UK ‘barking up wrong tree’ trying to get over-50s back to work(theguardian.com)
theguardian.com
UK ‘barking up wrong tree’ trying to get over-50s back to work
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/feb/20/over-50s-back-to-work-uk-lcp-report
64 comments
Do most software companies even hire people over 50 when the applicant doesn’t disguise themself as a younger person?
This isn't about software engineers, it's more about the nurses, GPs, teachers and everyone else who has said "well, sod this for a game of soldiers" and retired early rather than be paid to little to be the ablative armour of a system stretched to breaking.
For many NHS workers there is even a stronger incentive not to work at least not for the NHS.
The UK has a life time pension allowance once you reach it there is a huge tax penalty.
NHS workers have a defined benefit scheme on which you can easily reach the LTA within a few decades especially as a doctor.
Once you do that you are stuck with a massive tax penalty that makes it utterly pointless to work because your take home can be literal pennies as the tax liability after reaching the LTA is 60% which in a DB pension would be added to your annual tax bill unlike a defined contribution pension which will simply be raided by the HMRC when you retire.
Also previously HMRC has raided pension funds firstly by introducing the LTA then by shrinking it the LTA now is circa £1.2M the LTA of those who retired a decade ago it was £2.5M…
So if you can afford to retire early you also are incentivized to do so because it locks down your pension and secures it from any future raids by the government.
I can’t stress how terrible and backwards the tax system in the UK is.
It forces a tiny minority to pay for most of the tax burden whilst providing them for absolutely no benefits in return since nearly every benefit in the UK is means tested and the bastards know how to pay the least so they conveniently chose which benefits are means tested based on the highest earner in each household.
So if your partner works whelp no unemployment or housing benefit for your most likely… someone in your household earns over £50K? Well no child allowance…
At £100K you also lose 30 hours of free childcare per week and tax free childcare I known people that took a pay cut and turned down bonus payments because those benefits can easily be worth £20-30K of salary at 40% marginal tax rate in London.
The UK has a life time pension allowance once you reach it there is a huge tax penalty.
NHS workers have a defined benefit scheme on which you can easily reach the LTA within a few decades especially as a doctor.
Once you do that you are stuck with a massive tax penalty that makes it utterly pointless to work because your take home can be literal pennies as the tax liability after reaching the LTA is 60% which in a DB pension would be added to your annual tax bill unlike a defined contribution pension which will simply be raided by the HMRC when you retire.
Also previously HMRC has raided pension funds firstly by introducing the LTA then by shrinking it the LTA now is circa £1.2M the LTA of those who retired a decade ago it was £2.5M…
So if you can afford to retire early you also are incentivized to do so because it locks down your pension and secures it from any future raids by the government.
I can’t stress how terrible and backwards the tax system in the UK is.
It forces a tiny minority to pay for most of the tax burden whilst providing them for absolutely no benefits in return since nearly every benefit in the UK is means tested and the bastards know how to pay the least so they conveniently chose which benefits are means tested based on the highest earner in each household.
So if your partner works whelp no unemployment or housing benefit for your most likely… someone in your household earns over £50K? Well no child allowance…
At £100K you also lose 30 hours of free childcare per week and tax free childcare I known people that took a pay cut and turned down bonus payments because those benefits can easily be worth £20-30K of salary at 40% marginal tax rate in London.
> rather than be paid to little to be the ablative armour of a system stretched to breaking
Love that imagery. Although I work for a tech consulting firm rather than having a real/useful job like those you describe, I would apply the same sentiment. The difference is that while public services are being worn away at an accelerated rate due to a lack of maintenance, tech is like The Bus That Couldn't Slow Down - hurtling along with bits (and people) flying off in all directions, desperate to avoid going below that critical speed.
Love that imagery. Although I work for a tech consulting firm rather than having a real/useful job like those you describe, I would apply the same sentiment. The difference is that while public services are being worn away at an accelerated rate due to a lack of maintenance, tech is like The Bus That Couldn't Slow Down - hurtling along with bits (and people) flying off in all directions, desperate to avoid going below that critical speed.
Consultancies are, working directly is very different.
When there is only one interested party and goal it is much less stressful - when everyone wants a piece of the pie it becomes much more complicated (and late, always late)
When there is only one interested party and goal it is much less stressful - when everyone wants a piece of the pie it becomes much more complicated (and late, always late)
According to the article, it's about people who stopped working due to health issues.
Both of those can be true.
Health issues are a spectrum; depending on how little I like my job, I might make a different decision about whether a particular health issue rises above the threshold of "I don't want to do this any more".
Health issues are a spectrum; depending on how little I like my job, I might make a different decision about whether a particular health issue rises above the threshold of "I don't want to do this any more".
Stressful job = long-term sick due to stress, presumably.
Can't answer "most" but I know at least some that do; maybe I don't look it (which seems unlikely), but I've been hired over 50 more than once.
Depends on how old the people hiring are in my experience. The number of times I've heard "ehh doesn't seem like a great culture fit" at US companies is a little ridiculous, it's the legal catch all for otherism. You've got your work cut out for you if you're over 35 and not a manager.
Dunno about 'most' ... but myself and my cohort are over 50, and it hasn't been an issue. I think salary is a bigger issue then age - why
pay for a senior engineer (10+ YOE for most of my cohort) when a recent grad is cheaper ?
For a senior/staff engineer/principal/architect sort of role, I don't think it would be a problem. If you were applying for a junior role, it might be a different situation.
Yes, but the number of people wanting to do software over a certain age also goes down. I was working with a developer/tester in his early 70s until recently. He's not working now but I messaged him the other day and he was working on so ML project in his own time. His previous companies would hire him back. Even I'm past mid 40s now and many of the team are older (although they're called architects now).
I just transitioned to a Principal Architect role so I find this comment to be kind of hilarious.
From my personal anecdotal experience the ageism in tech may be better described as generationalism. It appears that companies don't mind hiring "older" people, but that there's a generational gap that companies are less likely to cross. As time moves on that generational gap also ages up.
From my personal anecdotal experience the ageism in tech may be better described as generationalism. It appears that companies don't mind hiring "older" people, but that there's a generational gap that companies are less likely to cross. As time moves on that generational gap also ages up.
Also, there are more sw devs aged 20-30 today than there were 20-30 years ago. Those who would be 50 today never existed in such numbers, so dev population is skewed towards younger generations.
Depends on the country/culture. In two different countries I know of (though, not the US) they do.
In my small sample size (established, profitable companies) yes.
Startups need young workers that will grind out lots of hours and pivot at the drip of a hat because the problem space is so large; there is no clear ‘right path’ forward.
But established companies with clear product lines etc. need people to keep the machine going. And there is a lot of skill in the over 50 crowd. The best programmers I know are in their early 50s.
Startups need young workers that will grind out lots of hours and pivot at the drip of a hat because the problem space is so large; there is no clear ‘right path’ forward.
But established companies with clear product lines etc. need people to keep the machine going. And there is a lot of skill in the over 50 crowd. The best programmers I know are in their early 50s.
> “We were gobsmacked by what we found. It turns out there are fewer earlier retired today than at the start of the pandemic. You wouldn’t believe that from ministers’ speeches and talk of getting people back off the golf course,”
It turns out that government ministers dont have the faintest idea of what they are talking about, except what their base wants to think so they can virtue signalling the correct message - which seems somewhat dangerous when they are setting the policy.
If you want more "growth" getting a young person into (meaningful) work would generate more short term growth and vastly more long term growth.
It turns out that government ministers dont have the faintest idea of what they are talking about, except what their base wants to think so they can virtue signalling the correct message - which seems somewhat dangerous when they are setting the policy.
If you want more "growth" getting a young person into (meaningful) work would generate more short term growth and vastly more long term growth.
The only growth Tories want is in their own bank accounts. They certainly don’t care about young people. Then they don’t really care about old people either, it’s just that they are still gullible enough to believe what they and the Murdoch media tells them to.
Old people read the Mail and Express, not Murdoch media.
Who reads the papers? Yes, Prime Minister - https://youtu.be/DGscoaUWW2M
Some old people definitely read the Times. Source: all the old people I'm related to who don't read the Telegraph which is even worse.
The messaging there is broadly the same.
If you want growth stop draining nearly over half your take home pay in rent and council tax.
Relatively high income people can cope with increasing bills, rent, and food, but that means they aren't spending money at the pub or whatever, reducing economic activity. Those with lower incomes can't even afford food.
Relatively high income people can cope with increasing bills, rent, and food, but that means they aren't spending money at the pub or whatever, reducing economic activity. Those with lower incomes can't even afford food.
The problem in the UK is less that everything is expensive, but that nearly everyone is poor. Inequality really appears to be going rapidly the wrong way.
The problem is the decimation of the middle earners, the ones that drive the service economy. More and more of their income (especially in London) is taken by rent and bills. Lower earners have had massive payrises - 24% in real terms since 2010. Median earners are up just 2.8% in real terms since 2010
From 2010 to 2023
Minimum wage has risen 76%
House prices have risen 76%
State Pension is up 52%
Median earnings is up 45%
CPIH inflation is up 41%
NHS Band 7 salaries (41-47k) are up 37%
From 2010 to 2023
Minimum wage has risen 76%
House prices have risen 76%
State Pension is up 52%
Median earnings is up 45%
CPIH inflation is up 41%
NHS Band 7 salaries (41-47k) are up 37%
isn't that what liz truss tried and got fired over?
not convinced more neo-liberalism is the answer.
It's the economical equivalent of "beer got me into this mess, so it can damn well get me out of it"
It's the economical equivalent of "beer got me into this mess, so it can damn well get me out of it"
Liz Truss's vision of 'growth' meant cutting caps on bankers' bonuses, and an unfunded tax cut for people earning over £150,000.
That's not likely to get many extra people into the pub, because there aren't that many people earning >£150k.
That's not likely to get many extra people into the pub, because there aren't that many people earning >£150k.
Those that do earn over £150k a year don't have to worry aobut how much they spend eating sunday dinner at the local pub
Those earning 55k a year used to, now they can't afford it.
(Marginal tax at 55k for a parent with 2 kids and a student loan is 69%, for someone on 150k who's probably paid off their loan it's 47%)
Those earning 55k a year used to, now they can't afford it.
(Marginal tax at 55k for a parent with 2 kids and a student loan is 69%, for someone on 150k who's probably paid off their loan it's 47%)
Was it? I get she had (and still has) a total lack of awareness of… well, anything… but I thought the problem was that that (income) tax cuts she announced weren't connected properly to the expenses in the same budget and the international markets (and IMF!) said "you can't afford this level of borrowing".
Neither rent control, for all its long term issues, nor utility bill limits were something I remember being brought up.
Council tax in particular, I think isn't done by central government? Although it probably should be, given how messed up local council funding seems to be.
Neither rent control, for all its long term issues, nor utility bill limits were something I remember being brought up.
Council tax in particular, I think isn't done by central government? Although it probably should be, given how messed up local council funding seems to be.
Council tax is done locally and basically has to be as high as it can be because the vast majority of it goes to things like care for wealthy pensioners (about half of council tax goes to adult social care). This used to be at least part-funded by central government (which raises its income mainly from taxing workers)
It's sort of based on house values, but that's values in 1990 so very little relevance to today, and its certainly not proportional -- someone in a £5m house pays just 3 times the amount someone in a £80k flat.
It's sort of based on house values, but that's values in 1990 so very little relevance to today, and its certainly not proportional -- someone in a £5m house pays just 3 times the amount someone in a £80k flat.
No. She didn't do anything to stop the draining of productive output by the land owning class, and neither the tories nor labour have ever tried to do this.
> except what their base wants to think so they can virtue signalling the correct message
So, this is a bit of an odd case where they're kind of _blaming_ their base; it is hard to think of a demographic in England more likely to be a Tory voter than an early retired person.
Of course, they're doing this because telling early retired people to go back to work, while highly unlikely to be at all effective, is at least quite cheap, whereas dealing with chronic illness would involve fixing the NHS, which would be terrifyingly expensive.
Also, if you're the Tories, the very last thing you want to do is to draw people's attention to the state of the NHS. They've been in government for _13 years_; it's very much on them.
So, this is a bit of an odd case where they're kind of _blaming_ their base; it is hard to think of a demographic in England more likely to be a Tory voter than an early retired person.
Of course, they're doing this because telling early retired people to go back to work, while highly unlikely to be at all effective, is at least quite cheap, whereas dealing with chronic illness would involve fixing the NHS, which would be terrifyingly expensive.
Also, if you're the Tories, the very last thing you want to do is to draw people's attention to the state of the NHS. They've been in government for _13 years_; it's very much on them.
In a speech to a room of over 50s the quantity of early retired person is near enough to 0.
Messaging that the kidz and the early retired (aka someone else) need to do their bit for the country will make the 99% of people in the audience that are employed and working hard feel like the true patriots trying to save the country from the forces of evil that they are.
Messaging that the kidz and the early retired (aka someone else) need to do their bit for the country will make the 99% of people in the audience that are employed and working hard feel like the true patriots trying to save the country from the forces of evil that they are.
> If you want more "growth" getting a young person into (meaningful) work would generate more short term growth and vastly more long term growth.
Doubling university places for medicine would be a very sensible move - but it'll take ~7 years before all the new medics are ready to practice. That's two elections in the future.
On the other hand, if you can tempt a retired doctor back into practice? They'll be treating people before the next election starts.
Of course, I doubt it'll work - wasn't the retired-doctors silver bullet already fired, during the pandemic?
Doubling university places for medicine would be a very sensible move - but it'll take ~7 years before all the new medics are ready to practice. That's two elections in the future.
On the other hand, if you can tempt a retired doctor back into practice? They'll be treating people before the next election starts.
Of course, I doubt it'll work - wasn't the retired-doctors silver bullet already fired, during the pandemic?
I've heard their pension system penalizes older doctors with more taxes once they accumulate enough years so its better to retire at that point.
The other thing is junior doctors can't progress forward in their training and career as there is limited training slots for specialization. So they end up logjammed being in the low rung doing scutwork at little pay.
Also doctors pay has not kept up with inflation for the last decade. Right now what they really want is full pay restoration but the government isn't budging.
There is a Reddit subreddit where UK jr doctors chat about this stuff and its very enlightening.
The other thing is junior doctors can't progress forward in their training and career as there is limited training slots for specialization. So they end up logjammed being in the low rung doing scutwork at little pay.
Also doctors pay has not kept up with inflation for the last decade. Right now what they really want is full pay restoration but the government isn't budging.
There is a Reddit subreddit where UK jr doctors chat about this stuff and its very enlightening.
Childcare's also an issue. Plenty of grandparents are providing free childcare so that their children can continue to work.
Would be interesting to know how much of the increase in long-term illness is due to long COVID and how much is other health impacts of the pandemic.
No mention of the effects of Covid here at all including Long Covid.
Flawless Brexit.
Brexit: 'British jobs for British people'. Total failure on that front.
Interesting how a poor health care system can impact the general economic productivity. UK is going to struggle to get out of this spiral down. Pouring more money into the system is probably not going to fix it. Coupled with lower birth rates It's not a good sign going forward.
> Interesting how a poor health care system can impact the general economic productivity.
I thought this was basic governance. Even at the most ruthlessly utilitarian, healthy workers pay taxes.
I thought this was basic governance. Even at the most ruthlessly utilitarian, healthy workers pay taxes.
What if the healthcare system is mostly serving people too old or sick to work?
Support it better (shoveling money at it is probably necessary but not sufficient), ration care to prioritise workers (this is usually considered distasteful) or do nothing and drag down the general health and economic condition of the entire population.
Basically, the system is thrashing: you can add RAM, make processes more efficient, oomkill "unimportant" things, or live with a virtually paralysed system.
Basically, the system is thrashing: you can add RAM, make processes more efficient, oomkill "unimportant" things, or live with a virtually paralysed system.
Everyone knows this. It is just a hard problem to solve due to the politically difficult task of
> ration care to prioritise workers
Who make up a good portion of voters. In an aging society that has promised its people healthcare, it becomes a fight between old and young as there are more limited resources to go around (absent sufficient automation).
> ration care to prioritise workers
Who make up a good portion of voters. In an aging society that has promised its people healthcare, it becomes a fight between old and young as there are more limited resources to go around (absent sufficient automation).
> ration care to prioritise workers - Who make up a good portion of voters
The people recieving this priority are not likely to be voters for the current government. Those who would be deprioritised, Tory voters.
The people recieving this priority are not likely to be voters for the current government. Those who would be deprioritised, Tory voters.
I found the actual study here:
https://files-uk-prod.cms.commerce.dynamics.com/cms/api/dkst...
If I'm reading it right, long term sick is self reported and comes with benefits. Not sure if the same applies in the UK, but in the US as welfare benefits were cut there was a large rise in those on disability because that was the only way to get government benefits.
https://files-uk-prod.cms.commerce.dynamics.com/cms/api/dkst...
If I'm reading it right, long term sick is self reported and comes with benefits. Not sure if the same applies in the UK, but in the US as welfare benefits were cut there was a large rise in those on disability because that was the only way to get government benefits.
Lot of wealthy 50-somethings that can live off their unearned income from their property portfolios.
Since 2000 house prices (when buy-to-let started to boom and many people now in their 50s and 60s bought in) have increased 283%. Average wages have increased 106%, and rents are far higher as a portion of wages than in 2000.
Since 2000 house prices (when buy-to-let started to boom and many people now in their 50s and 60s bought in) have increased 283%. Average wages have increased 106%, and rents are far higher as a portion of wages than in 2000.
I know few family members that retired during pandemic and are now living off on their airbnb incomes in a tourist town. They are able bodies and are in good health, now spend their days skiing and goofing off everyday. "housing crisis" has led to labor shortages in a weird way.
Bingo. UK will never fix the housing crisis because if they do so many retirees will be left with reduced savings.
But now, finally, the disbenefits of rampant house price inflation are starting to be shared by everyone, rather than by only those locked out of the leverage-fueled bonanza. The huge cohort of winners have done so well out of it that it is now actually creating a labour shortage as described, outweighing the "wealth effect" which was supposedly so beneficial to the economy throughout the boom. So now maybe The Government and The Bank will not be quite so inclined to keep pumping it up any more.
I disagree, there is building everywhere you look on the main train lines into London. But the population needs to stabilise, and even then it would still take a while to catch up.
British population is up by just under 10 million this century, that's a lot of new houses, and population density in houses is falling - its a far cry from the working class slum conditions of the 19th century, even in London these days.
British population is up by just under 10 million this century, that's a lot of new houses, and population density in houses is falling - its a far cry from the working class slum conditions of the 19th century, even in London these days.
Would be interesting to see what proportion of these new flats are being bought as investments to rent-out though.
it's not just over 50s. they need to incentivize the 18-25 age group that are not in school to work too. there's a massive labor shortage in the uk.
This could be the death knell for the Tory party. The over-50 early retirement crowd is squarely in their voter group. Calling them out in the blame-game of a failing economy is a perfect way to turn your own voters against you. Well done.
I thought they had already signed their own death warrant after the Truss mini-budget debacle. I don’t know what it looks like now, but at the time polling suggested they’d lose so many seats there was a real possibility they’d be the third party, with Labour having a huge majority and SNP as the opposition
The Truss era polling put them forth, after both the SNP and the LibDems; since then their polling has been upgraded from "existential crisis" to "disastrous".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_U...
Edit: 4th by seats, not by percentage of the votes, given FPTP.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_U...
Edit: 4th by seats, not by percentage of the votes, given FPTP.
Oh you're right, I must have forgotten how low they sank at their worst.
This Spitting Image sketch never gets old:
https://www.facebook.com/inmynewsfeed/videos/stupid-voters-s...
https://www.facebook.com/inmynewsfeed/videos/stupid-voters-s...
I don’t think they will make the link. “Everyone should stop being a lazy retiree but I’m not a lazy retiree because I worked hard all my life!”