Working longer helps build retirement security

October 15, 2010

The following excerpt is from my book, The Hard Times Guide to Retirement Security: Practical Strategies for Money, Work and Living, and is reprinted by permission of John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Work in retirement? It might sound like a contradiction in terms, but we’re looking for ways to achieve financial security over a retirement that could last 20 years or more. One of the best ways to do that is to work just a little longer than you might have planned. Working for even a few additional years can pay a surprisingly large bonus.

bookjacket200

Most people say they don’t plan to retire until age 65 at the earliest, but this is one of those cases where words and actions don’t match. More than half of Americans file for Social Security at age 62-the youngest age of eligibility. Even more striking, just 10 percent of men and women waited until age 66 to file for their benefits.

Working until their Normal Retirement Age (NRA) could have boosted income in retirement by a third, experts say. The reasons are simple:

– Working until your NRA means you won’t incur the early-filing benefit reductions imposed by Social Security.

– During your additional working years, you can continue to contribute to your 401(k) plan, building additional balances that can be put to work in the market.

–Every additional year of income is a year in which you don’t support yourself by drawing down retirement balances.

“The usual pattern has been to work forty years and retire for twenty,” says Alicia Munnell, director of the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College. “If you push back your retirement age by four years, now it’s work forty-four years and retire for sixteen, so the ratio is three-to-one. That just gives you a much better chance to have a really secure retirement.”

How big a boost can you get from working longer? Financial planners at T. Rowe Price have used Monte Carlo simulations to project some answers. These are simulations that can be used to model future uncertainty, and the analysis produces outcomes based on hypothetical probability. But the illustrations make the point-convincingly-that you can improve your chances for long-term retirement security by remaining in the workforce longer.

First, let’s consider the impact of working and saving longer on your retirement income. Consider the example of a woman who is working full-time with an annual, fixed salary of $75,000 and tax-deferred savings of $150,000. Let’s say that instead of retiring at 62, she decides to stay on the job for three additional years until age 65 and that annual inflation runs at a 3 percent rate. Let’s also assume she saves 15 percent of her salary, or $11,250, for each of those additional working years.

Down the road, those decisions will boost her annual retirement income from investments by about 14 percent per year. At the end of those additional working years, her annual retirement income, in today’s dollars, would be 43 percent higher than it would have been had she retired at age 62. If she could sock away even more of her income-25 percent- the total increase in her income from her investments alone would be 60 percent.

Factoring in the benefit of delayed Social Security benefits really adds rocket fuel to the projections. The Social Security Administration’s formulas give our hypothetical worker a significant increase in income; every year she waits to file for benefits will yield about 8 percent more in payments (in today’s dollars). That really starts to add up in the out years.

Next, let’s combine the impact of our worker’s decision to work longer and delay Social Security. This gives us the most complete picture of how working longer can help. By working until age 67 and saving 15 percent of her salary, her gain in annual retirement income from both Social Security and her investments combined will be 58 percent, or $1,000 more per month in today’s dollars.

If working longer makes such economic sense, then why don’t more people do it? Certainly, the economic crash is forcing premature retirement for many older workers. But even when the economy was in better shape, more than half of Americans filed for Social Security at age 62, so the recession alone doesn’t explain the trend.

Health problems that force retirement are another possible factor, and the boomer generation certainly is confronting problems that could prevent many from working: Rates of obesity, diabetes, and heart disease are rising, for example. However, the research by Munnell of Boston College shows that, on the whole, older workers are no less healthy than they were 40 years ago.

Munnell thinks that early retirement incentives offered by many employers, along with the availability of Social Security benefits, often outweigh workers’ perception of the long-term gains available from working longer.

She also thinks Americans take the cue to retire at 62 from signals sent by employers, co-workers, and even friends and family. “It’s a cultural expectation,” she says. “People just think they should retire, and it becomes infectious. We see our neighbors or our spouses doing it, so we think we should, too.” She also argues that the start of Social Security eligibility at age 62 creates an “easy out” for employees who don’t find satisfaction in their work.

Reprinted with permission of John Wiley & Sons, Inc.” author, The Hard Times Guide to Retirement Security: Practical Strategies for Money, Work, and Living, 2010.
Here’s text and link for the free chapter download:
Download a free chapter on How Working Longer Helps from the The Hard Times Guide to Retirement Security.


Comments

thinking of working longer? think again if you live in the failing US! real unemployment that counts not just those collecting benefits but the millions who have run out is well over 20% of the workforce.forclosures are a national disgrace and the country in a depression has no president to run it…

Posted by plange01 | Report as abusive
 

Many people drop out of the retirement race before crossing the finish line at age 66 or up, simply out of fear the government will not honor its commitment to pay Social Security, and the market will again wipe out their hard-earned 401K or IRA contributions. Imagine driving oneself ruthlessly until age 66 or higher, to end up in the next depression with investments ruined and Social Security bankrupt, perhaps suspending payments until Congress can convene in an emergency session to decide whether it can continue paying those who paid into the system over their lifetimes? One has to exercise blind faith in this corrupt system to ruthlessly drive themselves passed age 62 in an increasingly senior-hostile corporate world, knowing the rewards might be getting stabbed in the back by our own spend-thrift government while politicians retire to golf course communities to spend their days watching Martha Stewart in their massive Sub-Zero kitchens under cathedral ceilings and not a care in the world.

Posted by DisgustedReader | Report as abusive
 

Coming from a blue collar family and working a white collar job myself. My take on why many retire earlier, is simply that not everyone has a physically easy job that lends itself well to later retirement. There are a whole lot of jobs out there that at 60+ are really hard to do.

Posted by BubbaJ | Report as abusive
 

No one seems to talk about “burnout” in a profession.
I taught for 40 years and retired at 62. I probably would have died of a heart attack or stroke if I had worked longer. I was eating malox at 100 pills per month and have Barretts Disease of the esophagus from all the acid I was belching up. Two weeks after I retired I stopped eating antacids and have not had one afterwards in 12 years of retirement. Sorry, there are some jobs that just have too much stress for an older person.

Posted by neahkahnie | Report as abusive
 

I’ve survived 14 rounds of layoffs in the last 3 years and probably won’t survive round 15 which is coming in December. I’m doing what I need to do to find a new job but who knows how long that could take, where it will be, or whether I will maintain a comparable rate of pay.

This means two things with respect to retirement: one, given that I am 45 years old now, I have zero confidence that I will receive even cent one from Social Security, and I see no real hope that I can stuff enough money into a 401k or any other vehicle at 1% annual returns to pay for any retirement at all. So I expect that I will work until I die.

The experience of this depression, although I have had it better than most, has been so stressful that I am certain it has taken quite a number of years off my life expectancy. Thus, if by some chance I should manage to retire, I doubt I’ll have to fund myself for very long at all.

Posted by JackMack | Report as abusive
 

This is just another fantasy article which assumes people can choose to work as long as they want to. Most companies actively encourage older workers to leave because senior workers may be paid more, get more vacation, and use more sick days and health benefits. I am 57 and will be forced out in a year or two. It is unlikely I will work again, except maybe as a greeter at Walmart.

Posted by scarr34 | Report as abusive
 

Ditto scarr34. I would love to work until 66 or 68, but no one in my profession is willing to employ me. I’ll be out before I’m 63 with no chance of getting back in.

Posted by bigturkey | Report as abusive
 

Post Your Comment

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/