You are here

Age Based Analysis of Mortgage Arrears Released for First Time

Published 18/11/2019

SHARE THIS

We welcome the publication, by the Irish Times, of data released for the first time by the Central Bank of Ireland that shows the number of people approaching, or already at retirement age, who are dealing wtih significant mortgage debt. The information gives a clearer picture of the worrying situation for Ireland’s ageing population. Simply, a lack of evidence exists on the cost of ageing with less complete data collected about us the older we become. As a result, crucial policy decisions are made without the availability of disaggregated and representative data which can result in discriminatory outcomes. We need an urgent rethinking of how we gather evidence and inform policy that meets the needs of a changing Ireland.

While there has been an assumption that older people close to, and in receipt of, the State pension are generally mortgage-free home owners, it is clear that this is no longer true with many still carrying large mortgages, in mortgage arrears or living in precarious private rentals with no security of tenure in older age. We should all have a choice to age in place which means the creation of age friendly environments, including the provision of support services locally, which enable people to remain in their own homes and in communities for longer; but the changing nature of homeownership, rising cost of living, and the lack of a coordinated policy response to the housing crisis means many people will be facing a very difficult situation in later life. 

Many older people live in the most vulnerable situations in our society. An increasing number are struggling to meet the rising cost of living – in particular costs around rent and mortgages - in the context of a State pension that sees many surviving on incomes only just above the poverty line. Latest CSO EU SILC figures show 1 in 10 older people at risk of poverty. New taxes, and rising prices in recent years have a greater impact on older people generally living on a fixed income with limited opportunities to improve their situation. Budget 2020 saw the income of older person headed households increase by €1.08 per week for those living with another person, and by €6.08 per week for those living alone in older age. It did not offer the majority of older people the support needed to meet the increasing costs of living and it did not offer a concrete plan to support us to age in place.

Ageist attitudes towards working later in life still exist, for example many older people have reported high levels of discrimination during recruitment. Discriminatory mandatory retirement clauses are still in place forcing people out of the workforce earlier than they may wish. These two things undermine people’s ability to continue working in later life whether by choice or necessity. In the context of a buoyant labour market, we urgently need a fundamental shift in how we view and support older workers.

An increasing number of older people are experiencing fear about retirement due to worries about income adequacy. Less than half of those working have a private or occupational pension to support them in later life. While Age Action welcomes the publication of the recent autoenrolment scheme by the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection which will see increased pension coverage for more than an estimated half a million workers, the current design will further drive existing pension inequalities unless there is a targeted intervention to include people in low paid jobs, particularly women and long term unemployed.

Our economy has been built on the backs of those already in, and approaching, older age: these are the same women and men who lived through the Marriage Bar, shouldered several recessions and are now dealing with the accumulated disadvantages. Successive government policies have failed to adequately plan and provide for an ageing population which will ultimately impact on all of us throughout our lives. 

 

 

SHARE THIS

The new Bill is an inadequate response to the growing demand for the abolition of mandatory retirement.

According to Dr Nat O’Connor, Age Action’s Senior Policy Adviser: “Age Action strongly opposes the revival of the Employment (Restriction of Certain Mandatory Retirement Ages). Bill 2024, which is an inadequate response to the growing demand for the abolition of mandatory retirement.”

“Across political parties, in unions and among older persons, we see support for ending the practice of forcing people out of work before they are ready, but the proposed Bill makes no meaningful progress toward that end. The aim set out in its title, to restrict certain mandatory retirement ages, betrays its lack of ambition. All it provides for is the establishment of a complex, formal procedure so that employees can make a written request to stay on past their contractual retirement age; a request which can still be denied by their employer. This is the sole ‘restriction’ the Bill would impose on mandatory retirement.”

“This is a weak and ineffective Bill which is unlikely to help most employees who are forced out of work against their will for the offence of reaching a certain birthday. There is no reason for such timid action when we have seen other countries like Canada, New Zealand, Australia, the UK, and the United States abolish mandatory retirement entirely, in some cases decades ago. These countries have continued to enjoy well-functioning and productive labour markets and workplaces, showing that there is no foundation for the fears expressed by people who want to keep mandatory retirement.”

“Mandatory retirement is age discrimination. If the State allows a form of discrimination to be practiced, it must set out clear justifications for the practice. However, the popular arguments in favour of mandatory retirement are all myths. There is no evidence that older persons are less able to contribute to a workplace, or that they cost more than they contribute, or that they prevent younger workers from gaining employment. In fact, research has demonstrated the many benefits older workers bring to workplaces, including institutional experience, mentoring, and soft skills like better stress management.”

“Mandatory retirement is based on gross and insulting stereotypes about ageing. It is experienced by workers as a humiliating and dehumanizing injustice. It takes away our autonomy and our control over how and when we retire, which is a major life event. People who had no choice in retiring report poorer mental health, life satisfaction, health status, dietary habits, marital satisfaction, self-efficacy, and income adequacy, even years into their retirement.”

Dr. O’Connor concluded: “The proposed Bill is an incomplete and inadequate response to the problem of mandatory retirement, and by virtue of its incompleteness, reinforces and legitimises the dangerous ageism on which mandatory retirement is founded. We want our new government to take strong and decisive action, rather than tinkering around the edges of a serious problem. The Bill needs to be abandoned in favour of legislation that really helps the workers who wish to remain in work for longer.”

Churn:
It is not reasonable to suggest that the abolition of mandatory retirement would create a large problem for companies, when the scale of churn in the labour market is already far higher. The Irish labour market experienced 12.8% churn in quarter 3 of 2024, meaning that 1 in 8 jobs were created, abolished or vacated during this period, which was 365,750 jobs (Central Statistics Office 2024).

Compared to this level of hiring and resignations, managing the relatively small number of older workers who may seek to work longer or whose productivity may fall in older age is a much smaller human resources management issue for companies.

CSO (2024) Labour Market Churn Q3 2024 https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/fp/fp-lmc/labourmarketchurnq32024/

Age Action’s detailed policy paper outlining the case against mandatory retirement can be accessed here: https://www.ageaction.ie/sites/default/files/age_action_paper_abolish_mandatory_retirement.pdf