1.  Basically, it [the policy] said that the final year was the one in which a teacher turned sixty, but that s/he could continue on a year by year basis thereafter if s/he so requested and if there were no problems.  Therefore, virtually everyone who wished to, stayed on.

2.  First of all, things have gotten pretty bad for you to have formed a union.  I do all I can as an administrator to not let that happen.  It's　a sure sign of distrust on both sides.  I always try to include people who will be affected by a decision in that decision making process, nonetheless some decisions have to be made by the Board, perhaps　for financial reasons, that are not going to be popular.　I don't like arbitrary cut-offs for anything.  They are easier, of course, but to say that someone over 60 is a lesser teacher than someone younger is just not conclusively true in my experience. If all your evaluations have been positive then there is either something wrong with their logic or there is something wrong with the evaluation system. Who could be a better role model for children than someone in his or her 60's who is still learning and changing and growing?

Finally, and this is the question you asked me, my interpretation was as stated in the policy of 1964.  Those over 60 had to ask for an extension and usually got one.  I'm not sure what was "broke" about this arrangement.

3.  It sounds like you have a real struggle on your hands regarding the ASIJ retirement policy.  It would be a shame if the atmosphere at school has been adversely affected by this dispute.  Hopefully, the quality of the program and the welfare of the students have not been compromised.
I'm sure that everyone affected by this policy feels that they are productive and contributing members of the faculty.  To me, the greatest hardship is for those of you who started families a bit later in life and still have kids at the school.  It would be nice to protect their interests in whatever way possible.

4.  Wow.  Tough issue.  Of course my gut reaction (and SOP) is that　a deal is a deal and should not be altered without incredible extenuating circumstances, and then only case by case.  This is also an age discrimination issue, not?  I would think there could be a real　problem with AARP, etc.: here in the states at least it would be. 

The other issue is the spirit of the situation among professionals, even if the technicality is legal.

5.  Policies are guidelines and not hard and fast rules. The retirement　policy is/was a good one.  The problem comes from the administrators of the policy who are afraid of conflict.   If one exception is made (and it will be made) the policy seems to fall apart as it was intended or it becomes very difficult to carry out.

 I wonder how many faculty who have requested an extension have been told "no".  Not many I'd guess.

6.  Essentially the policy was never enforced.  With record enrollments for many of the past years, the school should be financially loaded.