State Pension Age Likely to Increase Again and Again
In the News
There seems to be moves a foot to have people born between 1971 and 1977 to have a retirement age of 68 years. I can only assume anyone born after 1977 is likely to be a 69 retirement age and if its a typical 6 year gap perhaps people born in 1983 or later it will be 70 years. The big issue with this is if people retire later then there are less new jobs for younger people etc. Also as people get older with health conditions they can be less effective in their job depending on job of course.
It feels again politicians have no real long term strategy, they are a disaster with the economy and constantly struggling with less income etc so they just go for simple solutions that just delay the problem again rather than sort out the economy.
It almost feels like a carrot hanging from a donkey's head where no matter how fast they run they can never eat that carrot and that is what the state pension is looking like, every time you get close to it they add another year.
A quick google shows this;
People in the UK maintain reasonable health until an average age of about 60.7 years for men and 60.9 years for women, after which health declines and people typically spend their remaining years managing ill health or multiple medical conditions.
It feels to me like at 60 working hours should be reduced perhaps 4 days a week and you get a state pension for 1 day and then as you get older that you get more days of pension until fully retired. This effectively makes their working life easier and allows for entry level part time jobs where you have the skilled person and the person training to be skilled in the same workplace especially smaller workplaces that don't employ many people. I.e. you might have a new trainee having 2 days in the workplace and 2 days at college etc and 1 day for learning at home etc. Also going from full time work to retirement is a shock to the system and a lot of people die quickly in retirement its much better to have a slower approach to maintain more fitness without taking away work altogether. I asked google this question.
If the state pension was gradual so at 60 you worked 4 days a week and got 1 days pension, at 64 you worked 3 days a week and got 2 days pension, at 67 you worked 2 days a week and got 3 days pension and at 70 you worked 1 day a week until 75 with 4 days pension and then a full pension at 75 how would the cost compare with the current uk state pension?
This it the answer it would be marginally cheaper by 1%.
This proposed phased-retirement model changes the total financial obligation for the state. To see how the cost compares to the current UK system, we can look at the concept of "pension-equivalent years"—the lifetime sum of full pension payouts given to a single individual.
Assuming a benchmark State Pension Age (SPA) of 67 under current legislation and an average lifetime spanning to age 85, the math reveals a surprisingly close cost baseline, though the distribution of that cost shifts dramatically.
The Lifetime Payout Calculation (Per Person)
If we assume a standard 5-day working week, each "day" of pension represents exactly 20% of the full weekly rate.
- The Current System Baseline: An individual reaching SPA at 67 who lives to 85 receives 18.0 full years of state pension.
- The Comparison: At 17.8 full years, your gradual system costs the Treasury virtually the same amount (just 1% less) in pure lifetime pension payouts per person who reaches age 85.
The point is I don't think you can simply keep pushing retirement age later and later without consequences to the economy. It could cause greater strain on the NHS if people with poor health but not terrible health have to work 40 hour weeks in a stressful job. However I personally don't think my idea would save money because I think on average people would live longer, their finances would be higher for longer and their health better too for most people.
If I'm honest I think it'll get to the point you'll be allowed to stop work when you die
Jerseydrew To be honest my scheme above if optional you would have to give people the option before they are 60 and the normal state pension age at that point may have moved beyond 70 maybe 72. It's like the council tax we are expecting more horrific increases as so many councils are in huge debt. I think Somerset council went up 9% last year unless that was the year before and it looks like it could be 5% this year 2027/2028 and we are a long way from the worst council for debt but those increases are staggering. My point is everywhere you look at the government they are wasting money not supported by the electorate and they are basically bankrupt and they are doing nothing to return to spending within their means and tackling the trade deficit.
Youtube suggested this video to me and while I don't agree with the courses being fully free for anyone including British citizens the criteria here is amazingly against British citizens and I can't understand why that would ever be a thing. There are so many things unfair in legislation but more importantly we simply can't afford it anyway. A plumber and electrician gets very decent money and I see no problem with everyone paying for the course even if the cost is loaned to them. I just don't get it. Anyone who gets free training is at a huge competitive advantage to those who have to service long term debts from the cost of training which they have to add to their labour costs.
The UK central government is expected to pay roughly £111 billion a year in net debt interest for 2025–26, while local authorities spend around £3.2 billion a year servicing their local government debts.
Ultimately I think you may be right as the government continues to waste so much money and deepen our debts so I can see retirement age getting later and later much more rapidly in the future.
Jerseydrew sadly my sister and brother in law died before they got theirs. Also a cousin only got a few months state pension before she passed.
I like your idea of reducing working hours steadily before full retirement. This would help so many out.
I don't believe anybody, especially those who have worked all of their lives should work until a ridiculous age (unless they want to of course). We have one life and should be able to have something to look forward to and aim for. I remember so many people getting excited about retiring but nowadays you don't hear it as much.
I recall meeting a lot of people in their 50s just coasting on their job as they were close to retirement when I was only in my early 20s - I knew I didn’t want to live like that (work to live) as I believe if you can, you should enjoy what you’re doing so much that you’d be gutted when it ended, as well as the fact I knew the gov will keep moving the goal post so I’d probably never retire (nor would retiring benefit me financially). Either way, trusting the government to do right by you is misguided - look after yourself, as they definitely don’t intend to look after you
I don't see any retirement in the future to be honest. Nor am I convinced it will still be in place as time goes on. I can see it going. I think as Jerseydrew says it'll be work till you drop or when you no longer really can ie, you have dementia
I agree about the lack of long term strategy but this is the problem with the way the system is. Every party is thinking short term and appealing to voters in that way as most people do not have a long term mindset.
On top of that, political parties typically do things that appeal to older people as they are one of the strongest voting demographics. Young people are the lowest voting group, so logically there are less policies targeted towards benefitting them.
The current pension system is unsustainable, especially with the triple lock, but I don’t know what will be done about it.
jms19 I think we can simply expect the retirement age to keep increasing and more means testing. The pension amount will reduce I'm sure and can see the triple lock going as a necessity. As ever politicians clueless what they are doing just keep kicking the can down the road. At some point the government or a government is going to have to speak about the terrible state of the economy and the huge level of debt. I guess if Reform did actually win the general election and with them opposed to most of the policies that have led to our level of debt they would have no problem stating all the issues because it would be criticism of past political parties. I just can't see Labour or Conservative being so honest as both have been responsible for appalling political decisions that have destroyed industry and farming, meant a huge level of immigration and a huge trade deficit which have all led on to horrific borrowing levels.
I have zero faith in politicians improving the economy to be honest. It's more about which political party will do less damage rather than improve anything.
Before I retired, I was managing a care home for people who were elderly and had dementia.
Despite needing to change the registration of the building to accommodate someone who was below the age of 65, it began to look more and more likely that my long-term staff were going to be elderly people caring for other aged people. Even at that point, a few of my night staff were older than several of our residents, and I was older than the lady aforementioned.
My husband worked as a 'foot soldier' Postie until he was 70 as that was his own decision, but not all are healthy enough to work in such a physical job so late in life. Basically, it's fine if it's your choosing to work late into your autumn years, but it's another thing to feel that you can't financially support yourself unless you work. So many of my family died shortly before or after retirement.
My mother in law is now 90 receiving her pension since being 60 and never paid any NI contributions in her lifetime.
Work until you drop .Its horrendous even the seniors,the sick and the disabled.No respite for many.
This is a hard call, some people are healthy and capable of working past pension age while others are lucky enough if they can work till pension age due to ill health. My dad retired at 65 - almost 25 yrs ago. He pottered round the garden and garage for yr but was so bored he went and got another job. He’d good work pension but was simply bored and still a fit man. He only stopped working in last 5/6 yrs. There’s also neighbour across road from my parents who’s in her early 90s and works couple days week in nursing home. She’s probably older than most of the residents she looks after. But at same time I know others in their late 30s who are just too ill to work. I think ur proposed timetable would be a great idea but if someone thought they could work 3/4 days when they only need to work 2/3 days they should be allowed to. Years ago people retired early to give their jobs to younger generation but now there isn’t as many young people. Older people had big families but now people are choosing to not have children or only have 1/2. It’s rare to see big families now. My dad was 1 of 11, I was 1 of 7 and had 4 of my own. 1 has chosen to not have any, 1 has 2 children while other 2 have 1 each. If state pension was phased in like ur suggesting I believe it would benefit the country and all in it
I would say good morning but you just ruined my day. I have health problems now I'm not going to be able to do the hours I do now until 69. I won't have children to look after then but still.
I do think your gradual retirement age is a good one both for the older and younger generations.
Imnotcheap I like my idea of gradual retirement which I guess I would because I came up with it. I like it because as your health gets weaker your working week is reduced but it wouldn't stop anyone from having full retirement if they became disabled or had very poor health because that would be covered by other benefits. Keeping people partially active has shown to have positive effects for health so the gradual reduction in theory and on average should help people maintain reasonable health for longer. It's just playing the probabilities really it won't work for everyone. When the state pension was first introduced it was at 70 and people didn't live as long either. I think companies would adapt to it as well so as their staff became older their roles may change and their responsibilities could reduce as they go towards retirement to make it easier.
Of course one of the big advantages is job sharing where the older experienced staff member trains the younger staff member before retirement. You wouldn't have the situation for small firms where the experienced staff member disappears and then a new staff member comes in to fill their boots but doesn't get much or any chance to learn from the person just retired.
BonzoBanana companies would be happy so long as it doesn't cost them more.
Gradually retirement would be good for mental health so NHS wins best solution all round really.
Much better than solutions the "experts" are coming up with
Imnotcheap I think it would cost them less as I would have thought it would reduce sick days pretty much. There are so many factors at work though as we are becoming poorer and house pricing is getting ridiculous as we cram in more people onto an island that doesn't have that capacity.
We are going to have to start thinking like Japan with much smaller homes as they have gone through this previously. Lots of people are taking longer and longer mortgages but if you start retiring slowly at 60 with reduced income that may be difficult if you have a mortgage but for most people mortgages start off really difficult and get much easier with time. I'm close to the end of my mortgage and only pay about £30 a month which means I typically make overpayments to clear it even sooner.
However if you rent the opposite is true, rent keeps going up and up and you could face horrific rental costs when your income is reducing. By the time I retire monthly rental costs could be £1500-2000 a month. The housing market is under such huge demand and you get people who own perhaps 3 homes and 2 homes they rent and that is all the income they need such is rental costs now. Rental costs are keeping many people very poor who have reasonable jobs today. My idea of gradual retirement I think works but the way its going in this country people are getting poorer and poorer and just surviving on reduced income could be difficult. If costs keep spiralling people will be forced to work 50 hour weeks in their sixties which could be hugely damaging.
I think it's shocking most pensioners have paid in all their lives and they get cuts it gets taken higher the age they want people to work till they are at a age they don't have to pay out much as they will probably die
There will be a lot of absences from work, as we get older we require more hospital and doctors appointments plus aging bodies could require even more time off from work with sickness . Would have to have a very understanding employer with extra effort needed from remaining staff to cover the extra workload
If the government removed the pension triple lock it would help, But no government will. That would reduce the pension bill. I am 59 so have another 8 before I get my state pension. But I worry about young people, not getting a chance to even begin their working life and having to pay loads in tax.
beccatavender It will be 68 I bet by the time you get there maybe even 69 but I would guess at 68. Also the government just keeps borrowing ridiculous amounts and world banking is starting to see the UK economy as high risk. The UK is getting forced into a corner where it will have make extreme cut backs in the near future and its clear the triple lock will be gone surely.
I don't think I'm ever going to be able to stop working..pension age is going up and up...I'm never going to be able to reach it and claim any.
Pinkspirit I reckon at some point it will jump two years so lets say it was 68 and then it jumps to 70 you will have some people that get to watch their older friend (by days) get 2 years of extra paid retirement while they have to work through those years. There has to be a cut off change somewhere and it can often seem unfair.
I did a quick google about the harm to health of going from a full time job to fairly leisurely retirement and got this;
Transitioning from full-time work to a highly sedentary, leisurely retirement causes rapid physical deconditioning known as disuse syndrome. [1]
Physical and Body Changes
- Muscle Atrophy: Lack of movement quickly leads to a loss of muscle mass and strength, known as sarcopenia. [1]
- Joint Stiffness: Inactivity makes joints stiff and painful because the body produces less joint-lubricating fluid without regular movement.
- Weight Gain: Burning fewer calories without adjusting your diet leads to increased body fat and a slower metabolism.
- Cardiovascular Decline: Heart and lung fitness drops, reducing your overall stamina and increasing blood pressure risks.
- Bone Density Loss: Weight-bearing activity keeps bones strong; without it, bones can weaken and increase fracture risks.
- Fatigue: Ironically, doing very little causes constant exhaustion and low physical energy.
That didn't take long, the triple lock to end in 2030.
This angers me no end. My mum is in her 60s and should be able to retire. Instead she's still having to work while not being well and trying to care for me and my dad. It's theft. People have paid into their pensions. They have a right to access them
Join for free to get genuine deals, money saving advice and help from our friendly community
Chief Bargain Hunter
