Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Dave Beans

"over 50 And On The Scrapheap"

Recommended Posts

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1302003/Over-50-scrapheap-As-recession-bites-record-rise-fifties-condemned-long-term-unemployment.html

The recession has created a generation of over-50s who are condemned to long- term unemployment, disturbing new figures revealed last night. The number of older workers trapped in a spiral of joblessness has soared by more than 50 per cent in a year to the highest figure in a decade. A total of 170,000 job-seekers over 50 have been out of work for at least 12 months, according to research for the charity Age UK, which warned of a ‘devastating legacy of unemployment’.

Older workers have been the biggest victims of a recession panic that saw businesses slash costs by getting rid of long-serving and, most significantly, more expensive staff. The 170,000 total is up by around 57,000 in a year, creating a legion of would-be workers who will struggle to find a full-time job ever again and can expect the coming decades to be characterised by a battle to cover essential bills.

The figures renewed claims of widespread prejudice against older workers, who are unfairly seen as slow and unable to keep up with new technology. The revelations also make a mockery of Government pledges to abolish the official retirement age and allow people to work on into their 70s. For the reality is that the jobs do not exist for older workers to take up, even if they wanted to continue working following a lifetime of toil. Age UK’s director, Michelle Mitchell, said: ‘This is the highest level of long-term unemployment among over-50s that we have seen in a decade and brings back the spectre of the last two recessions, which left a devastating legacy of unemployment among people in later life.

‘If hundreds of thousands of 50-plus workers remain stuck in long-term unemployment, the Government’s plans to “reinvigorate” retirement and extend working lives will remain a hollow sound bite for many people.

‘Before pushing people back into the recruitment arena or forcing them to work for longer, the Government must lay the foundations of a better job market for older people, with fairness and flexibility as cornerstones.’

Age UK said the figures would become worse because a predicted 750,000 older people are to be switched to the unemployment category after having their Incapacity Benefits removed under a tougher, cost-cutting regime. Much of the focus of Government economic policy is based on a concern for thousands of young graduates who will struggle to find a job in the coming months. However, older people who want to work appear to have been sidelined. Age UK said the number of older people out of work for more than a year is up by 52 per cent compared with this time last year.

This compares with a rise across all age groups of less than 45 per cent.

The 170,000 older workers who are long-term unemployed account for some 21.6 per cent of the total for all age groups of 787,000. Of the job-seekers over 50 who are out of work, some 43.7 per cent have not had a job for more than a year. By contrast, only 35.1 per cent of the unemployed aged 25-49 have not had a job for more than a year, while the figure for those aged 18-24 is even lower, at 26.6 per cent. Men make up more than three-quarters of the total of over-50s who have been out of a job for more than a year. However, the number of older women considered long-term unemployed has still risen by a third.

The problems facing older people are expected to be confirmed today with the publication of the latest unemployment figures. Total unemployment stood at 2.47million in the three months to May, while the number claiming Jobseeker’s Allowance was 1.46million. All the figures appear to be at odds with the Coalition Government’s rosy picture of the future, where older people continue working for as long as they like. Recently, the Employment Relations Minister Ed Davey said: ‘With more and more people wanting to extend their working lives, we should not stop them just because they have reached a particular age.

‘We want to give individuals greater choice and are moving swiftly to end discrimination of this kind. ‘Older workers bring with them a wealth of talent and experience as employees and entrepreneurs. They have a vital contribution to make to our economic recovery and long-term prosperity.’

However, employer groups have taken a different, hard-headed tack. Manufacturers’ organisation the EEF is worried companies will be forced to retain older workers who are no longer considered competent. It predicts a big rise in age discrimination cases at employment tribunals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

50? :blink:

That's pushing it.

Try 35. ;)

I think give it twenty years, and age discrimination will be a lot less frequent than it is now. A lot of those in their 50s & 60 can be fixed in their ways, but I see that a future workforce will have to constantly adapt to changing skills requirements. Companies may also treasure older workers a lot more than they do now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

‘Before pushing people back into the recruitment arena or forcing them to work for longer, the Government must lay the foundations of a better job market for older people, with fairness and flexibility as cornerstones.’

Fairness? By and large, that's a concept that does not exist in business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reality is that over 50 workers who labour are more likely not as good as they were when 21.

The over 50 is likely to stand up for there rights, likely to go workers compensation.

.

When the country is filled to the brim with young Eastern European workers willing to work below basic rates?

Business is about profit.

All arguments for their employment are just hot air

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, going on about people being "unproductive" after 50 is a load of sh1te really.

In the company I work for, we're desperately trying to hang on to the "old guys" because they're the only people that really know how to do the job!

We're about to suffer a real skills shortage, which will do us a lot of harm. They were well trained and are now super experienced.... whereas we that followed were rushed through to save money.

Ferkin accountants have a lot to answer for!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, going on about people being "unproductive" after 50 is a load of sh1te really.

In the company I work for, we're desperately trying to hang on to the "old guys" because they're the only people that really know how to do the job!

We're about to suffer a real skills shortage, which will do us a lot of harm. They were well trained and are now super experienced.... whereas we that followed were rushed through to save money.

Ferkin accountants have a lot to answer for!

Edward Deming said training your staff is one of the things that shows up on the expense column in accounting. Its a clear cost, paying the courses, paying the time off work, etc.. but the benefit; there is no way to measure it or to know. So accounting puts that at zero(by not recording it).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Edward Deming said training your staff is one of the things that shows up on the expense column in accounting.  Its a clear cost, paying the courses, paying the time off work, etc.. but the benefit; there is no way to measure it or to know.  So accounting puts that at zero(by not recording it).

Exactly. And that's why, in my opinion, accountants should not be running Companies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly. And that's why, in my opinion, accountants should not be running Companies.

Except that accountants constantly have to keep up to date in order to maintain chartered status. Maybe they don't see it as vital in more humble employee's?

I've worked for various ISP's internet companies in the past. We were all self taught. When I suggested courses/training the Directors thought I had gone mad.

But you will find the ownership/managment much more transient than the hod carriers these days. Make your pile and cash out at the earliest opportunity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think give it twenty years, and age discrimination will be a lot less frequent than it is now.  A lot of those in their 50s & 60 can be fixed in their ways, but I see that a future workforce will have to constantly adapt to changing skills requirements.  Companies may also treasure older workers a lot more than they do now.

The current generation in their 50s may often have stayed in the same job for 20-30 years. I personally think it is healthy to get a new job every 5 years or so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Edward Deming said training your staff is one of the things that shows up on the expense column in accounting. Its a clear cost, paying the courses, paying the time off work, etc.. but the benefit; there is no way to measure it or to know. So accounting puts that at zero(by not recording it).

Well, they include it as a cost for tax purposes as well.

and if the business is up for sale, the trained staff are included as Goodwill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The current generation in their 50s may often have stayed in the same job for 20-30 years. I personally think it is healthy to get a new job every 5 years or so.

I think thats very good advise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The current generation in their 50s may often have stayed in the same job for 20-30 years. I personally think it is healthy to get a new job every 5 years or so.

Agreed.

It works best if the change every 3 to 7 years is within the same company to retain the institutional memory of the place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Over at the oil drum, it was suggested that one of the factors in the BP disaster was the lack of properly experienced personnel. When the price of oil was low, they got rid of older, more expensive staff, replacing them with inexperienced graduates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The current generation in their 50s may often have stayed in the same job for 20-30 years. I personally think it is healthy to get a new job every 5 years or so.

On which planet is that then? I don't know anyone who has been in in the same job that long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Few 'jobs' exist for very long. Long service with a particular company usually means many different roles have been performed, and new skills have been learned over the years.

It is likely that employees who have managed to stay with a company for many years have done so by being adaptable and flexible.

However, when the axe finally falls, due to outsourcing to India for example, potential new employers will insist that new

recruits have performed an identical role to that advertised. This is rarely possible, but enables them to bin your application on this basis while practising age discrimination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly. And that's why, in my opinion, accountants should not be running Companies.

+1, you know it's time to move on when the bean counters take over.

So you're on the scrap heap at 16-25, and those lucky enough (or not) to actually get a job have only 25-30 years to forge a 'career' in an ever changing and increasing globalised workplace. Oh what a wonderful world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My dad is now 78 and until recently was often asked to come out of retirement for another project in his field, as a technical author in the offshore oil industry, which he was happy to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Over at the oil drum, it was suggested that one of the factors in the BP disaster was the lack of properly experienced personnel. When the price of oil was low, they got rid of older, more expensive staff, replacing them with inexperienced graduates.

Just seen this, should've got my old man in B)

Edited by Badger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 261 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.