Search results

This article investigates whether employers are more likely to employ older workers when faced with a shortage of qualified labour. Furthermore, it analyses whether in such cases age stereotypes moderate employers' preferences towards four employment options: (1) supporting workers to continue until the retirement age, (2) encouraging workers to continue beyond the retirement age, (3) recruiting someone older than 55 and (4) (re)hiring someone who has retired.

Data were drawn from a survey conducted among Finnish employers in 2021 (response rate = 66%, N = 1,442). Applying factor analysis to questions about older workers' qualities compared to those of average workers, a distinction was made between perceptions of experience-related and adaptability-related qualities. Generalised ordered logistic regression models were estimated to analyse the relations of preferences for each employment option with experiencing recruitment problems, workplace age stereotypes and interactions between these.

Experiencing recruitment problems was positively related to preferences for hiring a retired person. Employers with difficulties in recruitment were more likely to support work until the retirement age and recruit someone over 55, but only if they had above-average positive perceptions of older workers' experience-related qualities. Employers confronted with recruitment difficulties were more likely to encourage workers to continue beyond the retirement age if they had more positive perceptions of older workers' adaptability-related qualities.

This study shows that, even when confronted with labour shortages and population ageing, workplace age stereotypes still pose a potential obstacle for employers to make the best use of an older workforce.

Increasing longevity and lower birth rates put pressure on the sustainability of pension systems. This compels countries to reform pension schemes. Different countries opt for different types of reforms. This article examines the scope of possibilities for a pension reform in two countries with distinct institutional and ideational setup: Finland and France.

The authors utilise the framework of different modes of justification presented by Boltanski and Thévenot to reveal the reasoning used in pension reform discussions in both countries. The authors study expert reports to analyse how nationally constructed ideas and local institutions frame and shape the different logics and justifications.

In Finland, the approach to pensions is dominated by industrial and market justifications. The pension system is institutionally separated into two different blocks: one addressing poverty and the other income maintenance. The separation enables the prevalence of these logics and makes it easier to promote reforms that emphasize efficiency and individual responsibility instead of income distribution. The French report is concentrated around civic and domestic dominated justifications by stressing solidarity and the role of pension systems connecting individuals and generations together. Any reform needs to consider these issues.

The article uses a novel research design to study pension reform processes. The article distinguishes the roles that ideas and institutions have in shaping expert reasoning and reform options. The authors show how ideas and institutions form a mutually reinforcing loop which helps to explain path-dependency in pension systems.