Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Speaking from personal experience, after being laid off in Jun '08, I was able to find a new job on Sept. 28th when I was one month shy of turning 64. My boss is likely15 years my junior and most of the others in my department are even younger than that but my age doesn't seem to be an issue for anyone. I should mention however that I don't really look my age, my skills were sharp, I got rave comments from my references and I generally associate with people much younger. Given the economy we're in, retiring is hardly at the forefront of my worries. I have pretty much decided to work until someone tells me to stop and I am fairly okay with that.
I doubt you will be ..."okay with that "
The reason many places don't want to hire folks in their 60's is because many have the attitude you do...."work until someone tells me to stop "
When the boss has to tell them to stop they get so angry,upset, and threaten an age discrimination lawsuit ( even though their skills and productivity are vastly diminishing )
I have seen this firsthand.
Older workers thinking they are ENTITLED to work as long as they want and too blind to see their skills and productivity have declined.
Social Security wasn't meant to begin until 65. The earliest you can collect benefits is 62, but if you collect that early, your payment is a lot less, so it's a foolish choice unless absolutely necessary. If you delay collecting Social Security until you are 70, your payment will be at it's highest.
A lot of people approaching retirement had their 401Ks devastated when the economy went to hell. Heck, there were people already retired who HAD to go back to work. I know some of both - people who had to go back to work and people who had to delay retirement because of all the money lost.
So, I'd say a 60-year-old without a job should be looking for one, unless they are independently wealthy. You'd have to be living under a rock not to know that many financial experts expect a rise in people working until and past age 70.
And by the time people in their 30s and 40s retire, the age to collect Social Security will be higher. You'd better hope that when you're 60, younger people aren't so snotty about you looking for a job.
Last edited by Shooting Stars; 07-12-2012 at 11:55 AM..
The reason many places don't want to hire folks in their 60's is because many have the attitude you do...."work until someone tells me to stop "
When the boss has to tell them to stop they get so angry,upset, and threaten an age discrimination lawsuit (even though their skills and productivity are vastly diminishing)
I have seen this firsthand.Older workers thinking they are ENTITLED to work as long as they want and too blind to see their skills and productivity have declined.
Anecdotal evidence doesn't reflect the vast reality. Skills don't decline unless a person stops learning. Productivity shouldn't either unless you're talking about extreme physical work.
I can think of lots of young workers with neither skills, knowledge or productivity! Yet no one thinks of not hiring them even though they're lame.
My mom is in her mid-70s, and probably knows more about computers than most people. She had to start using them on the job in her late 50s and now she could run circles around most of us.
Now if you have an older worker who really has allowed their skills to decline and isn't as productive as you need, then go ahead and let them go. I hope you're also letting the young ones go who have the same issues. But please don't paint everyone with the same broad brush. Most people in their 60s have a lot of juice left in them and many of the world's greatest discoveries were by older people.
It can be the most creative part of life for some people. We don't all peak at the same time.
That sentence makes no sense. If you arrived at your 60s or 70s with plenty of money to retire, and then lost a good portion of it when the economy went to hell, then how is that a "LIFE" of financial mistakes?
If they had a "life" of financial mistakes, they wouldn't have had the money in the first place.
Anecdotal evidence doesn't reflect the vast reality. Skills don't decline unless a person stops learning. Productivity shouldn't either unless you're talking about extreme physical work.
I can think of lots of young workers with neither skills, knowledge or productivity! Yet no one thinks of not hiring them even though they're lame.
My mom is in her mid-70s, and probably knows more about computers than most people. She had to start using them on the job in her late 50s and now she could run circles around most of us.
Now if you have an older worker who really has allowed their skills to decline and isn't as productive as you need, then go ahead and let them go. I hope you're also letting the young ones go who have the same issues. But please don't paint everyone with the same broad brush. Most people in their 60s have a lot of juice left in them and many of the world's greatest discoveries were by older people.
It can be the most creative part of life for some people. We don't all peak at the same time.
I have served on school boards and on boards of a co-0p in agriculture------also witnessed this at the place I worked, ------ seen a good friend of mine get all upset because his boss told him his skills had deterioted ( he was age 78 )
The last person who sees their skills deteriote is the person it happens to. !
I will state one more time----- the last person who sees their skills deteriate is the person it happens to !
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.