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.
Lots of discussion in the working full time thread for us seniors but what about part time? Don't things favor us? Won't we see more seniors working part time with the many changes we are seeing today? With the many constraints on small business about to soon kick in because of the ACA, won't employees working part time covered by Medicare be desirable? With the pressure to increase minimum wage and employers especially in the food service industry wanting, to cut workers hours back, will senior desiring part time jobs be more desirable? Is it possible that much of the hiring in the private sector in 10-15 years will look very different from today? Skilled seniors hitting 66 can work 29 hours per week not need or have to be given health insurance and still be able to collect full SS benefits and any pension they might have. Lower level management positions might consist of former higher level management sorts now desiring less stress, responsibility and more free time etc etc. To soon to say but the seeds of may already be starting to root in society. Especially with temp/staffing agencies etc. Seniors will have cars and transportation that younger workers might not. Seniors might not be burdened with histories of prior drug/alcohol addiction that crashed another workers life. Perhaps the private sector will discover that a lot of unwanted government regulation can be side stepped with part time semi retired boomers. We all know what unintended consequences can do. Thoughts!
The no-need-for-health-insurance angle for employers may well lead to an increased interest in hiring seniors 65 and above (i.e., who have Medicare coverage). I can see that employers can save lots of money. If that trend develops, might it negatively impact the number of jobs available for younger people?
The no-need-for-health-insurance angle for employers may well lead to an increased interest in hiring seniors 65 and above (i.e., who have Medicare coverage). I can see that employers can save lots of money. If that trend develops, might it negatively impact the number of jobs available for younger people?
Lots of love for you and that question ER. I was wondering how long and who would be the first to ponder that question. You get a big Gold Star and now let the discussion of that thought begin. Want to rep you but can't so I owe you another one. That was the first unintended consequence I was thinking of. The other thread I started about senior housing got me thinking with so many wanting to work part time in retirement and stay in place without moving.
Regarding ACA: young adults can remain on their parents' insurance policy up to the age of 26 even if they are married, not living with their parents, in school, working and not financially dependent upon their parents, or eligible to enroll in their employers health insurance plans. So, I don't think ACA is going to have a great impact in hiring seniors over young adults.
Additionally, ACA is referring to part-time as working an average of 30 hours a week or more in a month. Employers do not have to provide health insurance benefits to people who are working less than the threshold.
Seniors have to overcome the stereotype of being forgetful, more frail, and more prone to illness, having skills that are outdated, being difficult to train and set in their ways, who get tired easily, and who may decide to retire soon. They have to overcome the fact that most of the managers are younger than them and don't feel comfortable bossing around a much older person. They also have to overcome the difficulty of finding common ground with those who are going to hire them and who they will work with. They may also have to overcome the belief that seniors don't need the money as much as a young adult does, that they don't have the intensive to work as hard, to learn as much, to try to advance within the organization.
There is also the matter of the cost of workers compensation insurance (which ACA does not address), which is very costly. It could be argued that it would be perceived that seniors would get hurt on the job more easily.
Regarding ACA: young adults can remain on their parents' insurance policy up to the age of 26 even if they are married, not living with their parents, in school, working and not financially dependent upon their parents, or eligible to enroll in their employers health insurance plans. So, I don't think ACA is going to have a great impact in hiring seniors over young adults.
Additionally, ACA is referring to part-time as working an average of 30 hours a week or more in a month. Employers do not have to provide health insurance benefits to people who are working less than the threshold.
Seniors have to overcome the stereotype of being forgetful, more frail, and more prone to illness, having skills that are outdated, being difficult to train and set in their ways, who get tired easily, and who may decide to retire soon. They have to overcome the fact that most of the managers are younger than them and don't feel comfortable bossing around a much older person. They also have to overcome the difficulty of finding common ground with those who are going to hire them and who they will work with. They may also have to overcome the belief that seniors don't need the money as much as a young adult does, that they don't have the intensive to work as hard, to learn as much, to try to advance within the organization.
There is also the matter of the cost of workers compensation insurance (which ACA does not address), which is very costly. It could be argued that it would be perceived that seniors would get hurt on the job more easily.
Just playing devils advocate here.
No disagreement with your points in general, however when you look at the lower end of the job market the current talent pool is wanting. It could well be upgraded by senior's as opposed to woman still of child bearing age, former convicts, drop outs, substance abuse history etc etc etc. I suggest woman still of child bearing age for the following reason:
Later in the report, Facebook Chief Operating Officer and "Lean In" author Sheryl Sandberg makes the case for nationwide paid maternity leave policy and reductions to the skyrocketing cost of child care, among other policy proposals.
The above is part of the reason why I said 10-15 years out with policy changes/unwanted government regulations and unintended consequences.
The no-need-for-health-insurance angle for employers may well lead to an increased interest in hiring seniors 65 and above (i.e., who have Medicare coverage). I can see that employers can save lots of money. If that trend develops, might it negatively impact the number of jobs available for younger people?
Both excellent points to ponder.
Shorter-term stints without health insurance may be where we're headed (contract work).
I don't know. Have you investigated to see if there is a study telling us the percentage of seniors with a history of drug abuse, the percentage of seniors who struggle with alcoholism, the percentage of seniors on prescription medications with a side-effect affecting their memory, cognition, and motor skills?
There are always going to be poor people who have children and cannot afford them. There will always be people who do not take school seriously. There will always be people who simply do not want to work. These people have existed for generations but their life choices have done nothing to reduce age discrimination in the workplace either in the past or the current.
Interesting comment about fast food, I've seen a lot of fast food places staffing there Opening (6am) to 2pm time frame with senior at the cash registers / Order Pickers . With the younger Min/Wagers doing the cooking in the back.
From my days in fast-food, I would say the 65+ could not keep up (Or even want to) do the back of the house cooking operations. But standing at cash registers taking orders, fetching them, is what they want to do.
Since most of them its a choice to work part-time, Not a money requirement. The 20 something managers know, they come in do there job, don't want to be 'cross-trained' on the grill etc. and leave them to do it. If the manager get to pushy, they will just up and quit, Filling daytime shifts with Competent people can be hard, One the High Schools get out at 3pm or so they have another big pool of workers.
I don't know. Have you investigated to see if there is a study telling us the percentage of seniors with a history of drug abuse, the percentage of seniors who struggle with alcoholism, the percentage of seniors on prescription medications with a side-effect affecting their memory, cognition, and motor skills?
There are always going to be poor people who have children and cannot afford them. There will always be people who do not take school seriously. There will always be people who simply do not want to work. These people have existed for generations but their life choices have done nothing to reduce age discrimination in the workplace either in the past or the current.
Sure the seniors with those issues wont be the ones hired. It will be those of us with 40 plus years of a quality life history to present still in good physical and mental health. What we have is government intervention to try to improve the life quality of those with the shortcomings you mention. It is the governmental effort to use the workplace as a lab for so much social change that can create the non intended outcomes. Not every senior is discriminated against in the work place and being railroaded out. The glass is often a tad more than half full or even more for many.
Interesting comment about fast food, I've seen a lot of fast food places staffing there Opening (6am) to 2pm time frame with senior at the cash registers / Order Pickers . With the younger Min/Wagers doing the cooking in the back.
From my days in fast-food, I would say the 65+ could not keep up (Or even want to) do the back of the house cooking operations. But standing at cash registers taking orders, fetching them, is what they want to do.
Since most of them its a choice to work part-time, Not a money requirement. The 20 something managers know, they come in do there job, don't want to be 'cross-trained' on the grill etc. and leave them to do it. If the manager get to pushy, they will just up and quit, Filling daytime shifts with Competent people can be hard, One the High Schools get out at 3pm or so they have another big pool of workers.
Yes high school workers the future quality workers in many cases as opposed to drop outs still struggling. Just consider what raising the minimum wage substantially would do to the job market. Paid maternity leave could be very expensive and if the high school student gets pregnant? Not that this is possible or probable but what if a drop out got pregnant and had to be paid to stay home and not work. Hmmm nah never happen. The job market is just that a market that if left free will seek equilibrium. If regulated who knows! My only point is it could benefit the many seniors who indicate they want to retire and continue with part time employment.
More than 80 percent of near-retirees say they'll likely do some work in retirement, citing both financial factors as well as other reasons, such as wanting to keep busy or maintain an active mind.
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.
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.
