I’m a retiree with no plans of ever again entering the paid work force, but I’m nonetheless really worried about the grim unemployment statistics. I worry about the young people in my life who might be facing long-term joblessness and I worry about the consequences for our society.
Should we do more to encourage those older works who can afford to retire to make room for young workers? My decision to retire was based primarily on my own exhaustion and longing to do something different with my life, not on an altruistic desire to make room for younger workers. But although altruism did not drive my decision, I was happy to make room for a younger teacher who would bring fresh ideas and energy to the classroom. There are too many young teachers out there who can’t find jobs.
Don Peck’s article in the March 2010 Atlantic points out that the problem of long-term joblessness is the not just a consequence of the current recession but rather of fundamental changes in the structure of the economy. Peck describes the consequences of our jobless recovery–if it is indeed a recovery:
| FREE REPORT: Jobs for Women Over 50: download this FREE Special Report for advice from Vibrant women — who’ve been there — about how to handle your age on a resume, what to wear to the interview, best careers for women over 50 and more. |
The effects of pervasive joblessness—on family, politics, society—take time to incubate, and they show themselves only slowly. But ultimately, they leave deep marks that endure long after boom times have returned. Some of these marks are just now becoming visible, and even if the economy magically and fully recovers tomorrow, new ones will continue to appear. The longer our economic slump lasts, the deeper they’ll be.
If it persists much longer, this era of high joblessness will likely change the life course and character of a generation of young adults—and quite possibly those of the children behind them as well.
The grim picture includes research based in my home town of Philadelphia. Peck cites the work of sociologist Kathryn Edin:
Communities with large numbers of unmarried, jobless men take on an unsavory character over time. Edin’s research team spent part of last summer in Northeast and South Philadelphia, conducting in-depth interviews with residents. She says she was struck by what she saw: “These white working-class communities—once strong, vibrant, proud communities, often organized around big industries—they’re just in terrible straits. The social fabric of these places is just shredding. There’s little engagement in religious life, and the old civic organizations that people used to belong to are fading. Drugs have ravaged these communities, along with divorce, alcoholism, violence. I hang around these neighborhoods in South Philadelphia, and I think, ‘This is beginning to look like the black inner-city neighborhoods we’ve been studying for the past 20 years.’ When young men can’t transition into formal-sector jobs, they sell drugs and drink and do drugs. And it wreaks havoc on family life.
Peck’s article is a powerful warning but short on solutions. The Obama administration is doing the right thing with investment in green technology and pressuring banks to start lending to small businesses, but it clearly isn’t going to be enough.
In addition to job creation we need to think more creatively about job sharing, such as the ideas about work sharing reported by Robert Pollen in his recent Nation article:
In the same vein are work-sharing programs that extend unemployment compensation to workers who accept reduced hours that then enable their companies to avoid outright layoffs. Indeed, work-sharing can be even more effective and fairer than traditional unemployment insurance, since it spreads the reductions in work hours across a wide group of workers rather than concentrating the effects of the recession on the minority of workers who become completely jobless. Work-sharing programs have long been a major part of the social safety net in Western Europe. Over this recession, Germany has been especially aggressive in extending these benefits to prevent rising unemployment.(my emphasis)
We need to spread the jobs around. Lowering the age at which one is eligible for Medicare might make some older workers decide to retire. Our society has been pushing workers to stay in the paid work force by gradually raising the age at which they are eligible for full retirement benefits. But either we pay more in social security and Medicare by encouraging older workers to leave the workforce or we’ll be paying more in unemployment compensation–not to mention the range of social ills resulting from a generation of young people who can’t find steady employment.
European societies have historically encouraged early retirement to make room for young workers. With plunging birth rates, some European societies are rethinking generous early retirement policies. But the United States with its relatively youthful population is in a position to move in this direction.
| FREE REPORT: Jobs for Women Over 50: download this FREE Special Report for advice from Vibrant women — who’ve been there — about how to handle your age on a resume, what to wear to the interview, best careers for women over 50 and more. |
Also, there used to be a limit to what seniors eligible for a full retirement check could earn without their earnings counting against their social security check. Now there is no limit and a 66 year old worker can pull in a high six figure salary and still collect a full social security check. Social security was never intended to be the icing on the cake and this policy needs to be rethought. Possibly, savings here could be applied to lowering the age for eligibility for Medicare.
There’s no one solution and we need to think about both job creation and job sharing. And job sharing should involve sharing across the generations. To return to Peck’s cautionary tale:
We are living through a slow-motion social catastrophe, one that could stain our culture and weaken our nation for many, many years to come. We have a civic—and indeed a moral—responsibility to do everything in our power to stop it now, before it gets even worse.
other blog entries from »
I can’t speak for everyone..but if I hit retirement age and can afford to retire, I will be more than happy to get my old butt out of the way to make room for some youngster.
I think part of the issue here is developing a new paradigm. The old jobs and old ways are not coming back. Creative thinking is called for in the workplace to identify the new needs that have accompanied all the recent social and economic changes.
I don’t think it’s simply a matter of moving people out of the way so others can take their place. It’s more about letting go of the past and developing skills and talents that match the current needs of society.
I agree SeaWriter – we have to be open to creative change NOT change just for the sake of it. I will probably drop dead at my job because I can’t afford to retire but that isn’t really the issue. I have a calling to do what I do – grief counselor – and although I’ve been laid off since the end of October I am negotiating now with another position in a NEW program. I realize my profession will never be what it was when I first entered it 20 years ago but I am flexible and I have always taught younger women coming up about what I do. I am doing it even without pay at this time but frankly, I need to eat and pay my bills so I will go back to work. What I see for myself is that I have an advantage over the younger worker in my chosen profession – people see the white hair and figure I’ve earned each one and may even know how to help them through their issues. Of course sometimes the spikey “I have attitude” haircut confuses them LOL but we get past that issue too. To tell the truth, I think much of it is about attitude – open, flexible, and with depth something that can’t always be matched by younger workers. But I’m always open to the next adventure – I don’t want to see young people discouraged but sometimes it takes more than a diploma to find your place in the work force.
This question came up among teachers recently. I don’t think that’s the only answer. I’ve seen a number of friends retire and they all said they retired too soon. The biggest reason for staying is what we have to offer. A 58 year old woman just won best director. I am a better teacher now, in many ways, than I ever was. I offer a balance and sanity to a school. I offer wisdom and guidance and a model of excellence without sacrificing my personal life. There’s this idea that after a certain age we have done all we can do. That is far from the truth. I read the phrase the “new young old” to express what this generation of 50+ represent. I agree with SeaWriter, we need a new paradigm shift. Moving people out of the way will solve provide a short term solution when what is needed is a shift in attitude.
All three of these women have said excellent points. Many of us can not afford to retire for one reason or another. At this time I am taking care of my mother, who never saved one penny for retirement and a daughter who just found work after her first well paying job laid her off, recession you know. What has happen to our 401ks, which by the way are 201s by now. To rebuild savings and investments take time again. Companies were oping for pushing people out at 55 years old, so they could have more money in pocket, Many who have retired are back as contractors, from where they have retired! I do feel for the young trying to get a start, some of us are trying to end well. I do not want to become a burden on my daughter later in life, money plays a big part. Getting other employment after 50 is no east task! New ideas and ways are needed. Thanks for the question……TRACK
Well Karen I would be more than glad to move aside for a younger person if I could ever get to the point of retirement. Personally I’m resenting the fact that I lost my job of 35 years at the age of 52 and am now 56 and have not been able to find a decent job since, and I am educated! We older individuals are the ones who lost the most in this economic downturn, have the least amount of time to recover, and are also the ones having the most difficulty finding a job! I’m not done in the workforce yet! So, in answer to your question; No, I am not ready to move aside for a younger person. I resent that they are being hired first!
I agree. Cheaper, lower wages, less benefits-I know. Don’t go into out-sourcing, these jobs are never coming back! You can’t compete with $2.00 a day or child labor from over seas. Remember we buy their products and own some of the stock, vicious cycle.
If I could afford to retire, I would gladly do so, but I plan to work as long as I am able, because I have to, in order to afford to live, and I don’t mean luxuriously. I know many women in this same position. I tell all my young women friends to save and plan for retirement, so they won’t be in my position. Luckily, I enjoy working for the most part, and at 64 I’m training for a new career direction, following a layoff last Fall. I’m grateful I have the health, stamina, enthusiasm and brains to continue working, but as I said, if I could retire, I would……maybe in my next life.
I am with FancyFrancie on this issue. If I could I would retire early. However, keep in mind that if I need money from my little retirement plan I will be penalized for taking an early distribution, as I have not hit the magic number 59 1/2. Next issue, health care is so expensive and not eligible for medicare until 66, this would put an additional financial burden, I therefore work in reality for the health-care benefits. Next, I am almost 58 and not the age most employers would consider as a first choice, as I will cost them more in benefits versus someone in their 20-30′s, additionally my experience would dictate in most cases higher salary, what is their incentive if they can hire someone for much less, and what is my incentive to exit the work force at this time, other than I am tired of working? NONE! I will want to collect my social security at 66 for full benefits as my 401k has taken a beating. So my reality is that I will be able to exit working full-time by 62 if I choose to or if they lay off, however there is still that 4 year gap until 66, as I do not want to deplete my savings, I will certainly consider working part time doing something that I am passionate about. I think we must always be willing to learn something new in order to be viable in this new work environment. Most importantly also understand our investments, compounding and dollar cost averaging. It is never to late to start saving… as it is better to have a little than none at all.
Everybody retires when they can. I cannot judge on that respect. Since i have been living in So Florida i see a lot of older people working but a lot of them are immigrants that will eventually go back to their country. I am assuming of course. I do believe in training the younger people in my office specially my assistant. I found out that the norm here in SoFlo is to do the opposite for fear of losing your job. That is insane! I feel that in 6 years or so i will be retiring and it will be good for my assistant to take over my post. She has been doing the work so why not? We have others in my office that will NOT retire even at retirement age and will only do so if asked to step down. We have a lady that she asked management for 2 more years since she lost most of her money buying an apartment she could not afford to begin with. But everybody is differnt.
Sorry, I totally DISAGREE with the concept of pushing the oldies onto a retirement iceflow to “make way” for the younger.
The whole concept is based on the erroneous belief that there are a specific number of jobs available; a liimited number of desks or cash register positions in the marketplace, so someone must quit to enable another.
The current unemployment crisis is caused by a combination of greed , arrogance and naivete. Not by older people keeping their jobs. People working are more likely to be spending $; and That is where new jobs come from. More spending, more jobs. (and I dont mean government spending) Even if you can afford to retire, what is the chance you will be spending the same amount of money in the economy, as you were while working?
Also, there are many jobs out there going unfilled due to a lack of qualified candidates. My employers have begged me not to retire because I have a profession where jobs outnumber candidates. In the modern world, job seekers need to keep up with new requirements of the market. Education and Experience are still and will continue to be bona fide job requirements
There will always be employers who “save” by firing the older, experienced and hiring the younger and cheaper, notwithstanding the economy. But it would be so wrong to encourage that with Forced retirements. Especially in education, where the USA is falling further and further behind the rest of the world. If you want jobs for the young people, better be sure you educate them well.
I agree with you Bonnie. This is very much a glass half-empty view. We should be focusing on encouraging/helping younger workers to train for the future, not the past. It is up to the individual to adapt to the market.
BTW, I got that ‘iceflow’ feeling too when I read this. lol. To me this is no different than what happened after WWII, when the same argument was used for women to come out of the factories so that men who needed jobs could work. In hindsight now, we view this as very unfair.
Finally found a response that makes sense!! Why punish any older worker – for whatever reason they are still working — because Corporations (pharma, insurance, and the derivatives of each) Government, want to increase their profits. When we hear GM ‘lost’ 20 billion in the first quater – they really mean their ‘profit’ was down for the quarter. THEY ARE STILL IN PROFIT!! Workers are the fodder for profit – and — if we cannot compete with China, Taiwan, Mexico wage-wise — it’s because Corporations want to increase their already fat coffers!! I really think we could be blaming the head of this dragon — not the tale.