Documentary on Ageism and Employment

I am in awe at Patricia Sahertian's moxy. Her ability to see a problem and tackle it, head on, is so inspiring. After being impacted by ageism in the workplace, she decided to make a movie about it. The resulting documentary, Cut Back: facing ageism, has been posted in its entirety on YouTube. Talk about doing a mitzvah!

Here's the first installment of this excellent documentary:

Ageism and Unemployment

It appears that the problem of being old and unemployed is starting to get its due. There may once have been a time when it was possible to retire tidily and in a timely fashion and never experience age discrimination in the workforce. In addition, the commonality of corporate pensions would have taken the pinch out of a forced retirement --- it wasn't a layoff with a few months' severance, but an income stream for life. Therefore, the phenomenon of ageism and employment appeared to be more of an exception than the rule and would have carried a tremendous stigma ("He really wasn't functioning on the same level anymore," "She just couldn't take the hint and retire..."). Considering that most of the rule-makers and policy setters in our country come from this ilk - the college educated, white-collar job-set, the relative invisibility of age discrimination in the corporate world insured that there was a lack of appreciation for the problem in general... until now. Because of the economic downturn and the timing as it relates to the anticipated retirement of aging boomers... the problem is much more evident.

I'm not sure if it's just that my awareness is now heightened, or that, because of the conditions of the moment (lots of people approaching retirement age with wiped out retirement savings and high numbers of joblessness), but the issue seems to be coming up a lot more in the media. 

Just today, I noted it in this article on local homeless services:

"These people are desperate," O'Mara said. "They've paid taxes all their lives; they've never not been able to work. They don't qualify for much of the aid that's available because they have too many assets. But what do all these assets matter when you're 50 years old and you can't find a job?"

Wow.

Wow. That's all I have to say. I just had to clip this response in total from the article on "Older Workers Need Not Apply" in the NY Times.

This is just a part of what Laurence J. Kotlikoff wrote. What do you think???

Pay the Aged Less

The solution?

First, modify the Age Discrimination Act by establishing a national age-productivity reference profile that employers can use to defend pay cuts they feel they need to impose on their older workers in order to retain them.

Second, scrap employer-based retirement programs in favor of a Personal Security System under which all workers would invest 8 percent of pay in a global stock/bond index fund. The government would split contributions between spouses, match contributions by the poor, convert balances at retirement to inflation-adjusted annuities, and guarantee that retirement balances equal at least what one contributed adjusted for inflation.

Third, scrap employer-based health care in favor of a Medical Security System under which all Americans receive an annual voucher to buy a basic health plan for the year. The size of the voucher would equal one’s expected costs under the basic plan. So those with pre-existing conditions would receive larger vouchers. The aggregate voucher budget would be set at 10 percent of G.D.P., which means the country won’t go broke.

Fourth, scrap the current tax system in favor of the “FairTax” plan, which is equivalent to a very low, flat-rate wage tax plus a one-time tax on wealth plus a monthly “demogrant.” This “right-wing” proposal is something every Democrat should love. The tax is implemented by taxing all retail sales. In my version, I’d tax the consumption services (called imputed rent) from living in your own home. Such a broad-based FairTax would have a very low rate. Indeed, most older, as well as younger, workers who move from paying roughly 40 cents of every dollar earned to Uncle Sam to only 18 cents.

This will give older workers plenty of incentive to stay on the job.

Thoughts???

Older Workers Need Not Apply

This article in the NY Times got a lot of hefty response.

Here's some of the gristle:

How can I supervise someone who has more experience than I have, how do I motivate them when they are less concerned about the carrot of promotions or the stick of being fired? Managing older workers in fact doesn’t require rocket science, but it does require a more collaborative approach that respects their expertise and engages their interests.

Another interviewed expert:

Older workers are desperate. Their 401(k) plans are devastated, and they realize they do not have enough to retire. My guess is that they are clinging to their jobs. If we had data on quit rates — which we don’t — I bet the rate for older workers has dropped sharply. And long tenure and anti-discrimination laws make it hard to fire older workers... But older workers without jobs are a different story. No law can really prevent the “not hiring” of older workers.

The International Longevity Center

Nancy sent me this great article on ageism, though I agree with her comment that it's a little too hoo-rah, swinging to the opposite end of the spectrum on what's expected in aging.

The article led me to the International Longevity Center site because the ILC's founder, Dr. Robert N. Butler,coined the term "ageism" in 1968.

I thought Karen's group would be particularly interested in the work that the ILC is doing related to aging and corporate America. I also like the consistent messaging of the "Age Boom" and "Longevity Revolution" on the site. Very positive. It turns the notion from "aging" to "living longer."