State retirement age is too old for working class people

[Spiceup]

An observation from some things I've seen lately. I'll explain.

I work in a public sector organisation that employees highly qualified and very well paid professionals alongside support staff on not much more than minimum wage and those in between.

Part of my role is managing sickness absence. What I am seeing lately is that the professional types, despite doing what are generally accepted to be stressful jobs, on the whole, stay well until well into their sixties, although many do retire earlier simply because they have the kind of pensions that make that possible.

People in the more lowly jobs are often genuinely finished by their mid-late 50s. Just worn out and suffering from multiple health problems. Perhaps because of their lifestyles or maybe from just having harder lives (not necessarily harder work lives, but getting by is just generally harder for them). To have to go on to 67 is just absurd and very few do, with ill health retirement common (so the state is paying anyway).

I can't begin to imagine how similar people manage in genuinely physical jobs, in construction for example.

Is it more common for working class people in their 50s to be worn out, or perhaps more comfortably off professionals retire before they get to that point so I don't see it?

I’m 36and work in hospitality. I work so hard my body hurts. I pick up the slack for the young ones. I can’t imagine doing this for another 20 years. Im already coming to the end of the “young and pretty look” work want

I agree, it's a worry. I think one problem is that, aside from people who work physically demanding jobs, there is a really big spectrum of people with different attitudes towards retirement and money.

My dad is in his early 70s, and his employer required him to retire a few years ago. Since then he went freelance, and now he works rather more than full-time hours per week. He claims to love it, and I can see that he'd be lost if he weren't working at all, but I can't help but notice what an inequality it is. He earns considerably more than I or my partner ever have, on top of his pension, and of course it means some younger person isn't getting a job. I think it is a real concern that people like him can choose to keep working - because it is so easy as to be a fun hobby - and profit from it.

OTOH my mother-in-law has declared she is 'retired' since I've known her. She was in her mid-fifties then and is early 60s now, and she's not had a job to retire from. She is quite sure that the world owes her a living, as it is (in her view) obvious that she ought to be supported in her main habits of tv watching and cat-petting.

How do you square that circle? If retirement age were lowered for people working very physical jobs, people like my dad would become even more disproportionately rich by working years and decades after those people's retirement age. And, if retirement age were lowered, it would give people like my MIL more reason to claim they're not just lazy, they are 'retired,' and the reason they don't lift a finger is that they're the same age as hard working people who've had to retire in their 50s.

Let's face it, the Tories don't give a fuck about working class people.

One of my team is 64, she’s exhausted, cannot pick up new systems/ struggles with anything digital and has been working for nearly 50 years. She has another 3 years to go. It’s incredibly hard for her.

I can well sympathise. I'm 62 and struggling to find a job after redundancy. I left my job at 59 and have only had temp jobs since. I don't actually want another admin. job due to the reasons mentioned above, but I'm hardly in shape for a physical job - although I have to say I enjoyed my labouring temp jobs far more than office work, where my back constantly aches. I'm in NZ, where the superannuation age is 65, but no-one really wants to employ anyone in their sixties. Apparently, once I turn 65 I can give up work - but at the age of 64 I will be expected to look for a job if I haven't found one by then - which is unlikely.

@Cailleach

Agreed.

My warehouse job involves walking twelve miles a day with a load of heavy lifting on top.

Try doing that when you're knocking on for 70!

I'm in a similar job. I've been thinking will I even be able to do it at 70. Which going by previous raises in state pension age is when I'll be able to retire. I'm the fittest I've ever been but still am getting older. Cant see me walking the miles or carrying the stuff in another 10 years never mind 20.

The state pension age is set to rise for some to 68 and probably more for the younger generation due to Covid. I can’t imagine anyone will want to hire me in my 60s it’s an industry for the bright young things. The comment about making both sexes pensionable at the same time seemed reasonable until you discover that a lot of woman didn’t pay in to any pension while staying at home to look after the kids. I also wonder how it will effect jobs for the younger generation if we are all hanging on in there. It’s depressing.

Of course socioeconomic status is hugely influential on health outcomes. Anecdotally, as a nurse I see such a huge variation in health around the age of 70. There are patients who are extremely active and in generally excellent health and then there are 70 year olds who can’t walk independently or climb stairs any more. Generally the latter are from low socioeconomic backgrounds.

Also smoking status seems to be enormously tied to your socioeconomic status nowadays. It is so ageing as well.

@Beachbreak2411

I work in hospitality. I work so hard and so long hours. There is no way I can do this into my 60s. I’m old at 35 in this industry.

My dad has just retired at 70 from hospitality 45 years in the trade. One thing he has got is carpal tunnel in both hands, which they've linked to basically so many years pulling pints! He's having surgery soon

As a slight aside, it's interesting that having a job involving hard, physical labour is linked to poor health outcomes and an early death - yet people who have sedentary jobs often make up for this by 'hard physical labour' at the gym.

Why is straining your body on a weights machine/treadmill good for you, but walking miles and lifting boxes in a warehouse is bad for you?

It will be interesting to see if, in the future, all the gym-bunnies are in fact exercising themselves into an early grave.

(I've never entered a gym in my life, I get my exercise by walking everywhere as I don't drive).

Life expectancy has increased by about 6-10 years since the 80's according to www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/lifeexpectancies/bulletins/nationallifetablesunitedkingdom/2018to2020

So, in theory raising the retirement age just evens things out because we should get the same number of years retirement, even working for longer, because we're living longer. That's not really working in practice though because although we're living longer due to improving medical care, so we can keep people alive longer, we're not keeping them healthier longer, and fit and able, we've just pushed it along the road a bit, more years of poorer health and old age. That's why there's a crisis in social care, there's more and more people still alive, but needing more and more support while they are.
I work in social care, it's physically demanding and not being physically up to the job can be detrimental to the people we care for, and at 43 it's already taking it's toll on me physically with the effects of shift work, arthritis and back issues. I can't see me being fit enough to continue for another 25 years as the hammering my body has had physically, the stress of a low income job and the natural effects of aging start to show more and more.

In the US we can retire at 62 on partial benefits or at 67 on full benefits, BUT we can retire at 62 and buy up to five years of benefit credits. Which means we get full benefits at 62. I did that at 62 in order to care for my mother in her home as well as to raise my grandson who was given to me through the courts. I was fortunate enough to be able to borrow the money to "buy my time". Unfortunately many workers who need to quit for health or family reasons do not have the financial cushion to do this.

I'm in total corporate bullshit, retirement age is 68 but can't see that happening, as memory is so bad but when I discus with DM who is only 70 she could never do it and tbh neither can I. What use will I be to anyone at 70 plus?

In the US we can retire at 62 on partial benefits or at 67 on full benefits, BUT we can retire at 62 and buy up to five years of benefit credits. Which means we get full benefits at 62.

That sounds like a great idea, I feel like I'm just filling in time until I'm 65 - can't make any plans (hobbies, volunteer work etc.) because I need a job, even though the likelihood of getting one is very low.

Regarding life expectancy increasing by 6-10 years since the 1980s, many older peoples last years are now spent in care homes or nursing homes. I don’t remember so many care homes in the 80s. I

DP was made redundant during lockdown. At 55 physically very fit but already had to get hernia sorted privately to keep on working. No way could he physically have done the same job for another 12 years. Intelligence wise he is off the scale so could easily have had a very different career but due to age and how things worked in childhood that wasn't a option. Now hes getting shifts on a building site. Likely that will kill him before anything else.

@ArblemarchTFruitbat

As a slight aside, it's interesting that having a job involving hard, physical labour is linked to poor health outcomes and an early death - yet people who have sedentary jobs often make up for this by 'hard physical labour' at the gym.

Why is straining your body on a weights machine/treadmill good for you, but walking miles and lifting boxes in a warehouse is bad for you?

It will be interesting to see if, in the future, all the gym-bunnies are in fact exercising themselves into an early grave.

(I've never entered a gym in my life, I get my exercise by walking everywhere as I don't drive).

I guess theres a difference between 1 hour a day heavy exercising to 8 hours?

@Malibuismysecrethome

Regarding life expectancy increasing by 6-10 years since the 1980s, many older peoples last years are now spent in care homes or nursing homes. I don’t remember so many care homes in the 80s. I

I agree, and although anecdotal and only my own experience but the age of people and the needs they have have increased since I started in care 20 years ago. I used to care for people in their late 70's and early 80's, a few into their 90's and rarely over 100. Now it's mid to late 80's, through the 90's and residents 100+ aren't a novelty like it used to be.

So, what’s your answer OP, universally decrease the retirement age to ???

I'm in the US. Full retirement age for me is 66.5, but I can start taking retirement benefits at age 62 with a lower monthly payment. I can also postpone taking benefits until as late as age 70 and get a higher payment. Is there not a similar option in the UK?

@ArblemarchTFruitbat

As a slight aside, it's interesting that having a job involving hard, physical labour is linked to poor health outcomes and an early death - yet people who have sedentary jobs often make up for this by 'hard physical labour' at the gym.

Why is straining your body on a weights machine/treadmill good for you, but walking miles and lifting boxes in a warehouse is bad for you?

It will be interesting to see if, in the future, all the gym-bunnies are in fact exercising themselves into an early grave.

(I've never entered a gym in my life, I get my exercise by walking everywhere as I don't drive).

Lifting heavy boxes and being on your feet for 8 hours a day is very different to the average desk-job worker going to the gym a few times a week after work. I’m not sure how you think it’s a fair comparison

State retirement age is too high for those who have made no pension provision.

I'm sorry OP but for most, unless there are extenuating circumstances you have a long time to save for your retirement - working class or not

Do people not hit 35 and wonder to themselves if they can do that job in another 10/20/30 years? Just because you start with a physical job in your youth doesn't mean you need to do it for the rest of your life.

I say all of the above as a woman that has been a single mother/on a low income/claimed benefits/worked a shift pattern that includes night shifts.

We need to take personal responsibility for our own careers and retirement - its hardly a new concept!

Lifting heavy boxes and being on your feet for 8 hours a day is very different to the average desk-job worker going to the gym a few times a week after work. I’m not sure how you think it’s a fair comparison

I'm not saying it is or isn't - just that gym-going is a relatively recent phenomenon (for the masses) and we don't know what the long term benefits or demerits will be.

@MorningNinja

State retirement age is too high for those who have made no pension provision.

I'm sorry OP but for most, unless there are extenuating circumstances you have a long time to save for your retirement - working class or not

Do people not hit 35 and wonder to themselves if they can do that job in another 10/20/30 years? Just because you start with a physical job in your youth doesn't mean you need to do it for the rest of your life.

I say all of the above as a woman that has been a single mother/on a low income/claimed benefits/worked a shift pattern that includes night shifts.

We need to take personal responsibility for our own careers and retirement - its hardly a new concept!

What about people who have literally no money left over after essentials? I'm not talking about myself - I have a company pension and I also save & buy corporate shares - but not everyone has money left over at the end of the month.

@HoppingPavlova

So, what’s your answer OP, universally decrease the retirement age to ???

Decrease it to 65 as it originally was for men and (until halfway through my working life) was the increased age for women.