Older Workers Taking Jobs from the Young? Nonsense! Say Economists

Pretty business lady working on a laptop while her male colleagues discussing business project
Alamy
By MATT SEDENSKY

CHICAGO -- It's an assertion that has been accepted as fact by droves of the unemployed: Older people remaining on the job later in life are stealing jobs from young people.

One problem, many economists say: It isn't supported by a wisp of fact.

"We all cannot believe that we have been fighting this theory for more than 150 years," said April Yanyuan Wu, a research economist at the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College, who co-authored a paper last year on the subject.

The commonly accepted vision of a surge of workers looks like this: A young post-doctoral student dreams of a full-time teaching job at their university, but there are no openings. An 80-something professor who has remained on the job long past what's considered "normal" retirement is blamed,

The problem with that vision is that there are probably full-time teaching positions available elsewhere, or the person blocking the young grad student from the job is only 40 years old, economists say. Further, the veteran professor's decision to stay employed and productive may stir other job growth. He may bring research grants to his university allowing for other hiring, may take on assistants, and may be able to dine out and shop and fuel the economy more than if he weren't on the job.

None of that would have happened had he retired.

The theory Wu and other economists are fighting is known as "lump of labor," and it has maintained traction in the U.S., particularly in a climate of high unemployment. The theory dates to 1851 and says if a group enters the labor market -- or in this case, remains in it beyond their normal retirement date -- others will be unable to gain employment or will have their hours cut.

It's a line of thinking that has been used in the U.S. immigration debate and in Europe to validate early retirement programs, and it relies on a simple premise: That there are a fixed number of jobs available. In fact, most economists dispute this. When women entered the workforce, there weren't fewer jobs for men. The economy simply expanded.

The same is true with older workers, they argue.

"There's no evidence to support that increased employment by older people is going to hurt younger people in any way," said Alicia Munnell, director of the Center for Retirement Research and the co-author with Wu of "Are Aging Baby Boomers Squeezing Young Workers Out of Jobs?"

" It's not going to reduce their wages, it's not going to reduce their hours, it's not going to do anything bad to them," Munnell said.

Still, many remain unconvinced.

James Galbraith, a professor of government at the University of Texas at Austin, has advocated for a temporary lowering of the age to qualify for Social Security and Medicare to allow older workers who don't want to remain on the job a way to exit and to spur openings for younger workers.

He doesn't buy the comparison of older workers to women entering the workforce, and says others' arguments on older workers expanding the economy don't make sense when there are so many unemployed people. If there was a surplus of jobs, he said, there would be no problem with people working longer. But there isn't.

"I can't imagine how you could refute that. The older worker retires, the employer looks around and hires another worker," he said. "It's like refuting elementary arithmetic."

The perception has persisted, from prominent stories in The New York Times, Newsweek and other media outlets, to a pointed question to Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) last year by the NBC reporter Luke Russert, who asked whether her refusal to step out of the House leadership (and the similar decisions of other older lawmakers) was denying younger politicians a chance. A chorus of lawmakers around Pelosi muttered and shouted "discrimination," until the Democratic leader chimed in herself.

"Let's for a moment honor it as a legitimate question, although it's quite offensive," she said. "But you don't realize that, I guess."

The heart of Russert's question makes sense to many: If Pelosi doesn't give up her position, a younger person doesn't have a chance to take it. That viewpoint is repeated in countless workplaces around the country, where a younger person awaits a senior employee's departure for their chance to ascend.

In the microeconomic view of things, Pelosi remaining in her job at the age of 73 does deny others her district's seat in Congress or a chance to ascend to the leadership. But economists say the larger macroeconomic view gives a clearer picture: Having older people active and productive actually benefits all age groups, they say, and spurs the creation of more jobs.

Munnell and Wu analyzed Current Population Survey data to test for any changes in employment among those under 55 when those 55 and older worked in greater numbers. They found no evidence younger workers were losing work and in fact found the opposite: Greater employment, reduced unemployment and yielded higher wages.

Munnell said, outside of economists, the findings can be hard for people to understand when they think only of their own workplace.

"They just could not get in their heads this dynamism that is involved," she said. "You can't extrapolate from the experience of a single company to the economy as a whole."

Melissa Quercia, 35, a controller for a small information technology company in Phoenix, said she sees signs of the generational job battle all around her: Jobs once taken by high schoolers now filled by seniors, college graduates who can't find work anywhere, the resulting dearth of experience of younger applicants. She doesn't see economists' arguments playing out. Older people staying on the job aren't spurring new jobs, because companies aren't investing in creating new positions, she said.

"It's really hard to retire right now, I understand that," she said. "But if the younger generation doesn't have a chance to get their foot in the door, then what?"

Jonathan Gruber, an economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who edited a book on the subject for the National Bureau of Economic Research, said it's a frustrating reality of his profession: That those things he knows as facts are disputed by the populace.

"If you polled the average American they probably would think the opposite," he said. "There's a lot of things economists say that people don't get and this is just one of them."

Matt Sedensky, an AP writer on leave, is studying aging and workforce issues as part of a one-year fellowship at the AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, which joins NORC's independent research and AP journalism. The fellowship is funded by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation and supported by APME, an association of AP member newspapers and broadcast stations.

Increase your money and finance knowledge from home

Introduction to Retirement Funds

Target date funds help you maintain a long term portfolio.

View Course »

Building Credit from Scratch

Start building credit...now.

View Course »

Add a Comment

*0 / 3000 Character Maximum

211 Comments

Filter by:
glndlhghts1

obamasam0r0n1. dude why dont you get a life. Listen everybody i was on hear 3 to 4 hrs ago , and this guy is attacking everybody. if you dont agree with this low life he attacks you.

January 06 2014 at 8:06 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
glndlhghts1

Some good places to get facts and news is hearing Tom Hartmann look him he has a great radio show and many good books to read. He also is on RT NEWS with his tv show THE BIG PICTUER.
nader.org. is one more place to get news and facts.

January 06 2014 at 7:50 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
glndlhghts1

Most all americans understand that both partys are to blame for the mess they laid on all of us. people know that you cant get all the News info from Fox news, CNN, CNBC . Best to get it from RT NEWS OR THE BBC. for people who dont like to read or research news of the day.

January 06 2014 at 7:36 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
glndlhghts1

The truth is the system will fail . the crash 2016 will soon be hear. The Reagan era is over. 30 years of failed economics. a birth of a new progressive movement will be hear.

January 06 2014 at 7:25 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
mrspelosi

We liberals will never tolerate manufacturing to come back to the United States dears. What about all that pollution. Everyone knows we will sic the EPA on those manufacturing plants and put them out of business. We liberals will impose enormous fines on them or tax them out of existence. That is the liberal way darlings.

January 06 2014 at 5:56 PM Report abuse -1 rate up rate down Reply
Iselin007

I have to go maybe later.

January 06 2014 at 5:41 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Iselin007

obamasam0r0n1
If you built cars in Detroit. 25 years ago, you were guaranteed a middle to upper middle class lifestyle with off the chart benefits and a full pension after 25 years. That’s no longer a realistic expectation. Today’s choices are to either increase skills or accept a lower paying job, and the lower standard of living that comes with it. No intelligent argument exists for why taxpayers should be paying to ensure this person continues to make the equivalent of $50+ an hour with full benefits. You need to take pride in learning a new skill like operating an NC machine.
When I see what the CEOs and others are making it's because they are just too cheap to pay Americans. NC you mean the same Numerical Control machines and pratt and whitneys they use to use here? Doesn't matter the tool and Die makers were even being sold out for cheap off shore labor. I knew some that were asked if they wanted to come back at the Minumum Wage!

January 06 2014 at 5:41 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Iselin007

John Henry was a Steel Driving man. He was said to be one of the strongest men. Since the man was said to work for a relative in control of a particular relative it would of been my wish had I been born back them=n to see John Henry kick the .... out of JPM and his ilk.

January 06 2014 at 5:17 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to Iselin007's comment
Iselin007

I meant in control of a particular Railroad.

January 06 2014 at 5:18 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Iselin007

I use to make those little metal parts like the cap and plunger for the Soap Dispensers on an semi automatic Chucker and assemble the parts on a kicker. I drilled and reamed the holes on the threaded pipes for Purolator Airfilters that a co worker cut and threaded on a turret lath. We use to handle bars of stock like pure Nickel, brass and other metals. This was all done in a Screw Machines products company in the 1970's. As the pro cheap labor conglomerates began shifting jobs off shore the smaller shops folded first just like the mom and pop retail shops. Today the foreign plants pay about what we were paid some 40 frigging years later!

January 06 2014 at 4:58 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
mrspelosi

Oh my. I see the liberals were here exhibiting their usual outlandish behavior. Bad behavior comes naturally to us liberals. It is in our blood to behave badly, darlings. How unfortunate.

January 06 2014 at 4:34 PM Report abuse -1 rate up rate down Reply