"The traditional retirement age of 65 is a thing of the past"
People retiring later may be easier for some and harder for others. Most likely, it will be harder for most. Based on current polling 'older workers' are settling in to the reality that they will. literally, have to work until they drop. And this new reality would bring greater challenges to many, those who could barely make it to the the present legal retirement age, which is 67, where many retire involuntarily.
Take the case John and Mary. The pivotal issue is physical stamina. John has been lifting over a 100 pounds on a loading dock for the last 40 years. He same company he started with is the same company he retired from. It's not that John isn't the same friendly guy hat this co-workers and management grew to love and respect over the years and that he hasn't lost that winning smile and that ear for listening to others problems, but you can visually see that he's slowed down a little and has lost a step. This is saying a lot for a guy who could hand wrestle and win hands down and lifted over 150 pound boxes even before the forklift became a mainstay in warehouses. Today he would tell you that he has chronic back problems, multiple pinched nerves and can barely walk without pain. His physical perseverance has paid off over the years, as his family could always count on him to put bread on the table and send four children to college.
However, the manual demands have taken a toll. John not only retired out of necessity, but no one should be expecting him to be cutting any lawns for extra retirement cash.
Unlike Mary, who is a brilliant bookkeeper and has been the foundation for administrative tasks for a small insurance company for the same 40 years as John, she sat at a desk most of the time. She also dreamed of traveling and starting her on small bookkeeping service company when retiring.
If one is believe that physical expulsion over the years can be a base for determining how far and how much one can strive beyond the traditional and now threatened retirement age, you have a microscopic view of two people who have arrive at a different spectrum on the durability scale.
This is a simple thought in suggesting as policy makers are seeking ways to prolong the working status of older workers that they are able to recognize the many and different variables in making those decisions. While the physical argument is only one perspective, it is easy to bring other considerations to the table, like, mental capacity, safety, health issues, family issues and more.
I'm a proponent of the idea that people should be allowed to work as long as they desire to and are capable of delivering the quality goods. At the same time 'one size does not fit all'. If it comes a time where it is compulsory to stay on the job until you're 80 or more, then government and business had better make sure that society can consume this shift without a eventful crisis ensuing. They had better be prepared. So the question should not be 'is 80 the new 65', but instead whether '80 can be the new 65'?
