Does age matter?

Published in the March 2008 issue of Risk & Insurance

The median age of the American worker has increased for over a decade. The age of the injured worker has also increased. Should these trends concern us?

As with even slight demographic shifts, some social and economic circles will see a marked impact. Let’s not however have the extreme anecdote bewitch us. On balance, should we worry?

I will summarize what researchers are telling us. My personal conclusion is that aging is not something we should be worried about -- with several important caveats.

The National Council of Compensation Insurance and Liberty Mutual’s Research Center of Safety and Health issued reports in the past few years on this topic.

Let’s thread a fictional worker, Hank, through the labyrinth of data, keeping an eye on not just what the facts say but Hank’s personal concerns and incentives. Facts are not mutable, but Hank’s state of mind is.

Hank was born in 1955 in the midst of 78 million baby boomers born between 1946 and 1964. He has worked in healthcare equipment maintenance, and is working today at age 53.

In the long historic view, Hank is phenomenally better off than his grandfather at the same age. He has far fewer chronic conditions and is better educated; he has triple the amount of leisure time; he has his Tivo. Two kids have graduated from college. His wife works. They have refinanced their home in Duluth.

But he is heavy for his height. He experiences increasing signs of gimpiness. His doctor has warned him about diabetes and hypertension.

Seven out of eight of his male friends are working. Some of Hank’s friends have begun to plan actively for retirement, but he has noted more jobs at Barnes and Noble and Wal-mart are being filled by people who look the far side of 60.

Changes in equipment design have reduced his episodes of exertion. Most injuries seem to be sustained by younger and, to him, less self-disciplined workers.

As I have sketched him, Hank should have lower injury risk than his younger co-workers and if injured, being 13 years older than the average injured worker in America should not make a material difference.

Here are scenarios that tip the balance towards greater duration of injury for Hank.

With a history of prior injuries, there is greater risk of Hank staying out longer. It is unclear whether this is due to greater psycho-biological effort to recover or other factors such as job dissatisfaction and acquired skills of being disabled. This duration driver is not directly related to aging so much as to repeated injury experience.

If Hank has several health conditions and is dissatisfied with his job – these often come together – risk of prolonged disability is much higher. These drivers are also not directly related to aging, although certainly with aging chronic conditions emerge.

Risks of greater duration would be much higher if Hank were 60. Then he would be planning to retire.

But, with Hank at 53 or even at 60, there is an important exception to these scenarios, which Glenn Pransky at Liberty Mutual and colleagues call “job lock.” A very large share of aging workers who are injured would like to leave work altogether but cannot because they need the income or benefits such as a health plan tied to their jobs.

Feeling locked in, bitten by poor relationships with the workplace and health conditions, could lead Hank to high levels of work stress. It may lead to presenteeism, future injuries, and premature retirement.

In an article in press, the research team suggests that employers target wellness programs and try to repair the job culture.

This is what we should be worrying about when we worry about the aging worker.