State Pension Age Case

[clubchamp98]

Yes but when I started paying in (1980) the life expectancy of a male was around 73, now it is 80 and the majority more active largely due to advances in medicine.

More people living longer = bigger pension bills, something had to be done and I think making us work an extra couple of years isn’t a major issue.

There will be some who have to retire earlier due to ill heath and there needs to be adequate provision for them.

But who can afford to live on a state pension alone, especially if still renting ?

That might be ok if you work in an office or non manual labour.
Manual jobs take their toll on your body.
But not many building workers and manual jobs can be done until 67.
Imagine taking tiles up a roof at 67 yrs old.

I had to climb a 60 ft to my crane cab I would not fancy that at 67.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

That might be ok if you work in an office or non manual labour.
Manual jobs take their toll on your body.
But not many building workers and manual jobs can be done until 67.
Imagine taking tiles up a roof at 67 yrs old.

I had to climb a 60 ft to my crane cab I would not fancy that at 67.

Or be a 67yr old nurse having to do a 12hr shift...as that is what nurses have to do - most of the time on your feet and on the go.

 

[clubchamp98]

Or be a 67yr old nurse having to do a 12hr shift...as that is what nurses have to do - most of the time on your feet and on the go.

Yes that’s my point the ones making the decisions are sitting on their arses in Parliament.
They can’t even do their own job properly?

 

[Lord Tyrion]

People slow down physically but they also slow down mentally. I've seen it with relatives generally but I have also seen it in a work place environment with people I have employed. The decline is marked. It does not make those people less likeable, less worthy as people etc but as an employer it makes them less employable. Companies are not charities, work / pay is a trade off. 65 was a great cut off for everyone. Increasing the age is going to cause a great deal of discomfort not just for employees but for employers who are going to have to have uncomfortable conversations with employees who have done nothing but age as we all do.

 

[clubchamp98]

People slow down physically but they also slow down mentally. I've seen it with relatives generally but I have also seen it in a work place environment with people I have employed. The decline is marked. It does not make those people less likeable, less worthy as people etc but as an employer it makes them less employable. Companies are not charities, work / pay is a trade off. 65 was a great cut off for everyone. Increasing the age is going to cause a great deal of discomfort not just for employees but for employers who are going to have to have uncomfortable conversations with employees who have done nothing but age as we all do.

One overlooked thing is if people stay in their jobs longer there are fewer jobs for the younger generation this is a backward step imo.

 

[pendodave]

Surely it's not beyond the wit of man to change jobs to something with fewer hours or which are less demanding? For many people, going from the structure and sociability of work to nothing is not at all life enhancing.
The trouble is that there are such huge variations in health, ability and employment history at age 65 that a 'one size fits all' pension solution is always going to be a poor fit for large sections of the population.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

One overlooked thing is if people stay in their jobs longer there are fewer jobs for the younger generation this is a backward step imo.

Not so sure that this has been overlooked - I have heard it raised and discussed at length.

But as governments often do about difficult things - the issue is the ignored or dismissed - the financial savings are all that matters. Of course what will happen in such as the NHS will that many nurses in the 60-67yr old category will go off sick due to stress and exhaustion - and as they will continue to be paid whilst off - additional funding will have to be found for bank nurses to cover - all the existing staff will have to do the cover. And when one or more of existing staff are older - they too then might well go off exhausted.

 

[clubchamp98]

Not so sure that this has been overlooked - I have heard it raised and discussed at length.

But as governments often do about difficult things - the issue is the ignored or dismissed - the financial savings are all that matters. Of course what will happen in such as the NHS will that many nurses in the 60-67yr old category will go off sick due to stress and exhaustion - and as they will continue to be paid whilst off - additional funding will have to be found for bank nurses to cover - all the existing staff will have to do the cover. And when one or more of existing staff are older - they too then might well go off exhausted.

I would say that’s true in most jobs .
We had to work 12 hr shifts to cover for absent drivers .
But it’s not rocket science the older you get the harder it is .
The retirement age was 65 for a reason!
This is a financial decision with no thought that the worker involved may not be able to do the job anymore.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

Surely it's not beyond the wit of man to change jobs to something with fewer hours or which are less demanding? For many people, going from the structure and sociability of work to nothing is not at all life enhancing.
The trouble is that there are such huge variations in health, ability and employment history at age 65 that a 'one size fits all' pension solution is always going to be a poor fit for large sections of the population.

What jobs do they move to? It sounds a nice idea, you slide from one type of job to a wind down type of job but what is that wind down job, who anyone doing it now, what happens to them?

When my mum retired she filled her time, still does, with hobbies and volunteering. She helps takes people to hospital, works in a volunteers only heritage shop, runs hobby classes. There are plenty of volunteer jobs out there that can keep you active mentally, physically and socially if you look for them, they don't have to be paid jobs (this only works if you have a pension you can live off of course). I agree with you that this is important

 

[clubchamp98]

I have total admiration for anyone who chooses to carry on working .
As long as they can do the job.
Most lads I knew couldn’t wait to get out.

Retraining is easier said than done but looks good on paper.
Money talks ,at least I will get mine at 66 I hope!!!
Younger people will be lucky to get one, but it will be a brave PM who abolished it!

 

[pendodave]

I would say that’s true in most jobs .
We had to work 12 hr shifts to cover for absent drivers .
But it’s not rocket science the older you get the harder it is .
The retirement age was 65 for a reason!
This is a financial decision with no thought that the worker involved may not be able to do the job anymore.

I work shifts, I certainly wouldn't feel great about doing so when I'm 65. However.... we have the option to take up job sharing which makes things a whole lot more palatable. I'm sure that there are many jobs (the nhs/nursing for example) where a more creative look at working practices would be of benefit to all. The idea that it's 12 hour shifts or nothing is something that needs to change.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

And on the NHS front just chuck into the pot the fact that nearly 1,0000,000 Babyboomer nurses will retire in the next 10yrs on their NHS pension...

That's a lot of experience going out of the door - 70,000 a year at the moment.

https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20170503.059894/full/

 

[clubchamp98]

I work shifts, I certainly wouldn't feel great about doing so when I'm 65. However.... we have the option to take up job sharing which makes things a whole lot more palatable. I'm sure that there are many jobs (the nhs/nursing for example) where a more creative look at working practices would be of benefit to all. The idea that it's 12 hour shifts or nothing is something that needs to change.

Agree I did shifts for 38yrs and the thought of doing nights at 67 on a physical job is just not good .
It was bad enough in my forty’s and fifties.

 

[jim8flog]

.
The retirement age was 65 for a reason!
.

Having worked in the insurance industry for years dealing with death claims I would agree with that comment. I dealt with an awful lot of claims for men around that age.

 

[SocketRocket]

And on the NHS front just chuck into the pot the fact that nearly 1,0000,000 Babyboomer nurses will retire in the next 10yrs on their NHS pension...

That's a lot of experience going out of the door - 70,000 a year at the moment.

https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20170503.059894/full/

10 Million, are you sure about that?

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

10 Million, are you sure about that?

typo - too many zeros...1,000,000

Still going to need a lot of replacing - though as much of it will be experience of many years - not so easily replaced. And obviously not so easily replaced when out of the EU - especially if EU27-sourced nurses have to satisfy a lower earnings threshold in order to stay - though nurses are likely to be an exempt group for which a much lower threshold applies. I am not sure how attractive a No Deal Brexit UK is going to be for EU27 nationals...but we will have to somehow replace all those retiring nurses.

 

[Deleted member 18588]

typo - too many zeros...1,000,000

Still going to need a lot of replacing - though as much of it will be experience of many years - not so easily replaced. And obviously not so easily replaced when out of the EU - especially if EU27-sourced nurses have to satisfy a lower earnings threshold in order to stay - though nurses are likely to be an exempt group for which a much lower threshold applies. I am not sure how attractive a No Deal Brexit UK is going to be for EU27 nationals...but we will have to somehow replace all those retiring nurses.

Still doesn't make sense as I understand there are only 600,000 to 650,000 nurses in the UK.

Over a period of ten years approximately one-sixth would have to be retiring each year.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Still doesn't make sense as I understand there are only 600,000 to 650,000 nurses in the UK

Apologies - I didn't know the figures - just knew of the wave of retirements that's coming - and I realise that I linked to a US site - doh.

From Nuffield Trust (April 2019)

There is also a threat posed by the ageing demographic of staff for some groups. For example, in the nursing professions there is a large cohort fast approaching pensionable age. A third are aged between 45 and 54 and one in seven (13.6%) are between 55 and 64. In midwifery the position is even starker, with a third of midwives already over 50 and eligible to consider retirement at 55.[37]

https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/re...numbers#8-what-is-the-outlook-for-the-future-

And this is forecast to contribute to a demand/supply shortfall of 250,000 nurses by 2030 if current staff employment rates are maintained and demand increases as expected.

 

[Colonel Bogey]

It’s a throwback, pension age for women was reduced to 60 from 65 in 1940, as women tended to marry men a few years older than themselves and generally married women did not work.

If you had the scenario of a man aged 65 and a woman aged 62, the man retired and took a pension, but the wife had to wait 3 years for hers, thus causing financial hardship for that time.

Now it has all changed, women have quite rightly fought for equality and have got it. Can’t have it both ways.

I have seen my pension age rise from 65 to 67 and I have no problem with that, we are living longer and it is a necessary change.

I hope you live those two extra years to be able to enjoy it then