Over 50s Hit Hard By Recession

New figures released by the Office of National Statistics (ONS) reveal the number of long-term (6-12 months) unemployed over-50s has increased by 135 per cent, the highest increase among all age groups. Men are being hit hardest among this age group, with the numbers of long term unemployed increasing by 185 percent, the highest increase among all age groups.

Andrew Harrop, Head of Public Policy for Age Concern and Help the Aged, said:

"These figures confirm our fears that men in their 50s are being hit hard by the recession, with the number of long term unemployed men over 50 nearly trebling over the past year.

"Employers ageist attitudes mean many older workers simply aren't getting the opportunities to return to employment and research shows the longer it takes, the more unlikely it is they will ever get back to work.

"An end to the working lives of men in their 50s now will not only condemn them to an uncomfortable retirement, but will also deprive the recovering economy of their skills and experience, just when they are most needed.

"The Government's Employment White Paper shows it has listened to the plight of the over 50s. We hope the package of support they have promised will help prevent a lost generation of older workers becoming trapped in long-term unemployment."

Lib Dems attack the high court ruling

Greg Mulholland, as it happens my local MP in Leeds North West, is the Liberal Democrat spokesperson for older people and he has just sent me his official statement on the high court ruling on the DRA.
"

“I am very disappointed that the High Court did not seize this opportunity to abolish the mandatory retirement age.

“It seems extraordinary that just because somebody reaches the age of 65 their employer is able to say that they are no longer fit for purpose.

“The Judge recognised that there is now a compelling case for changes to retirement law and I am hopeful that there will be a more progressive review in the future."

And the g'ments response is .............

Age Concern reveals background behind high court decision on DRA

Age Concern plans to take the battle to Parliament as High Court upholds Default Retirement Age.

Ruling on the future of forced retirement ages‚ a high court judge actually revealed that the Government had only avoided defeat because ministers had already caved in to pressure for a review in 2010. Mr Justice Blake said: ‘I cannot presently see how 65 could remain as a DRA after the review’.

The fate of millions of people who want or need to work beyond the age of 65 now lies directly in the hands of MPs and peers‚ says Age Concern and Help the Aged.

Andrew Lockley‚ Head of Irwin Mitchell’s Public Law team‚ which represented Age Concern and Help the Aged‚ said:

“The judge’s criticism of the Government’s approach to the default retirement age will be seen as justifying the strenuous efforts made by Age Concern and Help the Aged in this litigation. Had the Government not pre-empted this and announced a review while this case was ongoing‚ then the ruling would have gone against it.

“The judge has effectively given the Government breathing space to go away and change the rules. But his comments that he cannot see how the DRA can stay at 65 will give renewed hope to thousands of workers approaching that age. Essentially‚ the Government has been told to think again.”

UK retirement age challenge fails

Unbelievable but sadly only too believable. The High Court has ruled that it is legal for UK employers to force workers to retire at the age of 65.

In the UK, a worker can see their employment end at the age of 65 without any redundancy payment - even if they do not want to retire.

The case had been brought by Age Concern and Help the Aged which argued that the compulsory retirement age goes against EU regulations.

But their challenge, heard in July, has now been thrown out by the court. As usual we have judges making crucial social decisions with no account given to social implications. Maybe we should throw them out at 65 instead of being able to continue until at least 70 and then most of them can continue to do a range of legal work up until 75. More and more institutions are lining up to ditch this policy. Even this G'ment has brought forward a review of this to 2010 - when of course they may not be in power. In the meantime thousands of people will have their livelihood stopped at exactly the same time as the G'ment are trying to encourage older people to say in employment longer. Does joined up thinking mean anything to these people! Of course MP's also are not thrown out at 65.....

Charity demands 3 things from G'ment

Age Concern and Help the Aged are calling on the G'ment to commit to 3 actions to help deal with the ageing tsunami that we keep writing about.

• Scrap the National Default Retirement Age which forces people to retire at 65 and allow people to continue working as long as they want or need to while they are able to do a good job.

• Provide financial incentives to employers who take on 50 plus workers who have been out of work for more than 6 months.

• Provide a tailored package of support for unemployed over 50s‚ including specialised training for JobCentre Plus staff to recognise the specific needs of older people job searching and providing them with meaningful‚ holistic support.

As we keep saying - is anyone listening out there?

Economic madness

2 contrasting stories today. The Times has a piece about the pioneering work of George Magnus, who is joining the growing numbers of us in making the point that the demographic time bomb that is with us is as great a natural disaster as climate change in the short term.

"Baby-boomers hitting retirement may not sound exciting next to the threat of countries disappearing into the ocean or drought wiping out food crops, but the threat is real and the results could be expensive. Mr Magnus puts this into context by explaining that the cost of cleaning up the banking crisis will be up to 25 per cent of GDP, but that the cost of the UK’s ageing population – the next four decades of pensions, healthcare, disability benefits and residential care – will cost 330 per cent of GDP." “The richest source of participation in this country is people aged over 55,” Mr Magnus, 60, said. “We have to change the nature of work and the workplace to allow people to work longer.” He states that a retirement age of 65 is a total nonsense. Our economy cannot support an increasing number of people living 20 unproductive years after that.

Yet on the other hand, a recent survey from Age Concern and Help the Aged shows that 1 in 7 HR managers plans to use the default retirement age to help cut jobs. Why is this craziness occuring? Because yet again we have no leadership on this issue from this current G'ment.

Charities launch age-friendly logo

Age Concern and Help the Aged have launched an Age OK logo, which will appear on "age friendly" products and services.

The launch follows the publication of research carried out by the charities, which revealed that one in five people aged over 60 said that difficult to open packaging would stop them purchasing a product.

Of those surveyed, half said they felt UK businesses were "youth obsessed".

According to the charities, companies that fail to make their packaging "age-friendly" could be losing out on the estimated £250bn spent by older people every year.

Businesses wishing to apply for the standard will first have to become a member of the engage network at a cost of £1,000, before completing a £1,500 application for each product or service.

An audit committee will then assess the application and make a recommendation to the approval committee. The complete process should take six months in total.

Sky will be the first company to feature the logo on its remote control packaging, after it was involved in trialling the scheme.

The charities also plan to launch a organisational accreditation in 2010.

One Voice report

The One Voice report from the newly merged charity of Age Concern and Help the Aged tracks progress on issues over time. Four of the 30 indicators in the report had improved‚ 13 had worsened and 13 showed no change.

Key findings that have improved in the last year include:

• One in five people aged between 65 and 74 (19 per cent) are doing recommended levels of exercise. This has risen from 16 per cent.

Key findings that have worsened include:

• Three fifths of people aged 65 and over (60 per cent) believe older people suffer widespread age discrimination‚ including in the workplace.
• One in five pensioners (19 per cent)‚ the equivalent of more than two million older people‚ lives below the poverty line.

Key findings that have remained showed no change over the last year include:

• Seven out of 10 people aged 65 and over (68 per cent) believe politicians see older people as a low priority. The charity is warning politicians that a similar percentage of people aged 55 and over voted in 2005 and this has implications for the approaching General Election [4].
• One in ten people aged 65 and over (11 per cent)‚ the equivalent of more than one million older people‚ perceive themselves to be often or always lonely.
  

EU backs forced retirement at 65

Appalling news this morning as the European Court of Justice ruled that the UK set-up, where people can be forced to retire at 65, is not a breach of EU legislation – as long as it had ‘a legitimate aim related to employment and social policy’. Age Concern, the charity that brought the case, arguing that it was illegal to dismiss people purely on age grounds, now has to rely on the UK High Court ruling against it. At a time when people actually want to keep working beyond 65 for financial reasons, and rising life expectancy is increasing the cost of supporting pensioners, surely something has to give?
Many of us are working to overthrow this absurd and unjust law including the two main opposition parties. Let us see if this Government will bend to pressure on this vital issue.

Forced retirement could be outlawed

Many of us have been campaigning along with Age Concern and TAEN to stop forced retirement at 65. Age Concern have taken the issue to the Hague and to date we have been presented with an ambiguous ruling that probably throws the final decision back to UK courts. This government has been prevaricating on the issue. Some business groups have been against it although Age Concern believe that as many as two-thirds of UK employers no longer operate a fixed retirement age and 1.2m people are carrying on work beyond the normal retirement ages of 60 and 65. The Telegraph this morning carries the story that the Government are now planning to make it illegal to force people to retire at 65 and could see people working well in their 70s and beyond.

It would be applied retrospectively, covering workers who have already signed contracts requiring them to retire at the normal age.

The Government believes action is needed to help those who will find their savings, pension or income lower than expected in the coming years as a result of the current recession. It is the first time that the Government has suggested that the review into the current retirement age of 65 - which is due to conclude in 2011 - will consider calls to eliminate the default age entirely, rather than merely raising it in line with plans to increase the state pension age to 68.

The number of people wishing to work longer has already increased rapidly over the past decade. In 1998, 8 percent of women worked past 60 and 7 percent of men worked past 65. However, in 2008, 10 percent of men were working above the retirement age and 13 per cent of women. Older workers also receive more generous income tax allowances.

More than 250 people have recently lodged tribunal claims after being dismissed at 65.