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?

ps: and even the senior management in a school are on their feet a lot. Most likely, the HT never stops moving.

The current age of Retirement is crazy .My own Dad died when he was

in his 50s and FIL died well into his 90s! Dad worked as a Manual worker and had no private pension at all .DM used to ask him what he would do when he retired ,he would answer that he would work till he dropped! which sadly came true .FIL who I loved very much, was a Bank Manager and DH had a very comfortable upbringing .There has long been a huge gap between WC and MC jobs .I think it would be prudent to have a portion of State Pension avaliable at say 60 to 66 and the rest at retirement .This is done in other countries I think .It would be no different to private pensions as such

@1forAll74

I have had a few ordinary jobs in my life, some requiring hard and difficult work. I worked until I was 68, and I am now 79, and just receive the state pension.

I am in no way worn out at this age, and in good health, and not visited a GP. for about 28 years. I spend a lot of time, doing up my little old house here, and gardening, and also do a garden for another person. I just live alone, well with three cats.

You are very lucky...most people are not this fortunate

Morning Ninja I have a friend who worked at B and Q.She took the job with a young family to care for.At the time her DH was working on a building site,and he didnt have a regular wage to rely on .She couldnt afford to take part in their private pension or save ,as all her money was needed! Hence well into her 60s and still going .As she said she could retire a few years early ,but there would be no extra money and she would be scraping by .

@loislovesstewie

I took early retirement from a stressful job in the public sector. I wasn't on my feet all day doing a physical job but, my god was it stressful. I think people underestimate how awful it is to feel constantly stressed. I used to hope that something would happen to me so that I didn't have to go to work, well something did happen, I became ill mentally and that put paid to being able to work. I agree completely that 67 is much too old for retirement. I now have severe arthritis and I would never have been able to work the way I feel physically. BTW, if I hear one more person say 'I thrive on stress' I will scream. And another thing, it's the government's fault that they couldn't sort out investing the NI contributions so that the state pension self funds.

I had one of those jobs in the NHS, I left because of the stress and ended up with a manual labour job. So now I'm fit as fuck but 50 years old and I know I cant do this job til I'm 70. I'm menopausal and forgetful and now my body is starting to fall apart. At least in the NHS I earned considerably more.

balonsz

In deprived areas I think life expectancy is around 74 vs 83 in the more affluent areas.“

Heard a stat on radio 4 news a couple of weeks ago, Kensington and Chelsea in comparison to Blackpool, 27 years difference!!

I'll probably get slated for this, but I think that there are certain jobs that should be reserved for older/frailer people (where candidate exists) for exactly this reason. And obviously lots of these WC demanding jobs should be better paid in order that people can work PT to retirement/change direction if needed etc - wear and tear should be priced in.

@tiggerwhocamefortea

Retail is widely accepted as a low paid job - can't see how someone couldn't do that in their 60s so I think your logic flawed

What do you think retail involves?

Pulling cages full and empty?
Stacking all the shelves not just the ones at the right height?
Bundling up cardboard boxes putting it in skips bigger than you?
Standing all day?
If on the till, pulling heavy items with one hand?
When a shop refit happens its 15 hour days on your feet?

I'm in Belgium and as I understand certain professions do have the right to retire earlier - manual/heavy/nightwork etc. Maybe it is needed to have different retirement ages according to the profession you work in?

And yes, also the thing is that most people have just not paid enough tax to have free social and NHS care and a pension from 60 for perhaps 30 years. Even 40-45 years of solid working does not at a basic rate of 20% support 20-30 years of not working (even topped up with a private pension paid at a rate of 5-10%), being in progressively poorer health and expecting to pass on wealth to kids. This is not their fault - low wages, loss of defined benefit pensions schemes, longer life expectancy and improved medical interventions (so that you can expect certain conditions not to kill you - a great thing!). But really we need to be more honest about this and to work towards a cross party solution. Pretending NI (even invested) would have been enough is just not helpful.

My Dh said when he was younger, older people were put on lighter work.

I was a teacher and knackered. Teaching is such a brutal job for your body. What annoys me in this retirement age thing, is nobody has investigated the menopause.

A 3rd of women leave their jobs due to the menopause.

They should have left the retirement age at 65 for everyone.
My dp has a physical job, whereas mine is more just active. We've both had enough of working and have saved and invested for years in order to retire early. I do feel sorry for the people who have to carry on working until they are so poorly that their retirement is going to be mainly hospital appointments.
Because of our investments when we finally reach state pension retirement age we'll actually be really well off. There should be an option to take some sort of smaller state pension earlier if you can bolster it with savings etc.
Then jobs could be freed up for the younger generation.

I think this. There should also be an option to take it earlier depending on your physical health.

I got ill health retirement at 57. Still got to wait until 67 to get pension, even though I’m not well.

Older people leaving early gives younger people more job opportunities.

And my pension company declared me unfit for work. Can’t get PIp though

Thanks to all who answered my question.

The full retirement age for a government pension in the US used to be age 65 for everyone. To shore up the financial basis of the system, contributions were raised and the retirement age was gradually increased, with most of the increase only impacting younger people who had more time to adjust and plan for the change. Private pensions here can generally be taken starting at age 55, with deferral giving you a bigger benefit. Actuarily, the system tries to give everyone the same benefit, regardless of when you claim. Your benefit goes down by 8% for every year you claim it early and increases by 8% for every year you postpone it. There is a website where you can see your earnings records and calculate what you would receive at different ages.

There is a shortage of workers here now and one reason is that so many people decided to claim their Social Security Retirement benefits and retire early due to covid.

[quote julieca]@MorningNinja yes they have. But older womens pensions are affected by that discrimination. The pay gap used to be much higher and we didn't even have a minimum wage.
But suddenly we have an equal pension age with men as if we had an equal chance to build up a pension. We didn't. Its why most poor pensioners are women.
I know nobody cares though. I am resigned to working till 67 and struggling on and being poor in my old age. My loved ones will care but no one else gives a shit about poor older people.[/quote]
I know, my dh managed to save a decent pension and retired early, I'm still working and feel really resentful at times as I feel worn out

Looking at things purely from the working conditions point of view, highly qualified professionals/senior management do work very hard but have autonomy in their working life. People in lower ranking roles have little say in their tasks/ability to manage their job and more likely to be bullied. This makes a big difference in stress levels which can result in health issues and ability to carry on working for longer.

Please don't assume that all highly qualified professionals and in some organisations even senior management are all able to be autonomous and are exempt from bullying. Particularly In large corporates. This is a naive and Incorrect sweeping statement.

Those with good private or workplace pensions can get out sooner of course, and the state retirement age is ridiculously high. So I agree that it is unfair. But had to take you to take on your statements above.

I once worked a hard physical job where I was the only woman there and the rest of the staff were mostly older men, all old school grafters. It seemed like most of the people who retired passed away soon afterwards.

Maybe we need to do something really radical, like mandate that everyone under a certain age- say 35- does physical work, and then moves into a less physically demanding job as they get older. And not make exceptions for the intellectual elite or anybody else. A system like that could actually have some interesting positives: maybe you’d be more likely to choose work that genuinely suited you if some of the social expectations were different- if you couldn’t be a lawyer or a hedge fund manager, for example, until you were older.

Obviously there would need to be exceptions for younger disabled people, before someone points that out. But it could work for everyone else.

Thing is... like someone said, it is reasonably common that people start out at low paid jobs, move into higher paid jobs, then towards the end of their working life, move back into lower paid jobs, or PT work, or both low paid & part-time.

So if you say "lower paid staff should be allowed to retire earlier on full state pension" is that privilege based on their status when young, middle-aged, or older -- presumably should be adjusted for FT vs. PT. And who would administer & assess all the finer differences?

I think it would be prudent to have a portion of State Pension avaliable at say 60 to 66 and the rest at retirement

I don't even know what the last 5 words mean. Many people say they are "retired" which means they quit their Full time job and maybe also started drawing on one of their pensions, but they have actually have had paid PT work for many years since and concurrently. So what is "retirement"? Few people do the model of "work 47 years Full time then completely quit." That way of working barely exists any more.

Given we already have a system where people can access pension early &/or draw special benefits due to acquired disability ("can't work" status) it seems odd to argue in favour of blanket rules for low paid persons to enable early draw on retirement funds "because too worn out to work any more." as well.

Given life expectancy even in the poor areas is still high 70s, automatic access to pension fund at age (say) 52 would mean 1/3 of adult life not working for vast majority, in theory. That doesn't make sense.

Can't believe I'm sounding like a Tory. But am agreeing that upskilling people and improving general health in the lower socio-economic classes to keep them economically productive (due to better health) would be the best thing to help these folk. The benefits would be enjoyed across all areas of their life. Better sustained health into late middle age & beyond for people in those occupational groups, is ideal place to target resources, not offer early retirement as a default.

@Boood

Maybe we need to do something really radical, like mandate that everyone under a certain age- say 35- does physical work, and then moves into a less physically demanding job as they get older. And not make exceptions for the intellectual elite or anybody else. A system like that could actually have some interesting positives: maybe you’d be more likely to choose work that genuinely suited you if some of the social expectations were different- if you couldn’t be a lawyer or a hedge fund manager, for example, until you were older.

So we wouldn't have any doctors, lawyers, teachers, accountants, other professionals with decades of experience? They'd still be learning when they were 40. These professions also need diversity of age to keep them vibrant and vital.

I think the Chinese tried the heavy labour early in life and intellectual labours thing later (Cultural revolution). The system had problems.

What's the name of that genius guy who died about age 32, in the 1920s, he contributed to almost every science & philosophy going. He never would have made his great contributions if he hadn't been an intellectual first & foremost.

@RockingMyFiftiesNot

Looking at things purely from the working conditions point of view, highly qualified professionals/senior management do work very hard but have autonomy in their working life. People in lower ranking roles have little say in their tasks/ability to manage their job and more likely to be bullied. This makes a big difference in stress levels which can result in health issues and ability to carry on working for longer.

Please don't assume that all highly qualified professionals and in some organisations even senior management are all able to be autonomous and are exempt from bullying. Particularly In large corporates. This is a naive and Incorrect sweeping statement.

Those with good private or workplace pensions can get out sooner of course, and the state retirement age is ridiculously high. So I agree that it is unfair. But had to take you to take on your statements above.

That is insane, we would lose most skilled professions, decades of skilled working and it is a huge infringement of personal liberty.

The problem is that the state pension is so expensive to fund even with the age as late as it is, over £100 billion a year. It seems likely to me that the age is driven far more by what is affordable to the government than when people actually stop being productive at work. I’m 26 and over my lifetime I’m expecting taxes to rise to pay for it and state retirement age to rise quite a lot - probably something like 75, definitely after 70.