Government wants to coax over 50s back into work

I think covid probably exacerbated the situation, but it was certainly the case for 50 - 60 year olds 10 years ago, so nothing new. Government had time to see this coming for various reasons.

It would help if there was not a culture of “over the hill once you are past 40” as anybody seeking a job/new job will have found. Experience? Irrelevant apparently!

Looking the ONS graphs it’s the contrast between the UK and other nations who have had far more return to work that stands out, also the number that see themselves at long term sick in the UK after Covid.
Is long Covid a serious problem in the UK but not elsewhere?.

I retired at 66. Offered to go back a few months later (panicked!) However, was absolutely hammered by the taxman and it just wasn’t worth it. Good luck with that Richi.

Who needs stress if you can afford not to put up with it? No one.
Those who have been persistently poor in their 30s, 40, 50s, are less likely to have been able to build up a private pension or to have bought their own home. I assume this causes untold stress in mid life. A return to work might only be part time or in the lowest paid jobs.
I would have thought that the priority is to understand how people with cumulative disadvantages can be assisted to return to work comfortably.

Joseanne

Yes, this We are seeing that people are making a life choice to retire early, they are deciding that [work] is too stressful. That says poor health to me.

It says the opposite to me. People who can afford to retire are saying they want to enjoy their lives whilst they still have their health. Who needs stress if you can afford not to put up with it?

Yes, this We are seeing that people are making a life choice to retire early, they are deciding that [work] is too stressful. That says poor health to me.

Read. The. Report.

Surely this is all a bit upside down. The least well off are the most likely to be in poor health in their 50s and therefore have to leave the labour market. They physically can't return to work.

volver

Well that won't matter because the people we are talking about don't get pensions. By definition.

True, but if the pension age moves again, people will have longer to fund before getting it, so are potentially less likely to retire early. I had nine years to fund when I left, and that meant a lot of saving. Moving the SPA to say, 70, would make leaving at 57 with 13 years ahead of you out of the reach of many (I couldn't have done it). Rather than say they don't care about pensioners the government could spin it to say that the economy needs older workers, and cite generational unfairness as an excuse to justify it.

Various people are talking from facts rather than baseless opinion. Perhaps the link below will help you. It really is easy to do your own research; no doubt others will show you how. This may be a start

DaisyAnne, I think you may have misinterpreted my post.

volver

I'll be as "narky" as I like, thanks. It's in my nature. I'm pointing out that people don't believe facts if they don't suit their preconceptions. I think I'm quite entitled to be "narky" about that.

It's curious that 4 out of 5 in your group retired in yer 50s - I'd say that's unusual!

Not so unusual if you read the flipping report!!

You’re right, if people read the report, which is pretty detailed, they will see that it’s not at all unusual for people to have retired in their fifties. The conclusion at least is worth reading. This was the important point for future consideration by the government I thought.

6.The evidence suggests that an increase in people retiring earlier has probably been a lifestyle choice for many, rather than a reluctant departure from the labour market. It is possible that people got used to different habits and ways of working during the COVID-19 pandemic, which prompted them to reflect on their careers. The longer-term question that the Department for Work and Pensions workforce review should address is whether future cohorts of older workers will retire earlier in greater numbers, or whether the pandemic cohort have experienced a unique set of pull factors into retirement that will not apply to their successors. (Paragraph 81)

Crikey.

learned experience lived experience (computer taking over again!)

Siope

Lots of guesswork in this thread. The statistics that would resolve many of the guesses (ages, reasons, income sources to a degree, desire or level of interest in returning to work across various subsets , such as age, economic position etc) are readily available from ONS, and gov.uk-statistics.

I would link to, or quote from, them, but it would be largely a waste of effort as (some/too many) people would continue to play ‘I’ll see your data, and raise you three anecdotes’.

Various people are talking from facts rather than baseless opinion. Perhaps the link below will help you. It really is easy to do your own research; no doubt others will show you how. This may be a start.

www.health.org.uk/news-and-comment/charts-and-infographics/is-poor-health-driving-a-rise-in-economic-inactivity#:~:text=The%20main%20reason%20behind%20the

There is a "what we do" page on the quoted site, so you can check that out before you come to any conclusion about what they are reporting. You can also enter "Is the Health Foundation a reliable source" and get quite a few fact-based opinions on this.

Although ill-health may be the main reason, the right are attacking all who are economically inactive. Give them a group and they will attack as we see so often. That, and the learned experience of those knowing people taking early retirement, and/or taking it themselves tells us more about why they do it and why it has always happened.

I'll be as "narky" as I like, thanks. It's in my nature. I'm pointing out that people don't believe facts if they don't suit their preconceptions. I think I'm quite entitled to be "narky" about that.

It's curious that 4 out of 5 in your group retired in yer 50s - I'd say that's unusual!

Not so unusual if you read the flipping report!!

volver

I think the big deal Casdon, is that if people don't want to believe something, they'll just say something like "Well its not like that in my circle of friends, so I don't believe it. They're just making it up."

I think that this attitude is very concerning.

Don't be so narky!

One can believe the Economic Affairs Committee but still comment that within your circle things can be different.

I'm 68 and can't think of anyone I know who retired in their 50s. Most are professionals still working full/part-time or running their own business.

It's curious that 4 out of 5 in your group retired in yer 50s - I'd say that's unusual!

"Matter" is not a good word here.

"Happen" maybe.

Well that won't matter because the people we are talking about don't get pensions. By definition.

What I find concerning is the way the narrative gets driven by this sort of thing, and before we know it there will be cuts or means tests to pensions.

I think the big deal Casdon, is that if people don't want to believe something, they'll just say something like "Well its not like that in my circle of friends, so I don't believe it. They're just making it up."

I think that this attitude is very concerning.

volver

This is a big deal though.

It looks as though this is an evidence based situation where it has been identified that a large number of people have left the workforce who could still be working and being economically active. Some people don't want to hear that. I have no idea why. 🤷🏼 Because its obvious that this is the case.

So as Siope says, producing anecdotes about your sister's hairdresser's auntie not being in that situation, doesn't add anything to the conversation. Because I have an anecdote that counters it.

The people who say "its only statistics and surveys and you can get them to prove anything you want" might want to learn more about statistics.

It’s a big deal in that the government want people who can to return to work, but when you look at what proportion are drawing benefits from the data you provided the other day, it’s not actually that many people, given that a lot of them are on benefits for specific reasons, not just swinging the lead. I can’t see that’s there’s a strategy to persuade the rest, who are surviving without benefits, to return - unless they raise taxes or otherwise remove pension income. I don’t think this is where the answer to labour shortages is going to be found myself.

Well - I wish them good luck with it - but this little old lady is having a lovely time in retirement. They'd have to drag me back, kicking and screaming. Teaching is not a job for the poorly, faint-hearted - or slow/doddery old folk!

This is a big deal though.

It looks as though this is an evidence based situation where it has been identified that a large number of people have left the workforce who could still be working and being economically active. Some people don't want to hear that. I have no idea why. 🤷🏼 Because its obvious that this is the case.

So as Siope says, producing anecdotes about your sister's hairdresser's auntie not being in that situation, doesn't add anything to the conversation. Because I have an anecdote that counters it.

The people who say "its only statistics and surveys and you can get them to prove anything you want" might want to learn more about statistics.

Siope
^The statistics that would resolve many of the guesses (ages, reasons, income sources to a degree, desire or level of interest in returning to work across various subsets , such as age, economic position etc) are readily available from ONS, and gov.uk-statistics.^🤣🤣

I’ll see your statistics and raise you 3 manipulations to make them say what they are required to prove!