Too Old To Hire Too Young To Retire PDF Download

Employers in all sectors and in every developed country are confronted by mounting job vacancies that are impeding economic growth. The vacancies also affect government operations. The problem started a decade ago but was overlooked until the COVID crisis and the Great Resignation prompted the attention of the news media. Vacancies have averaged over 10 million a month since mid-2021. In recent unemployment reports, less than 6 million people were counted as looking for jobs. That explains the continuing high vacancy count. The vacancies are linked to two global demographic trends: fewer babies and increased longevity. The problem is also related to the shift starting decades ago from ‘blue collar’ jobs requiring strength and agility to knowledge jobs where skills are the keys to job performance. Knowledge workers today are fully capable of working as long as they are healthy. Professionals commonly work into their 70s. The demographic trends are also tied to the current political concern with funding Social Security. Those benefits are “pay-as-you-go” with current benefits funded by active workers. With increased numbers of retirees living longer, projections show the FICA taxes will be inadequate to pay the benefits by 2035. A deeply entrenched problem in the world’s youth-oriented society is ageism. That is treating older people differently from others based on assumptions or stereotypes related to their age. It influences employment, cultural settings, and politics. Research shows the assumptions are not valid, but too often employers rely on stereotypes and deny older workers training and promotion opportunities. Work cultures are too often unhealthy. The negative effects of ageism have been the focus of critical reports from the UN, the OECD, and the World Economic Forum. It’s a global problem. A McKinsey study found the annual costs are in the billions. In the first year of the pandemic, hundreds of thousands of older workers were laid off and the bias they experienced in job hunting convinced them to retire. Since then, federal data show three million workers more than normal retired; for many it was years earlier than planned. Now, many want to ‘unretire,’ but employers often ignore applications from older workers. Unfortunately, the courts concluded the ADEA applies only to employees, not applicants. That needs to be addressed by Congress. The bias and discrimination so costly to older workers is entrenched in the culture of many workplaces. That’s a core problem. Leaders need to focus on the need for change. Including older workers in ongoing Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives is a good early step. Contrary to the stereotypes, research shows older workers have better job knowledge, are better at solving new problems, are capable of functioning with minimal supervision, and often have a better work ethic. In the same situation, they are likely to perform better than younger recent hires. They can be productive much sooner. All of which is to say, their loss can be costly and their skills hard to replace. For older workers, a ‘good’ job’ – that is a job where they are valued and treated fairly – and their decision to defer retirement contributes to better physical and mental health. They enjoy increased longevity. It also keeps them connected socially. When older workers continue working, they fill a void, and their taxes help to fund federal benefits. It’s a win-win.