200,000 extra working pensioners

daniel maris

BS!

The prime motives are mainly (a) greed - people who have earned a nice amount, wishing to carry on and build up huge amounts in the bank or (b) necessity - because of our pathetic pension systems (and the need to maintain a higher income in old age compared with the past now that people have cars, TV, mobile phones and all the rest past retirement age).

Incentive has nothing to do with it. People would still stay on out of greed of necessity - because now they can.

howard

The most important factor as to why over 65's are continuing to work is they have to. Unless you're a teacher or civil servant, chances are your pension won't be anything like enough to live on. The tax and NI benefits are helpful but aren't the main reason over 65's carry on working.

Anthony

Is it not also the case that 1) more oldsters want to work after the normal retirement age, and 2) many employers might actually prefer age and reliability to youth and inexperience. Having been self-employed for 20 years I merely coasted through 65 five years ago without noticing that insignificant milestone, and intend to keep going until my hitherto wiling clients tell me to disappear. Would that all who wish to to could do the same.

Cynic

"You see, employees over 65 don't pay National Insurance, and they have a higher personal allowance (£9,940 as opposed to £7,475, and it's £10,090 for over-75s). This means that a 65-year-old on £17,000 a year gets £15,588 of it, whereas a younger worker on the same salary only gets to keep £13,922. That's a big difference in incentive and helps to explain why, when youth unemployment tops one million, the number of pensioners in work is at a record high." And no doubt you would like NI and income tax to be combined so that pensioners pay more tax? Of course, the number of pensioners in work could also be a consequence of their being literate, numerate (not having been educated under Blair's education x 3) and with a work ethic (not having been indoctrinated with Labour's creed of yooman rites without responsibilities). I suspect that, compared with today's youth (or should that be yoof?), pensioners arrive on time, attend regularly, look reasonably smart, are intelligible when they speak and put in a fair day's work for a fair day's pay.

Ben WELLS

More to the point, does the employer of an over-65 pay Employer's NI or occupational pension contributions? If not, then this is a strong incentive to employ a pensioner rather than a young person - the Baby Boomers strike again!

Diane C

Employers prefer oldefr staff because at least they can string two words together ...

lescam

Diane C
November 18th, 2011 10:34pm

"Employers prefer older staff because at least they can string two words together ..."

and they can usually spell, turn up on time, and the females won't be wanting maternity leave.

Years ago when I and my husband employed staff in our business, we always preferred the older ones, they were infinitely better.

daniel maris

What employers like are old competent people who are no longer permanent employees, so if they fall ill, they aren't a charge on the organisation.

People are now much healthier between 60 and 70 than they were 20 years ago, thanks to improved nutrition, exercise and medicine. They can cope with work. The old expectation of retirement at 65 has been naturally fading.

Colin Cumner

There are many reasons why the number of working pensioners has increased, two of which are reliability (barring episodes of ill-health) and their educational background, that judging from my own experience in the 1950s, provided me with the tools to gain useful, well-paid employment in adulthood. Today, there is a disproportinate number of work-shy youngsters and/or who are so ill-equipped to deal with life beyond school.

Dan

Occam's razor.

You don't need variations in the tax system to explain why pensioners are working:

Inflation at 5% + savings rates at 1% + 30% drop in equity markets = more pensioners working

Tax system can only be a second order effect IMO.

Ghengis

Good Lord! A number of comments without insult or bad language - must be senior (in all respects) citizens.

Jayu

@Ghengis

And not one mention of immigrants or the EU being the cause. That must be a first for a CH thread.

John Bowman

Which makes the point that income tax is actually an expense to the employer.

Reduce income tax and both employer and employee are better off

The employer can pay higher wages and employ more people or has more money to invest in the business.

Yes, yes the nasty, greedy employer can just trouser the saving, but business practice is not as simplistic as that and employers do have to pay to keep good employees and most want to expand their business.

Leonard of Quirm

I'm one of these grey freelancers ... I toddle along on pension and every so often somebody offers me good money to go and do a bit of survey work, inventing, painting things etc ... it works very well indeed.