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 worked in a care home (in my case, briefly) and everyone had back issues by their mid thirties. We all were given manual handling training and had hoists available, but humans are a really difficult size/shape to move and sometimes it was not possible in the reality of the situation to follow the training properly. I don't think anyone working there was older than 50 and I certainly don't think most people would still be able to do it in their mid to late sixties.

On the other hand, my dad does a desk job and will be 67 next year - he's perfectly able to carry on and probably will do so for a while, maybe part time. There are even some documented health benefits of staying in employment as you age if you can. My grandads retired from desk jobs in their late 50s/early 60s and had over twenty years of retirement each. In one case, grandad was retired for longer than he'd worked for (he'd gone to university, unlike the other grandad who left school at 14 and worked his way up to a desk job).

I have no idea how you could come up with a system that's fair to people in manual jobs but doesn't bankrupt the country by paying pensions to healthy middle class people for years and years to be honest. I would support such a system, but I can't work it out. Add in that our demographics are already against us here - aging population and all that - and there's certainly no appetite, for other reasons, for encouraging people to have more children, and that people are spending longer in education before they start work (no one can start before 18 now, and presumably the 50% who go to university don't start until 21 - that's 4 to 7 years later than my grandad who left school at 14) so their working lives are shortened already, and you can see there's not an easy answer.

I don’t think young women realise what work was like 40+ years ago. I started work age 16 for a top Fortune 500 company, in the top 5 at the time.
There were no women above Director’s secretary level. No women managers whatsoever. Women’s jobs were secretarial, admin, catering and tea ladies in that order. Not one woman was managerial level.

To pp saying “the government” doesn’t want to pay. No, it’s us the taxpayer.

The state pension is expected to cost £108 billion this financial year. That’s a tenth of all government spending and far more than the cost of social security payments.

Any yet few people want to pay more tax. I think successive pensions ministers have been very open that state and public sector pension ages have been raised due to affordability, it’s not a conspiracy.

I agree with pp that working until 67 is unrealistic for many.

@MorningNinja. I left school at 16 to work for Lloyds bank and women were not allowed to be in the pension scheme until they were 25. That’s 9 years lost pension!

Pure discrimination.

@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!

Yep, and this is the attitude that leads things to not change for the better, but the worse, for people who work in a job that benefits society yet doesn't pay enough to live on, just about pays enough to survive on, without any extras like a fucking pension, or luxuries like heating your home. Sometimes there's nothing to actually cut to put in to a pension. I have managed to since before the auto enrollment, but, before that I was in minus figures at the end of every month, and even now I earn pennies above nmw and I only put in what is put in through my employer because I can't afford any more. Spent years looking after other people's families for a shit wage so they don't lose so much inheritance or taxes don't rise too much, making sure they're safe and looked after and apparently I just need to take responsibility for my career and retirement. We need experience and knowledge in lower skilled roles too or things get even shitter for the people using the services, that comes with time worked. I am a senior care assistant, I have done 2 lots of training that took nearly a year each to complete alongside ft working hours, not to mention the CDP (that I have been categorically informed I don't do by people who don't have a sodding clue) of meds administration, first aid, care certificate, moving and handling (of people) etc, I have progressed, know how much I earn? £9.20 per hour. The nmw is going to surpass that in 6 months time by 30p. Hardly enough to survive on with the cost of living, never mind 'be responsible' and save for my retirement.

I remember years ago a Tory MP/minister was asked about this issue on Question Time. His response was that there’s no such thing as a job for life and people such as builders, etc who couldn’t carry on working until 67 should look for other, easier jobs. When pressed about where these jobs could be he suggested B&q.

He has no clue. Does he really think shops are falling over themselves to employ people in their 60s with no retail experience. I know B&q is kind of the exception there….but there isn’t going to be space for everyone in B&q.

@bestcattoyintheworld

When I was nursing, we were all struggling with health issues. The care assistants in particular had it hard due to the amount of moving and handling they had to do. The older nurses struggled with 12 hour shifts. Luckily, I could afford to quit nursing at age 50, but can only manage light menial work now.

I think 67 for retirement age is ridiculous. I suppose they'll save money through killing people off with hard work before they can claim their pension.

I had an awful feeling that I wouldn’t make retirement age; I retired 4 years ago at 63 and developed severe heart failure the following year. I honestly think I would have been dead before I was 65 if I hadn’t retired. It’s awful to think that so many won’t reach their pension before they die 😢 and sickening to think it’s a money-saving exercise.

"Glasgow and Blackpool have the lowest life expectancy, and it’s still well over the pension age.
Unless you are referring to small, specific groups of workers?"

Yes, it depends where WITHIN those generally deprived places. I once worked on an estate in a job which gave me access to the data, and the average man had his first heart attack in his mid 40s and then lived to about 62.

You are right OP.
DH had a physically extremely demanding low paid job from 16. He stopped at 55 (now has a PT desk job), and had issues from mid 30s.
He's 57, with arthritis in his thumbs, hands, shoulders, elbows, knees plus lower back problems. Sitting for long periods is very uncomfortable, but so is standing still.

Physically demanding jobs are low paid and severely undervalued, therefore private pension savings are low exacerbating the need to keep working until the ever increasing state pension age.

Scotland has the lowest life expectancy in the UK, and Glasgow the lowest of the country.
Female life expectancy at birth was highest in East Renfrewshire (84.0 years) and lowest in Glasgow City (78.3 years).
Male life expectancy at birth was highest in Shetland Islands (80.6 years) and lowest in Glasgow City (73.1 years)

It’s still 8 years above pension age though.

@AgileSlug

"Glasgow and Blackpool have the lowest life expectancy, and it’s still well over the pension age. Unless you are referring to small, specific groups of workers?"

Yes, it depends where WITHIN those generally deprived places. I once worked on an estate in a job which gave me access to the data, and the average man had his first heart attack in his mid 40s and then lived to about 62.

Average age of first heart attack in a population of 42? That is barely possible even on a diet of lard, butter and vodka, smoking 40 a day and taking a lot of drugs.

dh was actually made redundant from his heavy manual work and could not face doing it anymore once he was 60
there after went part time in a lighter, still manual, role.

I agree although I don’t know what the solution is.

In an ideal world I think later in life people could move to less physical jobs, perhaps part time. I know a lot of people in academia and professional jobs who do this and as pp have said there are benefits to working later. However this penalises the low paid again and those who cannnot do a non physical job or afford PT.

I don’t know how realistically the working can sustain the pensions of people for 20-30 years without extortionate taxes or mandatory high private pensions (which penalises those not working). A whole reform is required really and I can’t see that happening.

My parents pension is 4 x my salary. When I tell them my pension projection they are horrified (and I have a professional job and ‘good’ pension). Not looking forward to getting old tbh..

I agree, making retirement so late is done on the assumption that everyone has a sedentary desk job. So many jobs are not and need to be able to retire earlier. I have a hip defect and it's just as well I do have a sedentary job, but no one with a condition like mine could keep doing a job that involves lots of standing and moving about late into life.

I partially agree with @MorningNinja the real aim is to get people to have their own pension great if you are young. I understand there had to be a cutoff but why didn’t they make that the generation that had all the information and work pensions etc. I’m 50 and just trying now to build a pot impossible I need the state pension at 67 which may go to 68. Then there were the set of woman an age above that got even more royally shafted. It also doesn’t make sense where they started in terms of age as we will all need to hang on to our jobs. What about the young trying to get jobs. I’m sure we have all had that older colleague or teacher who just can’t get to grips with things never mind throwing the menopause into the mix. I’m a graphic designer and I’m looking for something else who will want designs from me into my late 60s?

Can’t afford to pay multi decade pensions. We the PEOPLE are the ones paying not the ‘government’.

Have robots do all the backbreaking jobs is the only solutions

@0verth1inker, the point is that private pensions are funded by contributions being invested. If NI contributions had been invested and ringfenced for the state pension then surely that too would be self funded? Instead, the NI contributions just disappear into general government funds hence why we have current workers funding current state pensions.

Also lots more people are self employed so don’t have the employee contribution that’s the other reason I’m trying to get another job

@MissConductUS

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?

Can someone please answer my question?

[quote loislovesstewie]@0verth1inker, the point is that private pensions are funded by contributions being invested. If NI contributions had been invested and ringfenced for the state pension then surely that too would be self funded? Instead, the NI contributions just disappear into general government funds hence why we have current workers funding current state pensions.[/quote]
Nowhere near. NI was also supposed to cover the entire social provision, healthcare, unemployment benefit etc. as well as pensions. Lifetime contributions for the vast majority are a fraction of what would be required to cover the cost. To fully cover the cost ee's NI would need to have a base rate somewhere between 25-40% depending on actual earnings and how you accounted for non-workere in the working age population.

@MissConductUS
In the UK you can not start taking a state (national government) pension early, you can take private pensions early depending on the terms of the scheme. You can defer starting them for a higher rate, whether it is worth it depends on personal circumstances and personal life expectancy.

@MissConductUS

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?

We can't retire with the state pension until we reach a certain age, that age has been increased recently It used to be 60 for women and 65 for men but has gone up to 66 for both and will be increasing again. I could retire early with my local government pension but will only get my state pension at 66. Hope that helps.

MissConductUS:
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?

There is no scheme like that in the UK. It would be a good idea to introduce it. We can defer our pension to increase it but cannot take it early.

Poorer people do jobs with less physical activity (on average) than middle income earners. It's a myth that there are lots of labourers for life. The most physical labour jobs were overwhelmingly automated years ago. Much factory work got exported to China, too. Most high-income countries are service-heavy.

Do you want to know about an industry with widespread high physical activity levels .... teaching. School level, I mean. Teachers and school staff are on their feet a lot. Most school staff qualify as middle wage-level.

Fishing or Agricultural labourer are jobs where even the senior staff may still be doing quite a bit of physical labour. Also some groups like retail or sole traders. But only a tiny% of total population are in such jobs. Many transit from the high physical labour jobs to being own business or supervisor role within a few yrs. You can have no qualifications and succeed eventually to very senior management in farming or fishing.

There's an American taxonomy of occupational physical activity that decided bus drivers were among the most active -- all that arm movement. It is a hard thing to characterise. All that sitting is linked to HGV & bus drivers not being a healthy group, in general.

I don't care where the retirement age is set, btw. Just want to say that it's a myth that there are lots of people who worked 30+ years in a job with constant high physical labour that has worn their bodies out -- those career trajectories all but disappeared in the 1970s. Also, putting aside portfolio careers, Most people have a transition phase before they enter true full retirement when they take on less demanding, more likely part-time jobs. This can supplement their income before they want to start relying fully on pension.

Annie, there are plenty of areas in Scotland where life expectancy is below state retirement age. Where I live, for example, average male life expectancy is just under 66years. Healthy life expectancy is even worse.