Aug 27, 2010

Why Raising The Retirement Age Isn't Such A Good Idea

From Hard Work? Patterns in Physically Demanding Labor Among Older Workers by Hye Jin Rho:
Employment in physically demanding jobs or in jobs with difficult working conditions is a major cause of early labor-market exit among older workers. Raising the retirement age is particularly concerning for near-retirement age workers with such jobs. Despite the fact that the retirement age increase is supposed to encourage workers to work longer, many workers would be physically unable to extend work lives in their jobs, and they would most likely be left with no choice but to receive reduced benefits.

An analysis of the Current Population Survey (CPS) and Occupational Information Network (O*NET) shows that in 2009 6.5 million workers age 58 and older (about 35 percent) had physically demanding jobs, while 5.0 million workers age 58 and older (about 27 percent) had jobs with difficult working conditions. More than 8.5 million workers age 58 and older (about 45 percent) were employed in difficult jobs (physically demanding jobs or jobs with difficult working conditions).

Physically demanding jobs include general physical activities, handling and moving objects, spending significant time standing, or having any highly physically demanding work. Highly physically demanding jobs involve such elements as dynamic or trunk strength, or kneeling or crouching. Difficult working conditions include cramped workspace, labor outdoors, or exposure to abnormal temperatures, contaminants, hazardous equipment, or distracting or uncomfortable noise.
It is easy to think that raising the retirement age to 69 or 70 would be no problem -- if you work in an office and seldom have any significant interaction with people who truly labor for a living. Unfortunately, the people making decisions about this work in offices and seldom have significant interaction with people who truly labor for a living.

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

I agree.

when has the wealthy or over-paid federal workers($100,000)ever understood the smaller person? I do realize there are a very few that do.

Anonymous said...

Arguably, some of these older workers might still qualify for disability benefits. But how does forcing workers to remain in the workforce make sense these days with official unemployment rates near 10%?

Anonymous said...

It's funny how Anonymous keeps railing against federal workers making over $100,000 on an attorney's blog. Federal workers' pay averages $71,206 while attorneys average much more than $100,000.

Anonymous said...

On topic, the real life impact of a career of hard manual labor seems to be just a concept to folks in "management" (be it congress, think tanks, etc). I would suggest that until folks who earn a living in physically demanding or dangerous jobs stand up and make their numbers and needs known, the pedagogic view of delayed retirement will have power. Perharps AARP could focus on the specific impact of delayed retirement on the "non-office" worker cadre and counter act this idea with people and facts.

Anonymous said...

In defense of my statements...private attorney's have expenses such as payroll and rent...alj's and staff attorneies don't.

ritamac said...

People who work in offices do have "significant interaction" with people who labor for a living, but I suspect said laborers are just invisible to those white collar workers. After all, you have housekeepers in hotels that you pass in the hallway every morning of your stay, you have cafeteria workers in the large office buildings, you have the waitresses in the restaurants, stockers at the Wal-Marts or Costco. All of those jobs are at the least light work. I've seen this fallacy of the abilities of older people in the workplace expressed in many different blogs. It seems to be the accepted wisdom that with the technological boom of the last 25 years has come a sedentary workplace for all. And, of course, the decline in unions means that the people who do our grunt work really are invisible.

I challenge any of our policy makers to try to do even a cashier's job, standing for 6 hours during a day, every day, much less something truly taxing. I couldn't do it, and I know none of them could, either.