Along with other major threats of the 21st century—climate change, biodiversity loss, pandemics, terrorism—sits global ageing. Indeed, the World Economic Forum Risks Index 2021 identified social security collapse as a long-term global existential threat.
One of the main questions around how economies will pay for their ageing populations emerges from the “high dependency ratio” between workers and non-workers, due to an increase in older people and a decrease in the proportion of younger people. For example, the OECD, the club of rich nations, noted that in 2017 most of its member countries would have more people leaving the labour force through retirement than entering work post-full-time education. The UK is particularly vulnerable, as current post-Brexit immigration policies are reducing the flow of younger labour which, since the mid-1970s, has compensated for the country’s low birth rate.
One way of tackling this upcoming labour shortage is to enable those older adults who wish to remain in employment to do so. Yet in today’s labour markets, the dependency risk predominantly arises from discrimination against older workers, increasingly defined as those over the age of 50, with numerous surveys suggesting that ageist stereotypes are presenting barriers to older adults both attaining and retaining employment. Slow work speed, low adaptability (particularly to new technologies), low skills uptake and being too cautious are all stereotypes expressed by employers. The assumption that older people are less flexible, less willing and able to retrain or to change jobs persists against all evidence.
One of the biggesy ageist myths to overcome is that older workers are less productive, which is based on general assumptions about declining health and physical capacity. These views derive from easily measurable variables such as muscle strength, whereas equally important attributes such as experience and strategic thinking are harder to calibrate. This is not helped by “celebrity employers” such as Mark Zuckerberg publicly stating, without hard evidence, that “young people are smarter.”
Indeed, between the ages of 20 and 70 there is—believe it or not—negligible decline in physical and mental activity. In general, variations within age groups far exceed those between age groups. In fact, there is now extensive evidence that crystallised intelligence—vocabulary, factual and procedural knowledge and strategic thinking—increases from mid-life, even for those in their 70s and 80s, and that productivity continues to increase until at least 65. In the UK, three-quarters of employers surveyed by YouGov agreed that older workers’ experience was crucial to the success of the organisation. Evidence from German car manufacturers with plants in Asia, Europe and the US found that average productivity actually increased in those workers who remained employed up to the age of 65.
Another damaging myth is the general preconception that older workers cost more. Yet seniority wages, which pertain in traditional, career progressive occupations like those in the public sector, have far less relevance in modern high-tech and service-based organisations and small- to medium-sized businesses. And it seems employers increasingly see commitment, experience and institutional knowledge as an asset, especially in a labour market where younger workers place a premium on job mobility. Thus, while UK average earnings between 1985 and 2010 for 35- to 54-year-old workers only increased in real terms by 14 per cent, those workers aged 60-64, 65-69 and 70-74 saw an increase of 54 per cent, 164 per cent and 300 per cent respectively. It seems that employers see the benefits of experienced, older workers.
But older workers take more sick leave, don’t they? No. Younger workers take more sick leave. Older adults are increasingly healthier. Finally, there is the still persistent but increasingly irrelevant view that older workers block the career progression of the young. This is despite a bank of evidence showing that a buoyant labour market increases work for all ages. As the UK government noted a decade ago, the employment rate of older people has little effect on the employment of younger people and, if anything, a higher employment rate of older adults tends to increase employment among the young.
An extension of working lives would address some of the challenges associated with ageing populations. But first, governments across high-income countries have to address considerable inequalities around health and education. They should also follow the recommendations from this year’s UN report on global ageism on how to tackle age discrimination. This can be done by changing policies and laws, by providing education and by encouraging intergenerational working and living, to enhance the mutual understanding of different age groups. Governments should be pursuing the opportunity to harness the experience, expertise and creativity of a historically large number of older people—and they must start now.
