To think increasing pension age isn’t going to add up?

[Tiredandconfused23]

I was reading a few recent studies about the employment situation for over 50s, basically confirming how this age group struggles to return to work, is more likely to be laid off and/or forced into early retirement and how a far higher proportion are in poverty and/or insecure employment than other age groups. And how, despite years of pushback against age bias, it’s only increased in recent years.

If we accept this, I can’t help feeling the idea that increasing the pension age so we work longer, thus save money on benefits, isn’t going to add up. Many people in their fifties would happily carry on working - the issue is many employers may not want us. You can’t keep working if there’s no job to work at.

AIBU to think we may soon be facing a load of older people on benefits, often through no fault of trying, rather than claiming a pension? Would this be seen as still more favourable by the Government?

@Bodeganights

The statistics (with links) I posted upthread

857,000 job vacancies in the UK

But there's more people than available jobs on unemployment benefits (the figures I linked upthread are for unemployment benefits, so not including disability benefits).

Numbers on unemployment benefits are higher than total job vacancies in the UK.
Approximately 1.63 million people

This.

I take the view that I am a 'prime' employee.

I'm beyond the age when I'm out with the girls drinking every night, I'm too old to get pregnant, no relationship hassles, no caring responsibilities, am bulletproof on the phone or face-to-face with Joe Public, I've got 35 years experience of computers and can deal with almost every issue, squeaky clean driving licence and I have no trouble getting out of bed in the morning. 🙂

Even I would employ me.

I'm late 40s although have historicallly looked younger than my age , this is now catching up with me eg at a recent medical appointment I was asked if I had grandchildren which initially I thought was a bit weird but then realized time is catching yo with me ( technically I could have grandchildren if I'd had kids earlier I suppose...just wasn't ready to ne seen as a 'granny')

Currently job hunting and worried about ageism for the first time. Have de-aged my CV but I can't de-age what I look like at interview! Also worried about things like long commutes with diminishing energy levels. 8 years to go on the mortgage, but sadly not much in the pension pot. All feels very unstable really.

And there are a lot of jobs which are part time, zero hours, low paid etc, and another set of employers who want the world of experience and qualification and are not going to get it, but keep advertising...

I think the 67 is imminent and 68 was supposed to be in place before 2050 but I think they will bring it in quicker maybe 2040 and introduce 69 by 2050. I've told my son's to expect pension not to be paid from 70 when they are old.

It's called the feminisation of poverty.
On average many women are socialised into lower paid work, we earn less, have more limited careers often due to time out for childcare and elder care, we have lower pension contributions, and lower pensions, and as the final cherry on top, we live longer.

Headlines
The main headline figures for the DWP benefits in this report
In the year to August 2023:
Employment and Support Allowance fell by 5.3% to 1.6 million claimants
Income Support fell by 18.3% to 140,000 claimants
Jobseeker’s Allowance fell by 1.6% to 88,000 claimants

From the government's own website.

That 88 thousand on job seekers as I already stated.

Anyone else isnt important, it's those on jobseekers who are supposed to be looking for a job.
The rest are self funding,already in work or too disabled to work.

In the past most people entered workplace at 15/16 years now most go to uni and don't enter the workplace until 21/22 years. Older people have often worked for 6 years by the age of 21-22.

@outdooryone some of the jobs I see advertised are ridiculous. So much responsibility & work load for shit pay! 30k in 2010 is approx 45k in todays money, how many jobs still pay 2010 rates.

The point is, even if every single person currently on unemployment benefits were given a chance by employers currently recruiting (trained up/retrained on the job etc), there would still be a surplus of people looking for jobs.

There's not enough jobs to go around for working age people.

And as my link upthread notes, youth unemployment has increased - so it seems more sensible to focus on job opportunities for younger people starting out. Instead of having a high pension age - especially as older people are more likely to be less able to work (ill health or caring for elderly relatives etc).

In the past most people entered workplace at 15/16 years now most go to uni and don't enter the workplace until 21/22 years.

I’m a millennial & I’ve payed NI since I was 17, easy enough with a weekend/holiday job around study. I’m not an anomaly

youth unemployment has increased - so it seems more sensible to focus on job opportunities for younger people starting out. Instead of having a high pension age - especially as older people are more likely to be less able to work (ill health or caring for elderly relatives etc).

The only reason pension age is increasing is because of affordability & an ageing population. Despite the fact you think it’s a blip…

Women received a pension at 60 but were often in the workplace at 15/16 not 21/22. Today women work similar number of years in workplace but start and finish working later.

@Bodeganights I don't know where you got your figures as there's no link but you're quoting figures for 2023

The links I provided give figures for 2024. Which show that there's more people on job seekers benefits than there are total job vacancies. (And some of those jobs will be only part-time or temporary work).

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/dwp-benefits-statistics-february-2024/dwp-benefits-statistics-february-2024

One reason for increased unemployment amongst the young is because the traditional sectors they worked in have declined. All my uni friends worked in pubs, clubs, bars or shops.

And I already stated about some roles part time/shifts/zero hours etc.

If older people aren't retiring until later, there is less natural progression in jobs, which means less vacancies for young people. Employers can only afford so many staff & if the ones at the top of the age range are taking longer to retire, how are they supposed to be able to afford to take on young people leaving education?

It’s also often more expensive to make older workers redundant.

Automation has done for a lot. When I started in banking my middle-sized branch had 70 people working in it. Now, if you can find a bank at all, there's hardly anyone in it.

Lack of retraining opportunities is a massive hindrance. We are still in the mindset of train and then do that job until retirement. For physical jobs that’s unrealistic.
So many posts on here I’m a teacher what can I do instead.
I had a total change at 40 into local government. We are crying out for staff. Older people would be well suited to the work for transferrable skills reasons but there’s no plan to advertise as adult apprentice roles or full training suit career changer.

What is the solution? We can't all retire at 60, people live for so long now. The line has to be drawn somewhere and I know it has caused a few in my social group to really think about and save towards their retirements.

I feel for the younger generations. Everyone seems to want better than what the generation before them had. I just don't think it's possible or acceptable to expect the younger generations to pick up the tab.

The "ageing population" has paid their share. 40-50 years of (full-time, in many cases) work.

And there is affordability. There's billions of pounds floating around. It's simply being misspent and not fairly distributed.

And people were lectured and pushed to be healthier - give up smoking, eat healthy, reduce alcohol consumption etc. Can't now blame them when there's a loss of the many billions of smoking and alcohol revenue and they don't die younger.

Someone suggested it just means being more unhealthy rather than dying younger - but statistically smokers die younger than non-smokers. That's why smokers qualify for enhanced private pension annuities.

(NB. I'm not necessarily saying everyone should smoke, drink heavily, and eat unhealthily - but people can't complain about "ageing population" when people don't do those things).

Thanks for the link @Bodeganights

I realise where our confusion has come from now

It's that (imo awful) change from old style benefits, including JSA, to Universal Credit.

The figures I quoted cover all forms of unemployment benefit (UC or the older JSA)

@Windchimesandsong

I don’t even know where to begin!

It’s a fact our population is ageing & we have a capitalist system. It’s pointless ignoring these facts when discussing the topic.