older worker

The Answer to the U.S. Labor Crisis: Older Workers

/in , /by

AARP recently reported on the difficulties Americans over 50 are having finding new jobs. I’m glad AARP flagged this issue, but the takeaway can’t simply be “We need to be nicer to old people.”

Instead, it’s urgent that we see this problem for what it is: a real threat to continued economic growth in the United States.

Read more

higher ed older adults

The Path Forward for Higher Education in the Age of Longevity

/in , , /by

Institutions like Harvard, Stanford and Cambridge have shown they’re serious about creating in-depth educational opportunities for middle-aged and older adults in recent years.

I applaud their efforts — but I don’t think they are enough.

In a Forbes piece titled Higher Ed Meets Longevity: The Global Rise Of Midlife Education, Avivah Wittenberg-Cox highlights programs at 12 universities across the globe.

“Higher education is being redesigned for the second half of our lengthening lives,” she writes.

Without criticizing the Harvard Advanced Leadership Initiative or the Stanford Distinguished Careers Institute (DCI), it’s important to point out that these are typically expensive programs at elite universities, designed for those at the top of org charts and the wage scale.

They’re valuable, and I’m glad they exist.

But to have a significant impact on the economy — and society — we need universities, colleges and even technical schools to open opportunities for those aged 40 to 75, across the economic spectrum and, in particular, for those whom we have typically considered middle-income. All of us, including the institutions, stand to benefit.

Avivah’s piece focuses on programs that serve successful executives who are looking to go from success to significance — finding meaning in their work and giving back.

But in countries like the U.S., where average lifespan is increasing and adults want (or need) to work longer, higher education should also serve:

👉The construction worker who feels their days of working a physically demanding job are coming to an end, but needs to continue to draw a paycheck.

👉The middle-aged knowledge worker for whom AI isn’t just coming for their job, it has come and now they need programs and training that offer them the opportunity to reskill for their next career.

👉The 50-something middle manager who decides 30 years in one industry is long enough, and is ready to make a move.

Here’s the bottom line: 30- and 40-year careers will not support an economy with 100-year lifespans. Instead, we need to build the infrastructure for what will soon be 60- and 70-year careers.

And they may well be careers, plural. That’s where the opportunity lies for colleges, technical schools and universities. They can provide training and inspiration for second and even third careers. Middle-aged workers need the opportunity to learn skills for their next career, and the strength of our economy will depend upon it.

U.S. higher education has reached the edge of a “demographic cliff” — a decline in the number of high school graduates, due to declining birth rates around the time of the Great Recession.

These institutions need to find new students.

And middle-aged and older workers need to find ways to remain productive contributors to a changing economy as they approach and pass traditional retirement age.

This is a golden opportunity to truly re-energize our economy. Let’s not miss it.

samuel moyn op-ed

Offering Simplistic Solutions to Real Problems of an Aging Society

/in , , , /by

With the headline “Older Americans Are Hoarding America’s Potential,” a recent New York Times piece by Yale professor Samuel Moyn has, understandably, attracted a lot of attention in my networks.

Much of the attention is critical, and I share some of those criticisms. But let’s recognize that Moyn identifies real problems.

He writes, for example, that older Americans deserve a better-funded long-term care system. I agree. Our long-term care and healthcare systems (or lack of systems) incentivize older people to hold on to wealth in fear that a medical emergency could wipe them out financially.

Unfortunately, Moyn’s piece offers simplistic solutions to the problems he identifies. For example:

➡️Voting: He writes that older Americans are overrepresented in elections, and they contribute a disproportionate amount of campaign donations.

I agree that younger Americans should have more influence in politics. Moyn focuses on reducing the impact of older voters and the older politicians they often vote for.

Instead, we should fix a political landscape that leaves younger voters feeling like it’s not worth voting at all.

➡️ Housing: Moyn suggests “a progressive tax on older homeowners to incentivize them to downsize rather than retain.”

I think many older adults would downsize without a nudge — if there was somewhere to go.

But we’re building the wrong type of housing. Very little new stock is all-age accessible. We build tall townhouses with no elevators because developers claim they’re too expensive. New housing for young adults often includes large HOA fees.

In the end, the options for older adults who want to move are impractical or unaffordable — or both.

➡️ Workforce: Citing a lack of opportunity for young and middle-aged workers, Moyn suggests we reinstitute mandatory retirement.

But forcing out older adults who want to work makes no sense given current demographic realities.

Immigration levels are falling dramatically. The number of 18-year-olds is plummeting as well. Even if the government incentivizes larger families, that won’t make a difference for 20 years, if at all.

Given these trends, we should be asking “Where will the workers come from?” The answer is older adults. We need to expand, not reduce, the age range of our workforce.

I also have an issue with the piece more broadly: using the word “gerontocracy.” It’s sensationalist, fanning the flames of ageist ideas which will not solve the real problems Moyn outlines.

His piece sends the message — perhaps not intentionally — that our problem is too many old people with too much influence. Too many old people at work, too many old people in single-family homes, and too many old people in the political process, from voters to elected leaders.

He doesn’t go so far as to ask, “How can we reduce the number of old people in society?”

But his line of reasoning may lead others there. And that’s alarming.

age discrimination hiring workplace

When Algorithms and AI Become Excuses for Ageism

/in , /by

Jacqueline Freeman wrote an incisive piece on “youth-biased AI algorithms” weeding out job applicants aged 50 or older last summer. Then in the fall, Accenture’s CEO revealed they are “exiting” staff who “don’t have a viable path for skilling” in AI.

To me, these stories are connected.

What ties them together? Ageism.

Freeman’s piece provides a real-world look at what’s happening in today’s job market. Even though her story appeared in a UK-based publication, the points apply here in the U.S. as well.

“Men and women at the top of their game, with years of experience, just don’t tick the AI boxes” when they apply for new positions, she wrote. Often they don’t even get a reply,  ending up “ghosted.”

I have often said that ageism is a prejudice against our future selves. Freeman makes a similar point: Ageist hiring and personnel practices are undermining the future earnings of many companies.

“It’s a catastrophic loss to the workplace, because of what older workers bring that no algorithm can replicate: culture,” she writes. “We’ve seen enough to know what matters. We know when to speak, when to listen, and when to quietly fix what others haven’t noticed yet. That’s not just competence, that’s important cultural infrastructure.”

And as she looks toward the future, she asks an important question:

“We hear that automation is wiping out entry-level roles too …  meaning many of the youngest workers never get trained. So, if the young don’t get a chance at the start of their career … and the experienced are weeded out at the top, we need to seriously ask, what the hell is left in the middle?”

I would add on to Freeman’s piece by asking why so few seem to see the value of experience in the workplace.

As computer-driven algorithms, robotics and “smart” factories and devices proliferate, we’re actually going to need even smarter human beings at work. As AI and tech explode, we’ll need a greater degree of experience, perspective and judgment to use it effectively and not destructively.

Where are we going to find those qualities? Will it help if we follow Accenture’s lead and lay off employees who are deemed unable to “reskill” on artificial intelligence?

That sounds like code for pushing out older workers for younger, less expensive workers — just the opposite of what we’ll need in the industries of the future.

Organizations like Sugarwork understand this, and are focused on retaining older talent and their institutional knowledge. We need more of this.

As Freeman writes:

“This isn’t about making space (for workers in their 50s and 60s). It’s about refusing to waste it. … If you’ve got experience, own it – don’t shrink it.”

aarp video millennials what old looks like

Why We Need a New Narrative for Aging

/in , , /by

I’ve been saying for some time that we desperately need a new narrative for aging in this country.

If you’re not sure what that means — or why it’s needed — three recent pieces do a great job of explaining why.

I’ll tackle them one by one:

1. AARP Asks Young People “What age do you consider to be old?”

In a video, AARP asked several young people to name an age that they consider “old,” and to show how they picture old people.

The responses were ages that few if any of you would call old: 40s, late 40s, 50, etc.

And when asked to show how an old person crosses the street or sends a text, the young people limped, shuffled, squinted and grimaced. It wasn’t pretty.

The video did a great job of showing the challenge we face: A generation (or generations) that holds a variety of out of touch, ageist attitudes.

2. The Wall Street Journal Shows the Difficulty of Navigating Job Loss for Older Workers

Veronica Dagher and Anne Tergesen write that “a bumpy transition often awaits people who get laid off or take buyouts late in their careers.”

One of the older adults interviewed was Kevin Crain, 64, who took early retirement from Bank of America. He found part-time work and his footing — eventually.

“Had I known there were ways to transition into retirement and still work and be engaged,” Crain said, “I would have thought about doing it earlier.”

Crain discovered there’s no roadmap available for our later years.

Many still expect to retire in their 50s or 60s and die in their 60s or 70s. But modern careers and lives don’t often work out that way.

This piece shows what’s at stake for older adults on a personal level. Older Americans not only struggle to find new jobs, they struggle to find the sense of identity and purpose that often go along with the work.

3. Axios Focuses on the Challenges an Aging Society Creates

The U.S. population of adults over 65 is growing, and the cohort under 18 is shrinking. Axios delved into this demographic trend and its potential effects — highlighting the problems.

The piece lists 11 states with more older adults than children and talks about the burdens these states face. They will need more careworkers, for instance. Economic decline could be next.

The thing is, this article assumes that older Americans are done being productive. They will be only a burden, with not enough young people available to support them.

We face a grim future if we assume older adults have nothing to contribute to society.  That’s a faulty assumption. They have plenty to offer.

Conclusion

These three pieces make it clear that the stakes are high, and stereotypes about older adults run deep.

That’s why we need a new narrative about aging.

It seems like a tall task. But if you want to feel hopeful, watch until the end of the AARP video. When the young people spend time with older adults, their attitudes change.

It’s evidence that we’re not stuck in the present. People, and society, can evolve.

Older Adults Are Willing to Work, But Will They Be Wanted?

/in , /by

It’s clear that more and more older adults will be willing to work past traditional retirement age in the coming years.

What’s less clear is this: Will they be wanted?

A post by Mary Cronin on LinkedIn brought this question to mind a few weeks ago. Mary’s post highlighted recent studies that showed increases in the number of Americans who expect to work past age 65 — or, in some cases, to never retire.

On average, the younger the respondent, the later in life they expect to work.

“When asked whether it’s likely they will need to work past retirement age to finance a longer life, a resounding 78% of Millennials responded ‘yes,’ followed by 52% of Boomers and Gen-Xers,” Mary wrote.

So there’s an obvious willingness to work later in life — much of it stemming from a feeling that they’ll need the money, but also coming from a desire to stay engaged in the world, pursue a passion, or fulfill some larger purpose.

Are employers and society at large ready for this? I’m not so sure. Ageism and ageist stereotypes often prevent companies from hiring workers they perceive as “older.” Older workers within companies have to fight harder for promotions or to avoid involuntary retirement, as well. Many of us expect older adults to step down or step aside when they reach a certain age, too.

It’s frustrating, especially when we see labor shortages persist across many industries. The largest untapped workforce in America today is adults between the ages of 55 and 85.

How do we make change here? It will take effort at all levels of society, but I think it’s important to make sure young people are a part of the effort.

When I speak to graduate and undergraduate students, I tell them something like this:

“You have the most at stake in issues involving aging. Why? Because you are far more likely to live longer than I am.

“And you have time to change these societal attitudes. They’re not going to change in time for me. But they can for you — and they will have to if you don’t want to be consigned to social, cultural and economic irrelevance at age 65 or even 75, when you may live till 97.”

Andrew Scott

‘We Need to Think About Aging Very Differently’

/in , /by

“We’ve got to change how we age.”

That’s a statement made by economist and author Andrew J. Scott in a recent interview with McKinsey & Company. In our current age of longevity, of course he is correct.

Coverage of longevity and the longevity economy too often frames it as a looming disaster. The focus is on increased care burdens, rising health care costs, more loneliness and more loss. But Andrew excels at revealing the many opportunities that longevity presents.

He talks about the economic opportunity in serving older adults 𝗮𝗻𝗱 in serving those in their 30s, 40s and 50s who are realizing they probably have a lot more life to live. And he talks about the economic opportunities presented to employers in the form of older workers.

“We need to think about aging very differently,” he says in the interview. “The ultimate point here is that we’ve got to change how we age so we don’t outlive our health, our wealth, our finances, our skills, our relationships. If we’re going to change how we age, then at whatever your age, you should be behaving differently from past generations.”

It’s so important to highlight these opportunities and call for change, because we’re in uncharted territory. We live in a society that is built for people to retire in their 60s and die five or 10 years later. We haven’t adjusted to the reality that many (but not all) people are living much longer.

If we follow the prescriptions made by experts like Andrew, we can do more than add years to people’s lives — we can put more life into those added years. If we do it right, we can harness the longevity economy and, in the end, reap a longevity dividend.

—

(I should also mention how good it is to see McKinsey, which serves as a platform for idea dissemination in the global business community, amplifying Andrew’s thoughts and recognizing the power of healthy longevity. Obviously they recognize the importance of this issue.)

older man seeking work

Many Americans Over 65 Want to Work. How Do We Keep Them in the Workforce?

/in , /by

“Planning on retiring at 65? Most Americans retire far earlier — and not by choice.”

That was the headline on CBS Moneywatch’s recent coverage of a disappointing trend. It’s disappointing in several ways:

  • Many older Americans want to work into their late 60s, 70s, or beyond because it provides a sense of connection and purpose.
  • Other Americans simply need to work past 65 for financial reasons.
  • Employers in nearly every industry need more, not fewer, workers.

If we were able to satisfy all three of those groups, it would be a win-win-win. So how do we get there?

I advocate a two-pronged approach.

1) Employers in white-collar industries and other professions where it’s feasible to work into your 70s and beyond need to adjust their policies and overcome ageist assumptions.

Many of these employers fail to account for their older workers who also serve as caregivers, for instance. This is especially true for women in their 50s and 60s who often are forced to step back or out of a job in order to care for an aging parent or spouse.

Others aren’t willing to train older workers to help them keep up with younger colleagues’ skills — while retaining the experience, loyalty and other valuable traits older workers tend to possess.

And still other employers won’t change their leave policies to accommodate older employees. Many want to stay on, but with a bit more time off as they age, perhaps for a long-anticipated trip. They fear they’ll lose their job even if they take unpaid leave to travel.

The bottom line: Many employers don’t realize how older workers’ needs change, nor do they value the significant benefits they bring to the job. That’s ageism.

2) For workers in jobs that are difficult to perform after age 60, we need to create pathways to new careers.

I’m talking about older adults who have worked physically taxing jobs for most of their lives. Or those in risk-laden roles like police, fire and the military. Often, these older workers are on the lower side of the income scale. They need to retire, but they can’t afford to.

These workers’ plights remind me of a senior living community employer who told me about hiring a former truck driver. The ex-driver moved from a lonely, draining job to one that allowed him to be involved in people’s lives on a daily basis. The residents knew him and counted on him, and he felt he made a difference simply by showing up with a smile and a desire to engage.

That’s the kind of example we need to follow: Helping older adults move from physically, emotionally and mentally demanding jobs into new lines of work.

When employers do that — and when they adjust policies in white-collar industries — they can offer older adults the chance to work as long as they want or need. And they’ll reap the benefits of a more experienced, loyal and productive workforce, too.

Frustrated executive looking at camera at office

With Increased Longevity, Young Adults Should Consider a New Type of Career Path

/in , /by

Many young adults feel like they face an unpleasant choice over the course of their work lives: Try to climb an increasingly shaky career or corporate ladder, or bounce around between different jobs and professions.

I believe there’s a third choice, however, enabled by increased longevity: A “sequential” career, defined by work that fits the different stages of a life that could easily extend until age 100. The sequential career can be a sort of “happy medium” with these distinct advantages:

  • It offers the flexibility that many Gen Z and younger Millennial workers say they want in a career.
  • It makes saving for retirement easier than a career path that, as Dr. Joe Coughlin wrote recently, is “more akin to riding pogo sticks, with leaps, bounds, and occasional bounces not just between jobs but from profession to profession.”
  • It can change as your sense of purpose, your passions or your financial needs evolve over time.

To expound upon that last point, I believe an increasing number of adults will discover that having different careers in different periods of their lives is the best plan. One career may work best for your single years, another for the years where you’re married with children, and another once the kids have gone off to college.

Career breaks for a sabbatical or additional learning may make sense for many, as well.

And some workers, after decades of physically demanding or high stress labor, may want to train for a new mode of work. Their bodies literally cannot absorb the continued physical demands or the mental stress of their current jobs. For instance, I have seen ex-truck drivers transition into jobs in senior living and love it — trading the isolation of long hauls for human interaction where they can literally put a smile on someone’s face every day.

If the traditional career path is a long commitment to a single company or industry, and the “pogo stick” path involves frequent and unpredictable change, the sequential career is a compromise. You don’t feel tethered to a single career, but you’re spending enough time in a few careers to build up the financial equity and professional credibility that’s hard to accumulate if you’re bouncing around.

We know that very few careers will be spent in one company or one industry any more. And many careers will extend into a worker’s 70s and 80s — in some cases out of necessity, and in some cases by choice. So we are no longer talking about a 30- or 40-year work journey. It could be a 60-year work journey. A sequential career path should increase the odds that the journey is both financially and personally rewarding.

Gen X worker

Ageism Hurts Gen X, too — Especially in the Workplace

/in , /by

Generation X is not the cohort that comes up first during discussions of ageism. But Gen X definitely is feeling the impact of age-related bias in the workplace — to their detriment, and the detriment of their myopic employers.

In a 2022 AARP survey, roughly 80% of workers aged 40 to 65 said they had either witnessed or personally faced age discrimination at work. That’s the highest percentage recorded since AARP began asking older adults about the issue in 2003.

Gen Xers, whose ages will range between 44 and 59 in 2024, are experiencing ageism at a particularly bad moment. Many are mid-career and in the “sandwich” phase of life, where they are both caring for kids and aging parents. They face significant burdens on both their time and their money, and most are not ready to stop working.

Yet they face the same tropes and false assumptions about age and aging that Boomers are confronting.

Christina Matz, associate professor at the Boston College School of Social Work and director of the Center on Aging and Work, described Xers’ plight in a recent BBC piece:

“They’re labeled as slower and set in their ways, well-meaning on one hand and incompetent on the other,” Matz said. “People of a certain age are considered out of touch, and not seen as progressive and innovative.”

In the same piece, Anne Burmeister, a professor in the faculty of management, economics and social sciences at the University of Cologne, Germany, says “Assumptions like these are not only potentially discriminatory and often inaccurate, they’re also at odds with today’s workforce realities,” adding they make “no business sense.”

I couldn’t agree more. So many U.S. industries need workers right now. As the BBC piece points out, older workers are experienced, often with a strong work ethic, lower rates of absenteeism, and better emotional stability than their younger colleagues.

So ageist practices are counter-productive for employers. They’re alienating and dismissing what could be a core segment of their workforce.

There are notable companies, such as the startup Sugarwork, that are seeking to help companies address this issue. They assist in retaining institutional knowledge, talent and leadership, as well as keeping older workers engaged in meaningful ways.

Similarly, author Andrew J. Scott’s books “The 100 Year Life” and “The Longevity Imperative” (which will be released this month in the U.S.), recognize that more people will live into their 80s, 90s and even 100s in the near future, so writing off workers in their 50s is folly. The social demographic trends are undeniable.

The only people who seem to be in denial are the leaders in HR departments and corporate boardrooms, as they decide who to hire, who to promote and who to retain based on unfair, inaccurate stereotypes.

© Nexus Insights. All rights reserved.