The old man who advances
There is nothing wrong with wanting to work even when you are already retired. E ', however dishonest to do so at the expense of the young, however, pretending not to realize it. It also happens in the world of journalism - urca, if it happens! - But it is a scandal which in too many close their eyes to the corporate spirit. And then, since a few days in this part there is a judgment of the Supreme Court that legitimizes this practice unhealthy in my opinion, it is perhaps appropriate to begin to discuss it without mince words, to clarify and try to put some stake, ethical, even before legislation.
Let's start with the facts. In Libya, followed by the war of 2011- and acting as reporters, not commentators' - there were several distinguished gentlemen pensioners, who once again did not want to give up the excitement of being in the front line, without thinking too much to the fact that in doing so they ended up stealing the bread and butter of the many freelance and temporary workers who, almost always at their expense - and often without life insurance - were convinced that they find in the hell of Misrata and Sirte few job opportunities, Having regard to the meager landscape that characterizes long service abroad in the Italian press. I mention no names for love of country, but there are those who - among these luxury retirement - had made arrangements with several newspapers, as well as radio and TV, with a bulimia to make sense; the point of being forced to sit in the hotel often, in order to keep up with all his clients, even if it meant begging for news of the day by fellow freelancers. It happens to esters, but not only. And it is an increasingly common practice.
Nothing illegal, for goodness sake. Especially since the savage practice of early retirements forced expelled from the newsrooms a large number of colleagues in the full force of their physical and intellectual, yet able to make a valuable contribution to the publications for which they worked. I think it's legitimate that these colleagues want to continue to work. And I'm glad, frankly, if they can. I do not find, however, just that they are used with the same duties as before: that is, that they continue to do the reporters, correspondents, or even - and it happens, it happens - who work at the desk. It 'obvious fact that such use is convenient to the editor - so save that, and not a little - but it is equally obvious that doing so will lock the turn over in newsrooms and reduce even more the possibility of hiring young journalists, who are (even for that matter) have to be hungry. That journalists-retirees do so commentators, columnists, or, if they have the chance. and capabilities. But let's stop, please, with this unhealthy practice, which generates an absurd war between young and old, which does not feel the need, especially at this time.
It 's true, in a ruling recently the Supreme Court has ruled that there is nothing wrong with "heap", disavowing such a standard that was introduced by INPGI well and that reduced the amount of pension for persons who receive an income from work of more than 20 thousand euro per year. But frankly I would not go so proud of this judgment, nor call it "historic", as does the Journalists Union Retirees . In my opinion this is not a defensible judgment. And I can not give reason to those they blame the "old hands" of writing and instead of doing the "noble fathers" of this profession are transformed into "stepfathers" whose behavior, if only on the ethical plane, is decidedly objectionable. We want to talk or continue to make like ostriches?