Introduction

As we saw in Part One of the book, state pension ages in the US and the UK are to rise significantly in the coming years. Prior to this, however, policy has sought to promote continued employment beyond age 65, particularly in the case of those with inadequate retirement incomes. While finances are therefore a key rationale for extended working lives, analysis in Chapter Five suggests that employment at 65+ was actually most common among the highly educated and healthy. This raises the question of whether employment at this age is simply a ‘free choice’, rather than the result of financial constraints. In this final empirical chapter, we investigate whether this is the case through an analysis of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA) and the US Health and Retirement Study (HRS). The chapter examines the influence of shared leisure within couples, alongside the stated motivations for working given by people. It also analyses the relationship between financial resources and employment. It finds that the richest appear most likely to work, and the poorest least. However, between these two extremes, there are significant numbers of Americans working for financial reasons. The ‘choice’ to work is therefore subject to considerable constraint. In England, there is less evidence of financially motivated employment, although it is predicted that this will change following the abolition of mandatory retirement. Although the analysis here is based on England, we can reasonably draw this conclusion for the UK as a whole (see statistical appendix).

The choice to work?

Couples and shared leisure?

In terms of examining potential motives to work, it is useful to start not with the individual, but with the household. It is important to remember that people make decisions about work and retirement in a household context (Loretto and Vickerstaff, 2013). US research finds considerable evidence for joint retirement, namely, people choosing to retire at the same time as their partner or within 18 months (Blau, 1998; Gustman and Steinmeier, 2002; Ho and Raymo, 2009). Ho and Raymo's (2009) analysis of the HRS (covering 1992 to 2004) finds that around a quarter of couples in the US synchronised their retirement timing.