Indeed, one OF the sad
dest aspects Of the depression. in the
course of the reduction OF working
forces in business and industry. has
been the letting out Of the middle aged.
generally speaking those above forty.
Just why forty years as limit? In
the judgment of most people man or
a woman is at the best in respect to
efficiency. judgment and reliability at
forty and for the following decade or
two. That Is to say, in all matters Of
mental occupation, for the fourth and
fifth decades of life are not the best
years for physical tasks. But the Gov
eminent does not hire its "navvies," as
the English call their muscular work.
ers, through competitive examination.
The skilled amanuensis-th specific
class embraced in the evidently modified
order of restriction-does not deteri-
crate after forty, does not as rule, de-
teriorate at all up to the point at which
compulsory retirement comes under the
law. Sickness or some accidental dis
ablesnent may lessen the value of the
service rendered, but that may happen
shortly after twenty -one.
Much ado is made in the Official ex-
planation, given in regard to the pro-
posed new regulation, of the fact that 1t
was intended to serve only against the
entrance Of over-forties, and was not
meant to involve the dismissal of those
passing that point Of years. But why
any such limitation against over-forty
are they not as fit as those q few years
younger? But, II Is suggested, they will
not be as valuable to the Government
service if they get their jobs after forty,
because they will not have so long to
serve. Only thirty years. in fact, at the
most. If that is the purpose of the
suggested restriction, why in strict logic
should not the age limit for entrance
be placed at thirty, giving forty years
as q possible maximum Of duty?
The very best course for the Civil
Service Commission to pursue is to cut
out all age limit suggestions. The Gov
eminent forces are now at q pretty low
stage Of morale, owing to pay cuts, fur
loughs, d1smissals and the hardships Of
personal losses and sufferings incidental
in general to the depression. The bare
mention Of age limits, even in respect to
new appointments In one particular
line Of duty. has caused apprehension to
spread through the ranks, lest other
limitations may follow, tending to
further curtailments, perhaps. in the In
terest Of quicker turnover Of
personnel