With the government and the ruling Democratic Party of Korea (DPK) declaring their intention to raise the legal retirement age from 60 to 65 within the year, discussions on the issue are expected to gain momentum.

However, concerns are growing that the plan could exacerbate conflicts between generations and among workers, and further deepen the polarization of the labor market. Experts say that to minimize social friction and unintended side effects, a comprehensive social dialogue that includes young people and non-regular workers is essential.

According to multiple sources on November 4, the DPK’s “social dialogue forum” on retirement age extension gives limited voice to younger generations. The party’s Special Committee on Retirement Age Extension, launched on November 3, includes representatives from the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU), the Federation of Korean Trade Unions (FKTU), the Korea Employers Federation, the Korea Federation of SMEs, and Professor Kim Sung-hee of Korea University’s Graduate School of Labor Studies.

Although the Youth Union also participates, it faces limitations in fully representing the diversity of youth perspectives. Kim Seol, chair of the Youth Union, said, “The voices of young people tend to be treated as secondary issues in discussions. Given the uncertainty over how extending the retirement age will affect youth employment, it’s difficult for us to take a clear position.”

Many analysts warn that extending the retirement age could reduce opportunities for new hires by keeping older employees in their positions longer.

A report by the Korea Labor Institute released last year, titled “The Impact of Mandatory Retirement at 60 on Youth and Older Workers,” found that extending the retirement age tends to reduce firms’ capacity to hire younger workers, potentially intensifying intergenerational tensions over jobs. The impact was particularly pronounced at companies with seniority-based pay systems.

A study by the Korea Development Institute (KDI) in 2019 similarly showed that for every one additional older worker retained, youth employment decreased by an average of 0.24 positions.

Workers in small businesses and non-regular positions, who are not guaranteed retirement protection, are also largely excluded from the discussion. According to the National Assembly Futures Institute, only 17.4 percent of workers who retired last year did so under formal retirement-age systems. While over 90 percent of firms with 300 or more employees operate such systems, the figure drops to just 20 percent among smaller firms. The institute warned that focusing the debate on the public and large corporate sectors could widen labor-market inequality.

The DPK is aware of these concerns but faces difficulty finding solutions. Floor Leader Kim Byung-kee said, “We must carefully assess the potential impact on youth employment and the burden on companies. A broad-based social dialogue involving all generations and labor-management stakeholders is necessary.”

Lee Jong-sun, deputy director of the Korea University Institute for Labor Studies, said, “Because the committee is trying not to reduce youth employment while also avoiding additional burdens on firms, it will be difficult to reach consensus. It’s important to ensure that various youth groups, such as youth committees within the KCTU and FKTU, take part in the discussion.”