[quote=bobby]Bearishgirl,
one counter point to your argument is that almost everyone is employable at the right wage. maybe those 55-65 y/o don’t want to accept a wage appropriate to their skill level?
If I can hire a 30 y/o with similar skill level for 30% less salary and benefits, I, as a employer with a bottom line, would be foolish to hire someone who ask for much higher salary, whatever their age may be.[/quote]
Bobby, the reality is that a 30 yo doesn’t have a similar skill level as a 55+ yo who has been working in the same industry for decades. Nowhere near it. And they don’t have the “institutional knowledge” to thrive in the industry and not make (often costly and far-reaching) mistakes. They can’t possibly … the difference in experience amounts to 25-35 years and you can’t take that away from the 55 yo.
Vast experience aside, employers won’t even hire 55+ yo’s for today’s “entry level” wages. ESP small biz employers (with <=50 employees). Why? It is primarily due to the cost of health benefits ... everything being equal. Health benefits for this group are 2.5 - 4 times the cost of their 30 yo worker-bee counterparts. And with very small biz (12 or less "employees"), employees sometimes have to medically "qualify" for a health plan, just as in individual coverage. This is true for 70%+ of law firms, for example.
Instead, they use the currently unemployed and underemployed "over 55 group" to work as part-part-timers and "consultants" (who receive Form 1099 instead of a W-2 form for the tax year). The over-55 "consultant" or "contract worker" needs 3-4 regular gigs to "eek out a living" from their home offices.
