It’s not difficult to find baby boomers out in the job market who will tell you that they have fewer employment options than they used to.
The turning point occurs around age 55. According to a recent study, only 4 percent of people in their early 50s who find a new job are moving into what the researchers label as “old-person jobs” – that is, jobs in occupations that disproportionately employ older workers. The share in these jobs increases sharply, to 13 percent, by the time they reach their late 50s and to 22 percent in their early 60s.
Given the more difficult job market, this cloud has a silver lining. Older workers are actually better off today than they were in the late 1990s and have experienced a “broadening of occupational opportunities,” concluded researchers Matt Rutledge, Steve Sass, and Jorge Ramos-Mercado of the Center for Retirement Research, which sponsors this blog.
Specifically, the situation has improved for two of the three age groups they analyzed. The share of new hires who are in their early 50s and end up in old-person jobs has fallen by more than two-thirds since the late 1990s. For people in their early 60s, it has fallen by nearly one-fifth.
Various possible reasons for the improvement include an aging labor force – managers included. As managers age, they may become more amenable to hiring older workers.
The study also found that things have improved for both educational groups: those who have spent at least some time in college and those who never attended college. …Learn More
One of Americans’ biggest financial challenges is proper planning to ensure that their standard of living doesn’t drop after they retire and the regular paychecks stop.
A new study has practical implications for baby boomers in urgent need of improving their retirement finances: working a few additional years carries a lot more financial punch than a last-ditch effort to save some extra money in a 401(k).
This point is made dramatically in a simple example in the study: if a head of household who is 10 years away from retiring increases his 401(k) contributions from 6 percent to 7 percent of pay (with a 3 percent employer match) for the next decade, he would get no more benefit than if he instead had decided to work just one additional month before retiring.
Of course, this estimate should be taken only as illustrative. To get their retirement finances into shape, many people should plan to work several more years than is typical today. Baby boomers tend to leave the labor force in their early- to mid-60s, even though more than four out of 10 boomers are on a path to a lower retirement standard of living. …Learn More
Despite the mounting pressures on Americans of all ages to save for retirement, our saving habits haven’t changed in 10 years.
The combined employer and employee contributions to 401(k)s consistently hover around 10 percent of workers’ pay, according to “How America Saves 2018,” an annual report by Vanguard, which administers thousands of employer 401(k)s and other defined contribution plans.
Retirement account balances aren’t going up either. The typical participant’s 401(k) balance is no larger than it was in 2007, even though accounts grew 7 percent last year, to $26,000, thanks to a strong stock market. The balances, when adjusted for inflation, are slightly smaller.
The growing adoption of 401(k) plans that automatically enroll their workers is having both negative and positive influences on the account balances. Employers tend to set employees’ contributions in these plans at a low 3 percent of their pay. This has had a depressing effect on balances, but it has been offset somewhat in recent years by a modification to auto-enrollment plans: more employers are automatically increasing their workers’ contribution rates periodically.
Baby boomers with a few short years left to save are particularly under pressure to increase their savings. The typical boomer has accumulated only $71,000 in his current employer’s retirement account, according to Vanguard. Total account balances are generally larger, however – though still often inadequate – because many baby boomers have rolled over savings from past employer 401(k)s into their personal IRA accounts.
Overall, the situation for all workers hasn’t really changed and neither has Vanguard’s message to future retirees.
“Going forward, we need to reach for higher contribution rates for more individuals,” Jean Young, senior research analyst says in the company’s video above. …Learn More
Men with high school diplomas are retiring around age 63 – three years before college-educated men. The gap in their retirement ages used to be smaller.
The reasons behind the current disparity are explained in a review of research studies on the topic by Matt Rutledge, an economist with the Center for Retirement Research. The trend for women is similar, though their story is complicated by a sharp rise in their participation in the labor force in recent decades.
Rutledge provides four reasons that less-educated men are still the lion’s share of early retirees:
Health. Older Americans are generally getting healthier and living longer – so why not wait to retire? Well, the health of less-educated people is poorer and has improved less over time than their more-educated coworkers. And health problems trump unemployment and other types of job losses as the single biggest reason for their early retirements – more so than for better-educated workers.
Labor Market. Two aspects of the labor market are relevant to less-educated workers. In the past, a large share of the retiree population could count on a guaranteed monthly income from a pension. Today, the workers who have a retirement savings plan have an incentive to delay retirement, because they will have to rely on the often inadequate and uncertain income that can be withdrawn from their 401(k)s. But less-educated workers haven’t been affected very much by the change, because they’ve never been big beneficiaries of employer retirement plans. In the 1990s, they could claim just 11 percent of the value in pensions, and today they hold 11 percent of the wealth in 401(k) plans.
A second change in the labor market is plummeting U.S. manufacturing employment since the 1980s, which reduced the physical demands of work. But myriad working conditions remain relatively poor for less-educated workers and are still a powerful reason for them to retire. …Learn More
A theme runs through the infographic below: aging baby boomers are still a force of nature.
Created by Georgetown University’s Center for Retirement Initiatives, the infographic uses demographic data to show that boomers remain important to the labor market even as they grow older.
More than 9 million people over 65 work – a steep 65 percent increase in just a decade.
Two things primarily explain this increase. One reason is hardly surprising: the post-World War II baby boom that created the largest generation in history also created the largest living adult population (though Millennials will soon catch up).
On top of this, baby boomers are working longer for myriad reasons – among them, better health, inadequate retirement savings, and more education – which drives up their participation in the labor force.
To see boomers’ other impacts on work, click here for the entire infographic.
The grocery shopping for five is over, the family cell phone plan has been canceled, and the college tuition has been paid one last time.
So what’s next?
Newly minted empty nesters, having poured a couple hundred thousand dollars into raising each child, respond to their financial liberation in one of two ways. Some start saving more for their golden years. The others keep spending at that elevated level – but this time on themselves.
This personal decision, made at the critical juncture in the pre-retirement years, will have consequences for retirement – save more and things could turn out pretty well, or keep spending and jeopardize financial security in old age.
In the aggregate, at least some older households are taking the second approach. An analysis by the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College, finds that having children translates to “a moderate increase” in the risk that their standard of living will fall after they retire.
The researchers looked at the financial implications of kids from two angles. First, they used household data to estimate the sacrifices parents make – in the form of lower income – while they are raising children. Then they looked ahead to their retirement finances.
Compared with childless couples, parents in their 30s and 40s have about 3 percent less income for each additional child – some of this loss occurs when mothers work part-time temporarily or take time out for childbearing and childrearing. The income gap between parents and childless couples closes when parents reach their 50s and the kids start leaving the roost.
Less income over a lifetime translates to less wealth: parenthood reduces wealth by about 4 percent per child for workers ages 30-59.
The effects of children persist even after the transition from work to retirement. …Learn More
Medicare pays for the bulk of the medical care for Americans over 65, but a lot of their income is still eaten up by medical expenses.
The list of expenses is long. The lion’s share goes toward various insurance premiums – for Medicare Part B coverage, Part D prescription drug coverage, and supplemental insurance, whether Medigap, a Medicare Advantage plan, or employer health insurance for retirees. The remaining costs, for copayments and deductibles, are also significant.
These out-of-pocket costs, when added together, averaged about $4,300 annually per person, finds a new study by researchers Melissa McInerney, Matthew Rutledge, and Sara Ellen King of the Center for Retirement Research.
Out-of-pocket costs consume a third of the amount that retirees receive from Social Security, which is the most significant source of retirement income for a wide swath of the nation’s seniors, including many people in the middle-class. Half of seniors get at least half of all their income from the federal program.
The Medicare Part D prescription drug program has given some relief to retirees. After it became effective in 2006, the share of seniors’ income consumed by out-of-pocket costs declined slightly and then declined again after a follow-up reform of Part D began to close a big gap in drug coverage – known as the donut hole – in 2010. …Learn More