Most pension funds seem to be increasing their retirement age to 67 too, so even if people make other arrangements within a decade or so, 67 (or higher) will be seen to be normal retirement.
Realistically, how many people could still be doing their jobs?
I'm thinking particularly of people who've done fairly low paid work and won't have had the opportunity to save in the same way that executive types will.
I work for an organisation that has historically had very low staff turnover and very low staff absence. We've now reached a stage where a high % of staff are in their late 50s/early 60s and I have half a dozen off on long term sick leave, with no realistic prospect of return. Things like COPD, severe pain awaiting hip replacement, the stress of caring for dying parents or a very sick partner and one case just appears to be general frailness, no diagnosis. Obviously these things can happen at any time, but they're more likely at this kind of age.
The company has a generous sickpay policy but can't pay them or keep their jobs open indefinitely so we're starting to look at dismissal on the grounds of ill health capability. TBH, it probably should have been done sooner, but we've tried to be decent about it.
So, whilst these people won't be claiming pension benefits, they will be claiming sickness/out of work benefits.
Even without health issues, there must be loads of jobs you simply can't be doing at 67, hod carrying etc etc. And if you lose your job for whatever reason in your 60s, what are the chances of getting another?
So, aren't we just moving people who've worked all their lives away from a pension and onto other benefits?