Older Workers

A 40-YEAR-old friend who is afraid of aging recently asked me if I've felt any discrimination now that I am over 65.An interesting question and one that I'm asked frequently.I told her if I'd felt anything, it's that sometimes I felt ignored or patronized.When waiting in line at a checkout counter, ticket line or trying to get a taxi, I can feel somewhat invisible because I am no longer pretty, sexy or young-looking.After all, one can't shed the blemishes and wrinkles of time. Like an aging house, the exterior changes shape and color, needs touching up, refurbishing -- the furrows of time are not kind.

In recent years, America's senior citizens have fared relatively well from federal largess. But new budgetary realities cast a partisan pall over the fourth White House Council on Aging, held last week in Washington, D.C.It's still difficult to discuss Social Security, but it's no longer possible to ignore the fact that Medicare, an immensely popular government benefit, is projected to go broke by the 2002. To put that problem in perspective, information from the federal Health Care Financing Administration shows that by 2004 the cost of health care for people 65 and older will make up 50 percent of total health care costs, which could reach $2 trillion.

Mass layoffs, downsizing, buyouts ... whatever you want to call them, dismissals by large corporations have become commonplace. Getting fired doesn't come with much stigma anymore and perks like severance payments, benefit extensions and the use of "outplacement" firms can help. But with retirement, health care and other essential benefits still linked to jobs, it's as important as ever to get back in the saddle. Keeping cool and rational is a good place to start, experts say. The more tenure you've had at a company and the smaller the number of firings, the more negotiating room you have when talking severance.

WASHINGTON -- Gene Nelson, a computer programmer, has been looking for work for two years. High-technology companies say they desperately need computer programmers. It would seem like a perfect fit.But Nelson has had only a few interviews and no job offers.A holder of a doctorate in biophysics who has been programming computers since the early 1970s, Nelson has sent out hundreds of resumes and attended dozens of job fairs. He has lowered his salary sights from $50,000 to $40,000. Now, he says the mid-$30,000 range would be fine.

Jo Anne Schneider studies marginalized groups: refugees, the poor, people with disabilities — and, lately, Americans who have been unemployed for months and months, which includes a lot of people who never would have considered themselves on the fringe before. "You've got this whole population of what was the stable middle class that is now out of work," said Schneider, a Catonsville anthropologist who is affiliated with George Washington University. in Washington, D.C. "The last time you saw that … was probably the '30s.

At an age when many workers are thinking about winding down their careers, Victoria Baldassano of Silver Spring says she can't afford to give retirement a thought. The part-time English professor at Montgomery College said her income has been too low for too long to save for retirement, and she's carrying about $40,000 in credit card debt racked up to pay living expenses. "It's an awkward situation to be in at 61," said Baldassano, who said she thinks more about day-to-day bills than retirement.

HERE'S another reason to believe that 2002 will turn out better than you think: A shortage of young workers is making it harder for your boss to replace you with a 25-year-old earning half your salary. It's true. Even though there's a recession on and unemployment is rising, human resource pros are warning companies of a long-term labor drought and a need to change how they treat people. "The very same models of hiring, developing and retiring employees that worked so well over the past decade could backfire if continued into the next," reports Watson Wyatt, a top personnel consultancy.

Last week, Congress passed legislation that stops the reduction of Social Security benefits for people who continue to work through their late 60s. The bill, which President Clinton has said he will sign, would be made retroactive to Dec. 31, 1999, effectively boosting the income of 800,000 workers 65 through 69 by thousands of dollars before Election Day in November. Under current law, elderly workers 65 through 69 lose $1 in Social Security benefits for every $3 in wages they make above $17,000.

WASHINGTON -- Thousands of older Americans will soon begin receiving an income boost, after the Senate voted unanimously yesterday to lift the penalty for Social Security beneficiaries who continue to work. After a brief return to the House for approval of a technical change, the measure will be sent to President Clinton, who has promised to sign it. The new law, which would take effect immediately, would provide an average of $8,000 annually for about 631,000 workers ages 65 to 69. Removing the penalty, which reduces Social Security benefits by $1 for each $3 earned above $17,000, is also expected to boost the supply of experienced workers at a time when the labor market is especially tight.

Work for a big company - or, better yet, one of those perennial best-workplace contest winners - and you're loaded up with benefits, right? Not necessarily. Soaring health costs and a shift away from guaranteed pensions have taken their toll. For example, just a third of companies with 200 or more workers offer retiree health benefits, according to a 2006-2007 survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation and Health Research and Educational Trust. Among this year's winners of AARP's Best Employers for Workers Over 50 awards, 31 of the 50 companies on the list offer retiree health benefits.