1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Work 'til we are 68?

Discussion in 'Personal' started by kareneliot, Nov 18, 2011.

  1. kareneliot

    kareneliot Occasional commenter

    No it would relate to the ability to perform the job. When you are 68, you should have the experience to do the job with less effort. Are you well into your 60s? Do you feel old already?
     
  2. Ruthie66

    Ruthie66 New commenter

    I don't know but I think the reality will be that more teachers retire "early" (at sixty something) on health grounds.
     
  3. Anonymous

    Anonymous New commenter

    Well...see...the complaint is that funding pensions is impossible because we're all living too long so by upping the pension age we ensure that more people die younger...problem solved.
    If I have to remain in the job until I'm 68 I'm unlikely to see my pension as I've had my first heart attack already.
     
  4. BelleDuJour

    BelleDuJour Star commenter

    More likely you'll not see your pension as by then the retirement age will be 70!
     
  5. kareneliot

    kareneliot Occasional commenter

    Why will people in the future, be less well at 60 than they are now?
     
  6. kareneliot

    kareneliot Occasional commenter

    Upping the pension age keeps the total costs similar. There's no obvious reason why working longer would reduce life expectancy.
     
  7. Anonymous

    Anonymous New commenter

    What age are you?
     
  8. kareneliot

    kareneliot Occasional commenter

    Any age and every age. I have to be,
     
  9. BelleDuJour

    BelleDuJour Star commenter

    No it doesn't keep the costs similar. First off all fewer people will reach pensionable age (as more die before retiement - ask any actuary) then people will draw their pensions for fewer years as retirement itself will be shorter. Retire at 60 expect up to 30 years retirement. Retire at 70 and expect only 20 years. Hardly rocket science!
    Simple!
    It is, of course, compounded by more people dying sooner of diseases brought on by (work related) stress such as high blood pressure and heart disease.
    The savings to the pension providers could be significant, all things considered.
     
  10. annsue

    annsue New commenter

    I believe the statistics, especially for teaching, show that it does.
    The truthful answer is, yes, I am now way ahead as the oldest classroom teacher and I do find it increasingly more difficult to "keep up" with the bright young things, but maybe it's more down to the ever increasing pressures, paperwork, targets , the merry-go-round of silly initiatives, and I was looking forward to retiring at 60 ( I know I still could technically but I have nowhere near a full teachers pension so can't retire til state pension kicks in !(at age 68)
     
  11. kareneliot

    kareneliot Occasional commenter

    Thats. the point. back to the affordability of the 80s.
     
  12. BelleDuJour

    BelleDuJour Star commenter

    Grim isn't it?
    I've not been in teaching all my working life, and for some of my teaching life I was on supply and paying inhto the pension was impossible so I've been left behind.
    I'll have my state pension, and Mr Belle's investments but my/our plan is to sell up and downsize. Belle Towers is our pension and we should be able to downsize to a more normal property and pocket around £500k+ when the time comes.
    I accept I am lucky in that respect but it does mean compromising my home to fund my retirement.
     
  13. kareneliot

    kareneliot Occasional commenter

    I doubt it, Got a link that shows a correlation between later retirement and reduced life expectancy for teachers? That may be your gut feeling but is is a fact?
     
  14. kareneliot

    kareneliot Occasional commenter

    It's a tough one. And if you don't do it now you might have to do it later for care costs.
     
  15. BelleDuJour

    BelleDuJour Star commenter

    Indeed. Having lost my dear Dad to Alzheimer;s in July, and in the midst of fighting the LA over care costs, I am only too aware of this.
    Seems they're out to get you whatever!
     
  16. Anonymous

    Anonymous New commenter

    It was a serious question.
    There are a lot of obvious reasons for believing that working longer will reduce age expectancy for many workers. Working longer ought to be a choice for those who wish to do so. In almost 20 years of teaching I've known 2 teachers stay on until they were 65, one was a widower who, I'm sure, was simply avoiding being on his own on a daily basis and the other a lone parent who'd not accrued enough teaching years to have a decent pension.
    I can think of several colleagues who've died in service of diseases which many medical professionals believe to be stress related (4 former colleagues have died of bowel cancer and all before the age of 65), several more have died within 2 years of retiring...both worked until they were 60.
    I don't think many of us will have worked alongside colleagues aged over 60 and many won't have worked with teachers over the age of 55. For a number of reasons fewer teachers are retiring at the traditional age of 55 - mostly financial (current crisis notwithstanding, many are supporting adult children in university).
    We are creating a situation where the young will increasingly be without work as a direct result of forcing the rest of us to work longer - I'm not sure there'll be anything to gain by making people work longer.

     
  17. inky

    inky Lead commenter

    All fine and dandy for some people, but the reality is that conditions such as arthritis will result in a lot more effort for many people. Will those who are not able to do the job with less effort be sacked under competency rules?
    Your coy response to the question about your age is telling.
     
  18. Anonymous

    Anonymous New commenter

    Do you have statistics that will prove otherwise? Your gut instinct isn't fact either.
    Common sense dictates that one of the reasons that people are living longer is that they don't work until they are old or incapacitated.

     
  19. kareneliot

    kareneliot Occasional commenter

    There are only limited studies which have shown people who retire die sooner. I don't think there is any avidence that doing nothing makes you live longer than working.
    The reirement age of 65 was determined in 1948 when life expectancy at retirement was 3 years. Things have changed.

     
  20. anon2799

    anon2799 New commenter

    Actually I read an article - and I'm trying to remember where now so I can provide a link- which stated that the generation of people who are currently retired are in better health than the next generation can expect.
    The combination of economic downturn leading to increased poverty, high housing costs, high fuel costs, the rising cost of food etc and the stress and strains these lead to mean that the next generation will be far worse off in terms of health.
    I suspect that Kareneliot may be a long way from retirement age so less worried about her pension and retiring at 68 than some people who are closer to it.
    I've a long way to go myself but I know that I am more tired now by teaching all day than I was when I started at 24. I can't see myself teaching at 68, nor doing my current job at that age, the stress and pressure will be too much. Although I know some people are very fit and young for their age I am still not sure that as a parent I would want my children taught by a teacher of 68. I know the supply teachers I sometimes use who are in their late 50s and early 60s tell me that they retired because they found a full time teaching commitment too tiring.
     

Share This Page