Having to work till mid 70s

I guess we should be starting pension schemes for our grandchildren now. If we can manage it.

People in their late sixties and seventies may be fit and well and keen to work and we hope that many more of our grandchildren's generation will be fit at that age. However there are and always will be others who suffer ill health and/or have caring responsibilities.

We should encourage a pattern of working over our lifetimes which is flexible and takes this into account.

There should be much more support of part-time work, not just for older people but at other times in life - as a student, as a parent of young children, as a returner to work after a career break etc. Part-time workers should not be disadvantaged, but should be more able to progress in their careers, earn more and contribute more to their pensions.

It does also depend on the type of work people do. Those doing hard physical work are going to find it difficult, if not impossible, to continue doing that work into their 70s

I'm 62 and been a nurse all my life, I physically cannot imagine how I could work for another 8 years, were this to apply to me. I have OA developing in my back, feet and neck.

Surely there won't be the jobs for the younger generation if everyone has to work to their 70's?

There will be a lot of people who can and want to work into their 70's. It all depends on health and attitude I think and the huge advancement in medical research that will happen in the next few years will mean people will be able to work longer if they want to.

I want to but mandatory retirement at 72! (Ministry of Justice)

My husband is approaching 70 and still working in a physical job albeit part time and has no intention to stop working any time soon.

I think it depends on the individual, health and attitude as maturefloosy writes. I also think we need a more flexible approach to retirement which takes into account these individual needs.

A change in many employers attitudes to mature workers would not go amiss either.

Surely so much depends on the nature of the job? Prison officers, for example, have to be able to physically manage to deal with violent offenders, nurses and teachers are on their feet all day ... and speaking as a more mature teacher, I am already conscious of being perceived as 'older' - that might have to change to 'ancient'! Currently I am due to be able to claim state pension when I am 67 and for my chosen profession, working full-time until then feels like it would be asking a lot of me / anyone.

I agree with you Varian, we need to start thinking in terms of part time work alternating with full time as our circumstances change. I dont receive state pension until 66, and although I am not in a manual job, I certainly wouldn't want to work until I am 70. Really not sure about lorry drivers/ bus drivers, care staff/nurses etc being able to work until 70. But on the other hand, there are many people wo are capable and willing to continue beyond pension age. Maybe less rigidity and more flexibility in work patterns and pension entitlement is the way forward.

At the other end of the spectrum, my stepson has only been able to get P/T hours for the last few jobs he has had -varying from 12 up to 25, but not enough to sustain independent living. My DS1 has just started to work for a cinema (so much for a degree education). His new employers take on approximately 10 people at a time and only offer 8-hour contracts. They have a high staff turnover. He did well at interview and and in his first week and as someone has just left they have offered him full-time hours, but only have a few on F/T pay. I think these firms are avoiding certain employment obligations by taking on lots of staff and keeping them on a 'flexible' rota. It isn't fair and I get so cross when the government proudly touts reduced unemployment figures - there are legions of young people who would love full-time work and can't get it. If we keep raising the pension age I fear that my children and grandchildren's generations opportunities for a working wage will be proportionately adversely affected.

I was lucky and got my state pension at the age of 60 - I am 67 now. I love my freedom, and do work - child care, running community stuff - I just don't get paid and I can pick and chose what I do.

I love it!

And I feel angry for those who had their retirements planned out only to see the date vanishing further into the distance. I simply would not have been fit enough to go on working even if I had not got my pension.

While I don't disagree with much of what is posted above I am quite surprised at the number of people who will be (apparently) relying entirely on their state pensions .
I am one of the lucky ones and claimed my state pension at 60 and 7m . But I claimed my earnings related benefits at 60.I had paid additional voluntary contributions , which enhance that pension. I realize not everyone is in my fortunate position but I believe the present generation has to pay into an employer scheme ?

While I don't disagree with much of what is posted above I am quite surprised at the number of people who will be (apparently) relying entirely on their state pensions .
I am one of the lucky ones and claimed my state pension at 60 and 7m . But I claimed my earnings related benefits at 60.I had paid additional voluntary contributions , which enhance that pension. I realize not everyone is in my fortunate position but I believe the present generation has to pay into an employer scheme ?

I think it's more to do with governments wanting to delay the state pension age to save money, irrespective of whether people will be able to hold on to or obtain jobs at the age of 70+. There aren't enough jobs now and, if we are to believe recent reports, there will be even fewer in the future because of computerised/robotic operating systems.

I assume (or at least I hope) that no government would leave people absolutely without funds and destitute but presumably it could bring in new laws. For example, anyone with a substantive asset (such as a property) would have to use that asset to obtain an income, either through equity release or re-paying loans from the government out of a deceased person's estate.

Have you considered that if people are to go on working into their 70s or 80s - as I saw suggested somewhere - there will simply not be enough jobs to go round? We could get to the stage where for every worker over, say, 75 there is someone in their 30s or 40s out of work.

There will never be an ideal solution until the problem is addressed with individual circumstances in mind instead of the 'one size fits all' schemes which are dreamt up by politicians and civil servants who have never been (and will never be) short of a bob or 2 in their entire lives.

Never say Die is surprised that many people are (will be) relying on the state pension in retirement. There can be many reasons for this - ill health during their working lives, stay at home carer, working in the (until recently) non-pensioned voluntary sector, self employed or part-time so did not qualify to be in a works pension scheme. For those in these categories who took out a self funded private pension there was the pensions raid carried out by Gordon Brown which wiped 20-30% off the expected value of the annuity. In our parents' day, small business owners either sold their business for a lump sum to fund their retirement or leased the business to someone else to provide a steady income. This does not happen now as there is no financial support available to help an existing business continue while grants/loans are available for setting up a business from scratch.

Of course those who enjoy and want to carry on working should be able to do so, but for those of us whose work is simply a daily chore to be completed in order to eat and pay the bills, there is surely a time when 'enough is enough'. As to the nature of the work involved it does not all rest on heavily physical tasks. Casting my mind around I know of an early retired Potter and a musician who both succumbed to arthritis in their hands, also a watch/clock maker/repairer whose eyesight deteriorated beyond the help of magnifying lenses. I suppose the powers that be would want them to retrain in their late 60s.

I just wonder what is going to happen to all the voluntary work that is carried on at hhe moment by the retired generation? Certainly near us there is a local authority who has said quite clearly that the only way many libraries will stay open is through volunteers. Most small museums are staffed by volunteers, many social activities for the very elderly and disabled are run by retired people. I'm sure you can add to the list.

Who is going to look after many small children when their parents are at work if not grandma and grandad - or cover emergencies at the drop of a hat? Maybe Cameron's mum needs to have another talk to him! You don't think she on here hiding under an alias, do you ??

I don't think the Camerons or any politician will ever be in a position of having to rely on parental help for any reason. The clue is money!!!! This is the problem of course, the powers that be are never on the receiving end of the policies they advocate. What doesn't affect you, doesn't bother you, no it doesn't, you can pretend it does, or even sympathise, but it doesn't keep you awake at night!! Therefore working till???! probably seems an excellent idea from a economic point of view; but when you actually have to do it.... that's another thing altogether!

I wonder how many people will be paying into a pension they will never enjoy if they have to work till their mid 70s. The average life expectancy in England is 82/83 years in the South East. It falls by 2 years or so in the North of England and in Scotland, Wales and Ireland. An average is approximately the middle of a range so many will literally die in harness and their contributions will have been in vain. Just google average life expectancy uk...

Good point lizzy

I do agree that it all depends on the individual and the role. Can I see a 70+ year old police officer chasing a 19 year old offender? Do I see a 70+ running into a burning building and climbing down ladders? To the nurses and builders?! I also worry about the impact on job opportunities for the younger generation. I'm already seeing my own children and their friends in their 20's who are well educated and only able to secure part time roles!! I believe we have to give this significant more thought..

I agree wholeheartedly with the comments made. Some careers require a level of fitness which is not sustainable ie fire service, police, health (paramedics, nurses etc). I feel very fortunate as I was medically retired and receive my work pension so financially I don't have worries. I'm watching my partner struggle to care for his mother & work full time (my health difficulties mean I'm unable to help), my daughter only being offered fix term contracts therefore unable to get a mortgage, other daughter juggling child care and work.

Life expectancy means for many their contributions to a pension will have been in vain. My generation seems to be supporting and looking after elderly relatives and our children and their families while also still working full-time.

LIFE EXPECTANCY MEANS FOR MANY THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS TO A PENSION WILL HAVE BEEN IN VAIN.

I suspect that this could be the general idea!!!!!!!!!

I agree that everybody should save towards a decent pension but this should start when they are in full time work, hopefully early twenties. That hopefully gives a person long enough to save so that he/she can retire around 60 and enjoy their pension and retirement.

It is so unfair to tell somebody in their late 50's that they will have to work maybe another 10 years when they were psychologically prepared to retire at 60 or just beyond.

Many MPs will enjoy inherited wealth so have no idea how the other half live and that includes never travelling on public transport like the rest of us.