Phillips as she appears on our television screens, with her hair dyed blonde. Photo: Damian Bennett
Here’s how I really look. Or at least how I would look, if I was brave enough. It’s how I’d look if I felt able to age naturally, without fear of risking my livelihood.
On air, my hair is the same colour it was 25 years ago, when I first started reading the news. The difference is that these days it takes two hours and several bottles of chemicals, once a month, to get me there.
The truth is, I’m a 51-year-old woman and I have grey hair. Not a glamorous silver streak. Completely grey. Grandma grey. “Have you ever thought about just going grey?” the hairdresser asked. “It’d save a lot of time.” An innocent question, but the very thought was terrifying.
Juanita Phillips, digitally altered (with her permission) to show her hair in its natural, grey state. Photo: Damian Bennett
I’ve been hiding my grey hair since my early 20s, when it first appeared. I remember feeling panicked. Perhaps it’s the equivalent of men going bald. Thick, glossy hair represents youth and vitality. Grey hair or no hair means one thing: old age.
When I started in TV, it was my dirty little secret which only the hairdressers knew. “Colour me younger!” I’d say as I sank into the make-up chair to get my roots done. By the time I was 40, they were telling me I was 60 per cent grey. After that, I stopped asking.
A few years ago, tired of the pretence, I decided to go silver at the front. Nobody seemed to notice. But after a few months, my hairdresser begged me to get rid of it. “It’s so ageing,” he said. “And I’m worried you might lose your job!”
It goes without saying that getting older holds no such perils for men on TV. Grey hair, bald patches, wrinkles, glasses. They can even get away with a paunch. If anything, ageing enhances a man’s gravitas. Brian Henderson was still reading the news at 71. The late Ian Ross was 68. The ABC’s own Ian Henderson is 61. But how many grey-haired women with glasses present prime-time nightly news in Australia?
Prime-time television news seems populated almost entirely by two groups: thin, gorgeous young women (nearly all blonde), and men of all shapes and ages. There’s a handful of older women – those in their 40s and 50s – but they don’t look their age and, with the notable exception of Lee Lin Chin, they don’t have grey hair. And women on Australian TV in their 60s and 70s? Apart from Caroline Jones on Australian Story, virtually non-existent. It’s like an entire generation has been vaporised.
Here’s what really happened to them: they hit menopause and they stopped looking like babes. It wasn’t that long ago that Mary Kostakidis was pushed aside for a younger man as SBS World News presenter, and it’s been less than a decade since some long-gone dinosaur coined the vile term “f…ability” in assessing the appeal of female presenters.
But on the positive side, things are changing. That blokey culture is way past its use-by date, and well on the way to being “boned”. In its place, you have TV executives like ABC news director Kate Torney, a strong advocate of gender equality in broadcasting.
There are more women aged over 50 in high-profile news roles than ever before. Lisa Wilkinson, Liz Hayes, Tracy Grimshaw, Sandra Sully, Kay McGrath, Helen Dalley, Geraldine Doogue and Ann Sanders are among the first generation of women to survive this long in TV. They’re strong, confident women who’ve had lifetime careers; not the kind of women who’ll obediently fade away when the boss decides he’d prefer someone younger and prettier.
The big test will be when this current crop moves into their 60s and 70s. That’s when it’ll get interesting because the real issue for TV women is not so much getting old. It’s looking old.
So back to the question of whether I’d go on air with grey hair. I’ve been hiding it for 30 years. That’s some 700 hours of my life baking my head in a poultice of chemicals. Oh for the sweet relief of not having to worry about it!
But I’m a 51-year-old woman in TV. I know the score. Grey’s fine with me, and I’d like to think the audience could cope with it. But the TV industry? I wouldn’t bet my career on it. Not just yet.
Opinion: Public expectations with retirement and living longer are in a period of transition
WELL I’ve finally reached the proverbial three score years and ten as mentioned in Psalm 90.
It is the scriptural statute of limitations. After age 70, I am supposed to be a time-expired man and become an honorary member of the community. This I am not.
In recent months, a public debate has raged in Australia surrounding the rising retirement age. Labor increased the retirement age to 67 and the Liberals are proposing age 70 by 2035.
Forecasts predict that by 2050 the ratio of working age to retired aged Australians will fall from 5:1 (in 2010) to 3:1.
ACTU president Ged Kearney believes the Government is out of touch with the reality of life for Australian workers and predicts it will lead to grandmothers and grandfathers joining the dole queue.
In my case and for many of my friends, this could not be further from the truth.
Working to age 70 and beyond does not have to be drudgery or a sentence to toil in the salt mines. It is about staying engaged, alive and purposeful. It is also a good way to keep a financial safety net in place just in case.
The ballooning number of older workers highlights a retirement revolution. As people live longer, public expectations with retirement are in a period of transition. For many aged 65 and older, it is a positive choice.
Employers are realising that older workers offer a good work ethic.
One of the keys is finding age-friendly employers that respect older workers and offer job flexibility options. Employers are realising that older workers offer a good work ethic, are punctual, willing to work on weekends, get on well with customers and rarely complain. Businesses that offer flexible employment options to older workers see them as a good investment.
I have enjoyed a career and lifestyle transition with multiple options and experienced no difficulties adjusting to new work requirements. I continue to work 20 to 30 hours a month but at a different pace. Older workers like me from diverse career backgrounds find employment such as promotional or customer service workers in large retail chains or shopping malls, in hardware chains, in coffee shops and food outlets or conduct field interviews for research firms. I am registered with five different employers who offer me work opportunities. My life is now a mix of working, learning, relaxing, and trying new things as well as a time of growth and reinvention.
For those who want to work, but are lucky enough not to need the income, volunteering is a wonderful option. Volunteering is a great way to stay active while making a significant contribution to a worthy organisation. Volunteering opportunities abound in every community.
But it’s not all work with no play. My wife and I are avid snow skiers and travel to Canada for four weeks to ski each year. We also manage to enjoy a driving holiday somewhere within Australia annually.
Retirement used to signal the end of a productive life for workers, but more and more, retirement is now a transition point for beginning a new phase of your life. For those approaching retirement, now is the time to develop a strategy to work fewer hours, try a new career or business, learn new skills, further your education, give back through volunteering and most importantly, enjoy life.
Ian Wallace is a Brisbane freelance writer and retiree
The release of the Intergenerational report in early March catapulted me into a state of confusion.
Only the night before, I had been at the Australian Human Rights Commission launch of their corporate toolkit where they played a short video developed by the Age and Disability Discrimination Commissioner, the Hon Susan Ryan AO. This video celebrates the power of oldness. Not only is it thoroughly entertaining but it also dispels some of the myths about the capability of people in their more mature years.
However, the quirky video also revealed a sinister reality – that mature age workers face substantial discrimination and other barriers to fully participating in the workplace.
The Intergenerational Report has projected life expectancies to increase to 95.1 years for men and 96.6 years for women by 2054-55. It also projects labour market participation rates among those aged 65 and over to increase from the current rate of 12.9% to 17.3% in 2054-55. But until we tackle widespread ageism, is this increase really possible?
For most people, paid work is an incredibly important part of their lives. Not only does it provide a pathway to financial security but it also provides social interaction. It can contribute to improved self-esteem, mental and physical health and life satisfaction. Yet the Australian Human Rights Commission has reported that age discrimination was most likely to occur in the workplace, and that more than a third of Australians aged 55+ years have experienced age-related discrimination.
Dishearteningly, the Commission also found that younger business decision makers are the most likely to hold negative views of the workplace capabilities of older workers. In the context of an ageing population and an ageing workforce, this type of stereotyping is very problematic.
All of this is despite the fact that we know employing older workers can bring a range of benefits both to our workplaces and to the national economy. For example, increasing the labour participation of women throughout their working lives is estimated to have a major impact on the national economy.
Economist have noted the major impact that increasing the participation of older women would have on the economy. Modelling by the Productivity Commission indicates that increasing older women’s labour participation rates to match men’s could increase per capita GDP growth to 2044-45 by 1.5%. Research by the Grattan Institute has found that the combination of increased labour participation by women and older people could grow GDP by $50 billion over the next decade.
For older women, continued workforce participation throughout their later years is especially important as their retirement savings are likely to be much less than men’s. Men have an average super payout of $198,000, while women average $112,600[1] due to the increasing gender pay gap and time out of paid work to accommodate caring responsibilities.
There are clearly benefits to our economy of ensuring increased labour market participation by our older workers. But what other benefits can older workers bring to our workplaces?
Older workers often have significant knowledge and skills that they accumulated over their time in the workforce, and can assist employers and their colleagues to:
look at business operations from a different perspective
improve business processes
fill many skill or knowledge gaps
provide mentoring to less experienced employees
train other employees by sharing skills.
So how can we start a positive conversation in workplaces around engaging older workers and removing bias and discrimination against them?
Diversity Council Australia has conducted extensive research into labour market issues affecting mature age women and what employers can do to attract and retain older women. In our report, Older Women Matter, a framework is laid out to positively support women into improved workforce participation. This framework (see below) provides a set of guided principles around productive employee engagement, workplace flexibility and the removal of structural and cultural barriers.
Employers can implement a range of initiatives to better support mature age works, in particular older women. But first we need to stop thinking negatively about older workers and start appreciating the enormous potential and value that older workers bring to workplaces across the country.
Then we can truly harness the power of oldness.
By Lisa Annese Chief Executive Officer Diversity Council Australia
Forty-seven per cent of jobs in the US will be overtaken by computers in the next decade or two, according to research.
Robots and computer programs could almost wipeout human workers in jobs from cooks to truck drivers, a visiting researcher has warned.
Driverless cars and even burger-flipping robots are among the technological advancements gunning for low-skilled jobs across dozens of industries.
University of Oxford Associate Professor in machine learning Michael Osborne has examined the characteristics of 702 occupations in the US, predicting 47 per cent will be overtaken by computers in the next decade or two.
University of Oxford Associate Professor in machine learning Michael Osborne. Photo: Supplied
Those most at-risk jobs are in accommodation and food services (87 per cent of workers at high risk of being replaced), transportation and warehousing (75 per cent) and real estate (67 per cent).
By contrast, only about 10 per cent of workers in the information sector, software developers and higher level management were at risk of automation.
Professor Osborne said machines and computers still struggled with creativity, social intelligence and the manipulation of complex objects, making jobs with high requirements in these areas less vulnerable to robotisation.
“What unites all those bottlenecks [in computer ability] is kind of a deep reservoir of tacit knowledge humans possess that’s not readily reproducible in software,” he said.
“For example, in order to be creative, you need to understand the creative values of the society in which you find yourself.
“It’s very easy to design an algorithm that endlessly churns out paintings or pieces of music but it’s very difficult to get that algorithm to distinguish between good pieces of music and bad pieces of music.”
While the results, which Professor Osborne had been reproduced with similar results in the UK and Scandinavia, are bad news for individuals, they don’t necessarily predict a sky-rocketing unemployment rate as machines take over the workforce.
History is full of examples of machines replacing workers.
At the start of the 20th century about 40 per cent of US workers were in agriculture. That’s now about two per cent but the unemployment rate has remained relatively steady.
The invention of the car savaged jobs in the horse transport industry but gave rise to tourism and all the jobs that come with it.
In the early 19th century the Luddites rioted against labour-replacing machinery in the English textile industry, coining a name for someone resistant to change.
“These people weren’t irrational. There were genuine risks to their jobs,” Professor Osborne said.
“And while overall in the end unemployment wasn’t affected, there certainly were very severe negative consequences for those workers in the short term.
“I think the story here is fairly similar actually that in the end, yes we may see new forms of work generated but it’s not clear that the kind of people who are put out of work, which I said ought to be those at the low-skilled end of the spectrum, are necessarily going to be those that move into those new forms of work.”
Technology will need to become more user-friendly and create new kinds of jobs given there would always be a resistance to its adoption, Professor Osborne said.
But Hollywood’s imagery of terminators and other self-aware robots wreaking havoc was not a healthy narrative to consider, he said.
“In the long term yes, we will see machines that may be potentially so intelligent as to have goals that aren’t consistent with our own and there might be consequences of that,” he said.
“But I think in the near term the larger question is that of employment really, and how people’s work might be affected by increasing automation.”
Professor Osborne is in Brisbane to speak about the future of work at the Queensland University of Technology on Tuesday.
He said many newly created industries such as software development and big data analysis weren’t creating as many jobs as thought but renewable energy industries were booming in the US and said Australian governments should be fostering similar innovation.
“There’s not a single silver bullet solution to this issue but investing in those new industries is certainly an important plank,” he said.
According to a new report, workplaces are still biased when it comes to older workers.
Researchers from the Auckland University of Technology (AUT) and the Equal Employment Opportunities Trust conducted the report to look into the impact of New Zealand’s ageing workforce.
The study showed that one of the most common ways employers are dealing with skills shortages is by encouraging older workers to continue working past retirement age – but when it came to recruitment, older workers were the most likely to be overlooked.
Many HR directors and managers agreed that there was a “tipping point”, typically at around 50 to 60 years of age, at which workers were seen as less attractive.
The survey also revealed that 45% of organisations were facing a skills shortage, and the same proportion of participants believed that the ageing workforce had the potential to strongly impact both their business and their industry within the next five years.
In spite of this, just over one in four respondents held the view that their managers were not sufficiently prepared to deal with the ageing workforce.
The report also said that workplaces would soon begin to notice “a decreased labour supply, and with it a sudden loss in skills and experience … while an ageing population will put increasing pressure on health and welfare systems”.
Although workers of retirement age account for just 5% of the workforce, this is expected to increase to 13% by 2036. Just over one in five Kiwi workers are currently aged 55 or older, which is expected to rise to one in four within five years.
Bev Cassidy-Mackenzie, chief executive at the Equal Employment Opportunities Trust, told HRM that employers have an important role to play in debunking some of the myths and negative stereotypes surrounding older workers.
“These days, older workers and their future cohorts are likely to be fitter and healthier than previous generations, technologically savvy – contrary to popular belief, more dedicated, loyal and reliable,” she said. “They come to the role with rich life experiences, and the people skills they have gained in the process can prove invaluable.
Businesses of any size and sector can make the most out of their age diverse workforce through insight and an appreciation of the value each individual brings to the workplace.”
Cassidy-Mackenzie also outlined the strategies employers could consider putting in place. “Organisations must gather information on their employees’ age profile and needs, then move to implement appropriate strategies for recruitment and retention such as reward systems, training and development, flexible working arrangements, job design and wellbeing,” she suggested. “This in turn will enable their wisdom workers to flourish and prosper and see real benefits for the sustainability of the business.”
According to Cassidy-Mackenzie, discrimination based on age is “still very much alive and kicking in many workplaces across New Zealand and beyond”.
“More than half of the respondents said that the tipping point was 50 years old! In a country which has one of the highest participation rates in the world for over 65s, this position is simply untenable.”
The reasons for people choosing to work past retirement age included income, job satisfaction, mental stimulation, physical activity and a sense of useful contribution.
Many workers’ choices also arose from the increasing availability of part-time work and flexible work arrangements, as well as people remaining in good health for longer, starting families later in life and the superannuation system.
Despite these trends, researchers found that most Kiwi organisations did not have a policy in place to address the issue of ageing workers.
The study’s authors encouraged employers to consider implementing such policies in order to reduce the pervasiveness of negative stereotypes around older workers.
Older workers do not steal jobs from young people and wages and job prospects for the under-50s would actually improve if baby boomers were kept in work longer, a study found.
Ros Altmann, the Government’s older workers’ champion, said the idea that older workers took jobs from the young was a “myth”.
Ageist attitudes were hurting the economy, she said, predicting that an extra £25 billion would be generated if half of the 1.2 million employed or inactive older people seeking work were given jobs.
Rather than reducing the number of roles available to young people, extending British working lives would “better living standards for all of us”, she said.
“One of the most persistent myths I have encountered is that encouraging more older workers in the labour force will take jobs away from the young,” she said.
“On the contrary, the evidence shows keeping more older people in work actually improves employment prospects for younger generations, and has in some cases even increased their wages.
“Older and younger workers are not readily substituted for each other [and] there is not a fixed number of jobs in the economy.”
“The more spending power in the economy, the more jobs can be created.”
Her research showed that as the population ages, the number of people aged 50 to state pension age who were not working would increase from 2.9 million to 5.4 million by 2033 at current employment rates.
Many of the additional 2.5 million people would have “relatively low incomes and inadequate pensions”, she said.
This would “place a rising burden on younger generations”, she said, warning that “immigration alone cannot fill the gap”.
Ms Altmann, a former investment banker and academic at London School of Economics and at Harvard University, provided evidence to the contrary. She said historically, higher employment rates among older workers had benefited younger generations.
Ros Altmann found evidence to dispel the ‘myth’ that older wokers deprived the young
“After the Second World War, the dramatic increase in women’s labour force participation did not mean fewer jobs for men,” she said.
“Instead, it boosted economic growth, and more two-earner families with higher disposable income created new jobs as spending power in the economy increased.”
She contrasted the events with the “job release scheme” in the Seventies, which incentivised early retirement. The scheme was “accompanied by higher unemployment for young people”, she said, and was branded a “spectacular failure” by Age UK.
In France the government from 1971 to 1993 encouraged early retirement, only for employment among both old and young to fall. From 1993 to 2005, more older people stayed in work and youth employment rates in France increased, the report found. The same trend was noted in Germany and China.
“In the Fifties, over 90 per cent of men aged 60 to 64 were working, while it is now around 50 per cent,” Ms Altmann said. “For too long social norms have dictated that once you reach a certain age, you should expect to suddenly stop working. This must change. ”
Steve Webb, the pensions minister, criticised “old-fashioned and outdated perceptions” of older people and called on employers to retain and hire older staff. “From next month, we will be trialling targeted and intensive support for older jobseekers, including rolling out an ‘older workers’ champion scheme across every part of the UK,” he said.
The ‘grey army’ is a key to Australia’s future prosperity, according to Treasurer Joe Hockey. But what can the government do to increase participation of older people in the workforce? Its Restart program which offers employers $10,000 to hire an unemployed older person for two years has been a flop so far. Since last July, 956 people have benefited, the Employment Minister, Eric Abetz’s office told me. The program was expected to help up to 32,000 a year. Another program called Corporate Champions, aimed mainly at helping firms retain older workers, looks destined for the chop despite support in the business community. Corporate Champions was a Labor government initiative that was supposed to run for three years from 2013-2016. It’s proven so popular the allocated money has run out after a year, and no new companies can sign up.
Despite a surge in mature-age employment in the past 15 years, Australia has one of thelowest workforce participation rates for older people in the developed world. A higher proportion of older people is in work in New Zealand, the U.K, Sweden, Canada and the US. It’s relatively unusual to see someone of pension age strap-hanging on the bus in the morning peak hour. Can this be changed?
I think there’s no doubt Australia’s workplaces should harness the experience and wisdom of older people, and their contribution to the GDP. A lot of Australians can’t wait to retire; others want to work till they drop. A third group is in-between – they’d stay longer at work if more flexible work conditions were on offer. “Mature workers want to work longer but differently,” Alison Monroe, of Sageco, an employment consultancy, told me.
Many in this in-between group retire as soon as they can access their superannuation or the pension, or if other needs or desires pull them away. Because they want to pick up their grandkids from school a couple of days a week, or play golf on Fridays, they exit the workforce without exploring options. They assume bosses will be pleased to be rid of them.
That’s what Cynthia Cato 63 assumed when she resigned. She was in the young people’s business of advertising. She loved her job as a proof reader at the advertising agency. But she’d lost the affordable rented accommodation she’d enjoyed in Sydney for 30 years after the owner died. As a single woman, she couldn’t afford to buy near the city. But she could afford to buy in the countryside. She bought a beautiful cottage in rural Victoria, and she hoped she’d get a job packing shelves in a supermarket. “The managing director of the agency asked to see me. He said, ‘Cyndi, I’m not in the habit of letting good people go’ and so they worked out a deal,” Cynthia told me.
Cynthia now works from her rural Victorian home for the Sydney-based ad agency and couldn’t be happier. “If you have the internet, there’s no reason you can’t make a contribution to the workplace,” she said. “Older workers are prepared to give 110 per cent. We’re willing and reliable.”
The Corporate Champions program is geared mainly at this particular group – the workers who given flexibility could be persuaded to stay longer. Holding on to the existing mature-age workforce is where the big potential lies to increase participation. When the National Australia bank, one of the Corporate Champions, surveyed its mature-age workforce it found 91 per cent said they would work longer if they could work more flexibly; 62 per cent of staff leaders as a result of the program took steps to reduce barriers for older workers.
The Corporate Champions program has involved 486 big and small companies. Government funds don’t go to the companies but to approved providers who survey staff on retirement intentions, what it would take for them to work longer, and so on. Transition-to- retirement seminars in company time for workers have shocked some into knowledge of their true retirement financial position. The program appears to have been useful in educating both employees and employers. But last week’s Intergenerational Report mentioned only Restart as a government initiative for mature-age workers, signalling the possible end of Corporate Champions.
So many programs in this mature-age workers’ space have come and gone, from the “Wise Workforce” program of the Howard government to Labor’s Jobs Bonus. Many are not well thought-out or given a chance. Restart needs a bit of time to show it’s not a complete waste of money. And Corporate Champions should not be ditched just because it was a Labor initiative if it’s shown to change attitudes and practices.
More direct ways to keep older workers at the grindstone also need consideration. The most obvious is to raise the age at which superannuation can be accessed to the pension age. What’s your view of that? By 2023, the pension eligibility age will be 67 but access to super will be at age 60 (from 2024). Maintaining the gap provides a lure to the better-off to retire. Most importantly we need an economy that creates enough jobs for young and old. As for unemployed older people who are desperate to re-join a grey army of workers, they need a better deal. Higher penalties for age discrimination, and more naming and shaming of errant firms are needed to jolt employers and recruitment firms into changing their ways. The nicely, nicely approach hasn’t worked.
Australia’s prosperity is at risk of being put under increasing pressure over the next four decades unless Australians work longer and productivity is improved, according to a major report due to be released today.
The ABC understands the Intergenerational Report, looking at population and budget projections to 2055, also states that economic reform is “crucial” to improve living standards. The document will be released by Federal Treasurer Joe Hockey today. Like previous long-term forecasts, the report will predict that the proportion of working Australians will decline as the nation’s population ages. By 2054-2055, the workforce participation rate is expected to be 2.2 per cent lower than today at 62.4 per cent. While the report will state “it is fantastic Australians are living longer, healthier lives” it warns there is a risk to GDP and income growth unless the Government can grapple with these demographic changes. It will suggest those not in the workforce, in particular older Australians and women, need to be encouraged to get a employment, re-enter the workforce, or prolong their careers.
To do that, the report will advocate policies to improve the accessibility of childcare, more flexible working conditions and the removal of discrimination. Australia currently trails Canada and New Zealand in terms of total workplace participation, though gains have been made in recent decades. For example, the report will show the number of working Australians aged 55 to 64 increased by roughly 18 per cent between 1978-1979 and 2013-2014. Also, the number of women in work has increased by 20 per cent since 1974-1975.
The Government is likely to use the Intergenerational Report to make the case for politically difficult policy changes in the next budget. The document will say reforms “to improve productivity will be crucial to achieve the growth in living standards” and wages. It will show average income levels have risen from about $40,500 in the early 1990s to about $66,400 today. “For every hour that is worked, Australians today produce twice as many goods and services per hour of work than they did in the early 1970s … It is no coincidence average incomes have almost doubled,” the report is expected to say. Assistant Treasurer Josh Frydenberg said the “landmark report” was a vital addition to complex national policy debates. “The detail it describes … will help the public understand the context for the Government’s economic decision making over the years ahead,” Mr Frydenberg said.
Labor and Greens wary of politicisation
The Intergenerational Report will also point out that the Government needs to ensure spending is sustainable. It will contain three forecasts of the nation’s cash deficit in 2054-2055. Under the policies of the Labor Government, the report suggests the cash deficit would be 12 per cent of GDP. But under the policies the Abbott Government has managed to pass so far, it forecasts a deficit of half that, or roughly $266.7 billion in today’s dollars.
This should be an independent report and I am worried it will be used to justify savage cuts in the budget.
Greens Senator Richard Di Natale
Also, under the policies the Abbott Government has proposed but not passed, it forecasts a surplus from 2019-2020. The Opposition says it is wary the Government is manipulating the report to try to justify its “unfair budget”. “This Treasurer has manipulated the timing of the release, he’s manipulating the content,” Shadow Treasurer Chris Bowen said. “We know that he hasn’t accepted the Department of Immigration’s advice about what the population figures in the report should be and he’s now bringing down a chapter on the Labor Party, it appears.” The Greens plan to refer the report to a Senate committee, to scrutinise its underlying assumptions and forecasts. “So far the discussion we are hearing around the Intergenerational Report seems to indicate we’ve arrived at a conclusion before we’ve even looked at the issue in detail,” Greens Senator Richard Di Natale said. “This should be an independent report and I am worried it will be used to justify savage cuts in the budget,” he said. Source: abc.net.au
Australia’s notoriously labyrinthine $150bn (£75.8bn) welfare system last week underwent a major review, which essentially recommended an overhaul. However the Commonwealth-funded age pension was conspicuously absent. A politically sensitive topic, it was not in the scope set by the conservative Abbott government, despite it being the largest and most expensive part of Australia’s social security.Australians are living and working for longer. By 2013 the number of Australians aged 65 and over had increased by 533,000 from five years previously, and 17% of people aged 45 and older expected to work beyond the age of 70. In 2012-13, more than half of all retired men and a quarter of retired women named the government pension/allowance as their main source of income, a 45% increase on the number who told the Australian Bureau of Statistics they relied on it when they first retired. Superannuation payments (9.5% of a salary contributed by an employer) have been compulsory since 1992.State pensions are available to Australian residents over the age of 65 (67 by 2023) who have lived in Australia for at least 10 years (with some exceptions such as refugee status) and who meet income and asset requirements. In 2011, that translated to 60% of Australians of qualifying age. People who work past the pension age can still receive partial benefits or a lump sum under incentive schemes.Each fortnight pension recipients get a maximum payment of A$776.70 (£392) for singles, or A$585.50 (£296) if you are part of a couple. A payment supplement of up to A$63.50 (£32.13) a fortnight covers a pharmaceutical allowance, on top of Australia’s publicly funded universal healthcare benefit scheme, and utilities allowances. Each state and territory also offers cheaper travel and retail discounts to people over 60. Additional services, which are means-tested and partly financed by contributions from a recipient’s pension after a departmental assessment of what is needed, include the Home Care package, and the Home and Community Care package. People over the age of 65 can apply, or from 50 if they are Aboriginal or an Torres Strait Islander. Helen Davidson, Darwin
Germany
At the core of the German welfare benefits system is the comprehensive social insurance system into which most workers pay, which includes healthcare provision, unemployment insurance and pension insurance. Once you pay into all these parts of the system, (about 15.5% of your salary for healthcare, 3% for employment insurance, nursing care insurance, 2.2% or 1.95% for those with no children, 18.9% for pension insurance – most of these shared with an employer) you are entitled to a range of benefits, including healthcare for older people. Prescriptions and glasses are covered by that system so don’t have to be applied for separately, and are not classed as benefits.
A person continues to pay into the health insurance system once they are drawing a pension, unless they don’t have the means. Roughly speaking, on retirement, individuals receive half to two-thirds of net income as a pension. About 85% of the workforce is enrolled in the system. There is no legally set minimum or maximum pension.
The normal retirement age for everyone born after 1964 is 67 years. Women who take time off to have children have their contributions topped up by the state. But an OECD report published this week shows that Germany has the widest pension benefits gap between men and women in Europe and the US. The average monthly pension received is around €1,052 (£767.46) for men in the old West German states, and €1,006 (£733.9) for those in the old East German states, while for women the figures are €521 (£380) and €705 (£514). Kate Connolly, Berlin
Japan
Roughly one in four Japanese are 65 or over – that proportion is expected to rise to one in three by 2025. Pride that life expectancies for Japanese men and women are among the highest in the world is tempered by concern over how to pay for welfare in the coming decades, when there will be fewer people of working age to foot the bill. In 2012, the full basic pension was ¥786,500 (£4,342) a year, 16% of average earnings of 4.79 million yen (£26,443) a year, according to OECD figures. Everyone aged between 20 and 59 is expected to enrol in the basic national pension scheme, but only those who have paid in for a minimum of 25 years are eligible to draw a pension when they retire at 65. Full-time company employees and their spouses are automatically included in the employees’ pension scheme, which provides additional contributions to the basic state pension, proportional to an individual’s salary. The government estimates that about 85% of Japan’s workforce draw from the employees’ pension scheme. The fuel allowances for low-income residents will be cut by about ¥3bn (£16.2m) in this financial year. People aged 75 or older only need to shoulder 10% of their medical costs unless they have a high income. Everyone else pays 30% of the total cost. Some cities offer reasonably priced annual passes that enable elderly passengers unlimited travel for a year. Justin McCurry and Chie Matsumoto, Tokyo
Nordic countries
Unlike Sweden and Finland, in Norway pensions are holding up, and poverty among pensioners is actually falling dramatically, despite rising average wages. The official pension age has been 67 for both men and women since the 1970s, but it is possible to draw a full old-age pension from 62 and continue to work full time, while there is a range of options to draw a partial pension. But 67 remains the age when most people aim to retire – and the age at which people on disability benefits are transfered to pensions. Norwegians can continue to accrue pension entitlement until they are 75. Norway’s pension system is in transition, and currently two versions are in operation as the old one is phased out. The outgoing one is a defined benefit scheme comprised of a flat-rate universal benefit, an earnings-related second tier and a minimum benefit floor of almost 50% of average earnings after tax. It is a strongly progressive, egalitarian system due to the comparatively generous level of minimum protection and a decreasing replacement rate for earnings above the average annual wage. Marginal tax rates on pension income rise rapidly. A worker in Norway with 40 years’ contributions on an average wage can expect to enjoy a pension of about 67% of their previous income after tax. A new system is gradually taking over that consists of a defined contribution scheme, plus a minimum guaranteed pension. The payouts from this scheme are subject to a life expectancy adjustment, implying that old-age benefits for each new cohort of pensioners will be reduced in proportion to increases in longevity compared to 2010. Employment among older people is high in Norway, with more than 70% of people aged between 55 and 64 still working – well above the EU average of around 50%. In Sweden, pensions used to be more generous than in Norway, but the average pension is now just above 50% of wages, and it is expected to dip below that level if life expectancy increases and the retirement age is not postponed. The guaranteed minimum pension is about one-third of the net average wage. Pensioners in Sweden and Norway get discounts on public transport, entry to museums and an income-tested housing allowance is available. Pensioners – like other people in need – can also apply for social assistance to cover one-off payments and special needs. David Crouch, Gothenburg
Russia
The legal retirement age in Russia is early by European standards: 60 years for men and 55 for women. There has long been talk of raising the age, but given that male life expectancy is only just above 60, the move would be deeply unpopular. Russia’s finance minister said in a recent interview that the pension age should be increased gradually until it is 63 for both men and women. There is also talk of introducing an income test for pensioners – currently none exists and working pensioners or those receiving money from investments or other sources can still claim their pension. Workers involved in certain categories of hard labour, those who have spent more than 15 years working in Russia’s far north, and mothers of more than five children, are entitled to begin receiving their pensions earlier. A new points-based system is being phased in that will determine how much money pensioners receive based on how many years they worked. Currently, the basic state pension is around 4,000 (£40) roubles per month, but almost all pensioners receive a number of add-ons, and the average pension across the country is around 11,000 roubles (£110) per month, which is a little under one-third of the average salary. Some regions have particular allowances, for instance pensioners who have been registered living in Moscow for more than 10 years have their pensions topped up to at least 12,000 roubles by the Moscow city government.Pensioners also have a number of travel subsidies, discounted medicine, as well as small savings in certain supermarket chains, usually offered on particular days of the week. There is no guarantee of the security of Russia’s pension fund further down the line, and indeed it was recently admitted that 243bn roubles (£2.4bn) had been redirected from the pension fund to pay for costs associated with annexing Crimea. Shaun Walker, Moscow
United States
As the country ages there is no shortage of local, state, national and not-for-profit initiatives that cater to older citizens’ needs. From prevention of elder abuse to ageing awareness to help with nutrition, assistance programmes are a common feature in many communities. Take the “Campus Kitchens Project”, which along with the older persons’ organisation, AARP Foundation announced in 2014 a three-year renewal of its outreach effortsusing student volunteers to combat hunger and isolation among older people. With an estimated 9m older Americans at risk of hunger and the number of hungry people over 50 up by 80% in a decade the initiative harnesses a number of student-run kitchens at colleges across the country to help tackle food insecurity. Meanwhile in Pennsylvania, one project, “Coming of age”, under the auspices of a collection of organisations, including the state branch of AARP has trained administrators in methods to revamp “seniors centres” to make them more appealing for older people to spend time in with numerous benefits including reducing social isolation. While there are plenty of examples of inventive community-based initiatives, there are wider challenges not least of which is funding retirement. Exactly what income and benefits an individual receives when they reach 65 depends on a host of factors including which state they live in, whether they continue working past retirement age and in what capacity, the level of private or public sector employment-based pensions and other savings or investments. The Pension Rights Center in Washington DC and the Pension Policy Center report that of the 44.7 million Americans over the age of 65 in 2013, half had a total annual income of less than $20,380 (£13,271) – from all sources. Most US retirees receive income from social security, a federal social insurance programme to which people contribute via direct taxation. In the absence of a national state pension, it is the primary source of income for many and widely regarded as the foundation of retirement income. In 2013, 85% of older Americans received monthly social security benefits. The average annual benefit from social security for retired workers in 2013 was $15,132 (£9,852). According to the Social Security Administration, the national average wage in the same year was $44,888. For three out of five people over 65 who receive social security benefits it accounts for half of their total annual retirement income but it is particularly important for lower income Americans. In 2012 one in four people over the age of 65 received all of their income from social security. According to the Global Age Watch Index 2014 the modest nature of social security payments and the high reliance on it means that the US has a higher incidence of elder poverty than most other countries One of the most valued public services available to older Americans is Medicare, a national health insurance system with almost universal coverage. According to Global Age Watch the programme provides “good access” to medical services and preventative care. However wWhen it comes to access to services for older people with long-term care needs, however, there are many barriers to obtaining affordable, quality provision because most adults don’t have separate insurance coverage for these. Mary O’Hara, Los Angeles
South Africa
Old age pensions are provided to people above the age of 60 earning below R49,920 (£2,763) if single and R99,840 (£5,527) if married, and whose assets do not exceed R831,600 (£46,041) if single and R1.7 million if married. Beneficiaries must not be maintained or cared for in a state institution, and should not be in receipt of another social grant. An elderly person is typically eligible for a grant of 1,350 rand (£75) per month. Government guidelines state: “It should be noted that social grants for adults are paid on a sliding scale – the more income and applicant has, the less he/she will receive for the grant.” They can turn to extended families and NGOs for help. The services NGOs offer include social support groups, training and education, income generating projects, frail care services, transport to health facilities and luncheon clubs and home based care, according to the Older Person’s Forum. But most of these services are non-existent in rural areas. Nearly three million people were old age pension recipients in 2013/14. There are private companies that offer these benefits to pensioners – such as Specsavers with spectacles and some bus companies regarding travel.South Africa has one of the largest voluntary retirement funding systems in the world (and for the large proportions of people in employment, these arrangements are mandatory conditions of service). There are programmes of support in provincial social department for old age homes.There is broadly free healthcare in public health facilities. Public housing and transport also benefits many elderly people. Those retiring early have their pensions cut by 3.6% for each year, except those forced into early retirement, whose pensions can by cut by a maximum of 10.8%. David Smith, Johannesburg
Italy
The state pension is €219-€230 (£159-£167) per week for people under 80 and €240.30 (£175) for over-80s, depending on Older people, like all other Italians, receive free healthcare under the national health system. The services are either delivered free of charge, or patients pay for them and are reimbursed. Other benefits differ from region to region. For example, residents in Rome over the age of 70 are offered free bus and metro passes. Stephanie Kirchgaessner, Rome
France
The legal retirement age in France now stands at 62 for people born between 1955 and 1973. However a full state pension is only awarded for those who have worked 40-43 years. Those born after 1973 will have to work for 43 years to obtain a full pension at 62. In certain cases, including those who have taken time out for parenting or taking care of a disabled person, it is possible to claim a full pension at the age of 65 (or 67 depending on the date of birth) regardless of how long the individual has worked. For private sector workers, the full pension takes into account the 25 best years worked, with an allowance for inflation, and can total half their monthly salary. Civil servants have a more generous scheme: they can retire on a state pension of 75% of average income, calculated on the basis of their last six months in work (minus bonuses). However under reforms announced last year, civil servants will have to work an extra two years – 43 instead of 41.5 – to receive a full pension, bringing them into line with the work period requirements of the private sector, even though the calculation remains different. For unemployed pensioners, a single person with less than €9,600 (£6,988) per year or a couple with less than €14,904 per year can claim an allowance called the allocation de solidarité aux personnes agés (Aspa), or elderly persons solidarity benefit. In the case of a single person surviving on €7,000 a year, the Aspa allowance would be €2,600 (£1,893) – calculated according to the €9,600 benchmark figure minus the €7,000. A couple with €13,000 would receive €1,904 per year. Anne Penketh, Paris
Ireland
The state pension is €219-€230 (£159-£167) per week for under-80s and €240.30 (£175) for over-80s, depending on social insurance contributions while working, regardless of any income from private or occupational pensions. Pensioners, like those in receipt of long-term social welfare payments or those who can prove they cannot provide their heating needs during winter, are entitled to a means-tested weekly winter fuel allowance of €20 (£ 14.54) per household. Those over 70 receive a free TV licence and in some cases are eligible for means-tested free electricity and gas depending on their fiscal circumstances. All pensioners receive free bus and rail travel, not only in the Irish Republic but across the border in Northern Ireland. Henry McDonald, Dublin Source: The Guardian
To safeguard our way of life, we must keep people in jobs and the economy growing.
Older workers have expertise based on years of experience and make an important contribution to the economy. Photo: James Alcock
I suspect if you were to ask many of those in their late 40s and older if ageism could hold Australia back, their answer would be “yes”. That disappointing view would invariably be based on their personal experiences in the workforce.
Ageism will hold us back because, with an ageing population, we need to increase participation by older workers in the workforce.The evidence over recent decades indicates older people are underemployed for longer periods than younger workers. Australian Bureau of Statistics figures show more than 35 per cent of jobseekers aged 55 and over stopped looking for work because they believed potential employers thought they were too old.
As a society, we are discarding valuable older workers far too early.
These older people excluded from the workforce account for more than half the total number of jobseekers who gave up looking for work.
Older workers face ageist stereotypes and biases, especially in the workplace and in recruitment. These negative attitudes label them as too costly, too inflexible and too difficult to train. As a society, we are discarding valuable older workers far too early.
The stereotype of people studying in their youth, working hard in a career and retiring at 65 no longer applies. We need to change the way we view older people. This is not just because it is demeaning and discriminatory, but because we need to revalue their potential contribution in the workplace.
To safeguard our way of life, we must maintain our incomes and keep people in jobs. In short, we need to keep the economy growing. One of the key drivers of long-term growth is widely recognised as having more people in the workforce.
Unfortunately, if we do not adjust our approach, the long-term outlook for Australia is lower economic growth. Why? Because our population and our economy are changing and that will impact heavily on our workforce participation.
The government will soon launch the 2015 intergenerational report. The report is the most comprehensive examination of demography and current policy. It evaluates how these changes will affect the economy and government finances over the next 40 years.
It will show there will be fewer people of traditional working age as a proportion of the population in the years to come. Over the next decade, the working population is expected to increase by 12 per cent, while the population over 65 is expected to increase by 36 per cent. That is, the number of people aged over 65 will grow three times faster than the traditional working-age population.
The number of people in the traditional workforce supporting those who have left the workforce will nearly halve over the next 40 years.
On the one hand, this a problem, because as the population ages and more people leave the workforce, tax revenues will struggle to fund the same level of government services we enjoy today. On the other hand, this is an opportunity to encourage greater workforce participation, especially among underappreciated and underutilised older people.
We must not fall into the trap of viewing an ageing population as a burden. Older people will be critical to maintaining the economic growth that has underpinned the advances in our standards of living and quality of life.
According to the age discrimination commissioner: “As a society, we have been slow to recognise that millions of older Australians are locked out of the workforce by age discrimination. We are only now starting to understand what a terrible waste of human capital this situation represents; a loss to the national economy and to businesses large and small, and a loss to the individual who is pushed out of the workforce prematurely.”
Deloitte Access Economics estimates a 3 per cent increase in participation by the over 55s would generate a $33 billion annual boost to the national economy. A 5 per cent increase in participation, would see a $48 billion boost to the economy.
If Australia’s workforce participation rate for those aged over 65 increased to that of New Zealand over the next 10 years, this would result in a boost to Australia’s real gross domestic product of about $40 billion in 2024-25.
Older workers contribute knowledge and skills based on years of experience and expertise. We need older people working and contributing to our economic growth.
Also, people who work longer accrue more superannuation savings and are less reliant on the pension during retirement.
There is a strong correlation between workforce participation and health status. Continuing to work protects against physical ill-health and poor mental health. Data shows people staying in the workforce past retirement age tend to have better health compared with those not working.
Older workers also report the need for flexibility in their working hours or part-time arrangements so they can fit in caring responsibilities or manage sickness or disability.
The decline in participation rates of older workers only aggravates the problem of age dependency and rising social expenditures. Ignoring a pool of productive workers in the face of a falling participation rate will affect our economic growth.
If these trends continue, we as a society will be contributing to a decline in our standard of living. So let’s reverse the traditional attitudes, embrace a longer life and look for ways to redesign our lives so we can enjoy prosperity along the way.
