Did you know that almost half of the U.S. Postal Service's employees are over 50? And our average age is 53, according to Bloomberg Businessweek.
According to Dead Tree Edition, the Postal Service's proportion of over-50 employees is 10 percentage points higher than any Fortune 500 company and nearly double the average, according to a recent study.
What do you think about this statistic and trend?
Wow! Average age of a postal employee is 53? That tells me that employees appreciate the work environment and benefits and will stay for the long haul. We sometimes hear of employees hitting the 40 or even 50 year mark in their careers with no plans to retire because they enjoy the work and the comraderie with their co-workers.
We should let our customers know about this and emphasize the experience and knowledge of our workforce.
That is both good and bad. On the good side, it shows that our employees like their jobs and want to stick around. On the bad side, without a younger workforce coming on board.......due to not hiring....the work force will all be due for retirment at the same time. Its always a good thing to have your workforce spread out amoung all age brackets.
I believe it. It has been a great place to work and when I started I was in my thirties and I have retired. A lot of knowledge leaves with each employee and we are not replacing those that retire. A younger generation is necessary. They have to work their way through the knowledge that has been lost.
I have seen both the pros and cons of this. I am on the younger side, just under forty years old. I appreciate the knowledge and skills my older counterparts have passed on to me. Priceless information. When they retire, and it will happen sooner than later, I think the transition will be smoother than it could be. On the other hand, I have seen retirements or separations occur by very skilled people where there are not suitable replacements. Years of knowledge lost and when their replacements are finally found, the learning curve is so wide. It is hard to recover from that. The other enigma that blows my mind are the few people that I have seen that have been here forty-five plus years and they sit and relax more than they stand and work. Seems wasteful and I just wonder, why?
I saw an article on one of the news channels the other day, that a study found that older workers are actually more productive than youngers workers.
This was for a variety of reasons but mostly because they were highly skilled in their jobs from doing it so long.
11 out of the 12 clerks in my office are over 50 and half of those are thinking of retiring in the next few years. I don't think that older workers are more productive BECUASE of their experience the older workers are more productive because of THEIR WORK ETHIC. Most of the younger generation wants the money but they don't want to work for it.
I TOTALLY AGREE with the 6.28.11
(5:42AM) post! Anyone from age 50 on up was raised to PLAY as a CHILD, LEARN how to WORK as an ADOLESCENT, and WORK...REALLY WORK... THE SHOW UP AND GET THE JOB DONE KIND OF WORK...as an ADULT! I'm 58 years old. I've been working for the Postal Service since 1992. Only the past 8 years have been career service, but due to my up-bringing and my work-ethic,and lots of HARD WORK at DOING A GOOD JOB....I became a Postmaster, and I'm very proud of it! There is STILL alot to be said for GOOD OLD-FASHIONED WORK ETHICS!
I think it's a good thing that USPS doesn't push out older workers the way some employers do. I will reach full retirement age soon, but intend to keep working -- God willing! -- another 7 years, to increase my retirement funds.
It's good to know I'm "average" - I think! Yes, there will be a lot of us retiring in the next few years, but that may be helpful as the Postal Service tries to trim the workforce. At least then they won't have to lay off or RIF any of the younger workers. As for the work ethic of older employees, I agree for the most part, but I have had some very young employees that are amazing workers. I think some of it may also be due to regions of the country (rural areas raise a lot of hard-working farm kids), parents (don't we all try to make our kids' lives easier than our own was?), and modern technology - remotes, computers, calculators, robotics, etc. My biggest worry about the older aged workforce is if the USPS can afford to pay them their retirements, especially when there will be fewer active employees. Some of us may have to look for jobs when we hit our 70's! See ya at WalMart :)
This is a mixed bag for me.....becaue there are pros and cons to this issue. Being a vet I tend to think in terms of term limits. Should the USPS place a 30 year limit on employment? This would provide a constant out flow, making room for new employees so there is more over lapping work periods. This would allow the younger employees to learn from the older employees. But as stated above, with them retiring this will avoid the RIF or layoffs. Which always sparks another debate....why should we RIF someone when the unit has someone is already retirement eligiable? Why not require the retirement eligable first...since he has earned this retirement...and allow the younger guy to work towards his retirement. Some will say my seniority earns them the right to stay....but this thinking is not thinking about what's good for the USPS or the workforce...its thinking about what is good for themselves. Then this employee retires and they hire a TE or PSE, a little forward thinking would have kept the RIF employee on board instead.
A 30 year time limit on employment? Perhaps before enacting this sort of involuntary retirement - we should pass the law for term limits on the Congressional constituents. The changing of the "guard" might provide a more proactive Congress willing to actually help the Postal Service succeed, rather than tie our hands. No business can succeed with the restraints being implemented by a Congress that neither understands the business end of the Postal Service nor the need to treat this as a business rather than an institution.
I agree with the second posting. I also would like to add that maybe the Postal Service isn't such a good place to work anymore. Some pay scales haven't kept pace with the private sector. If I had to do it over again I'm not so sure I would work for the Postal Service.
Why would we want to impose a 30 year rule and lose the experienced people. I am just under the average age and I consider myself a good worker why because I was raised up fairly poor and wanted a better life than what my parents had. I have succeeded and love my job for the most part. I remember just starting out and thinking how wise the older people were and now I am considered one of the older wiser people. Coming full circle is very rewarding.
Coming full circle is rewarding, but knowing when it is time to move on to make room for new people is wise. The second poster is right, it is wise to have your workforce spread out among all the age brackets. This helps ease the burden of copious amounts of people leaving at one time, allows for innovation and keeps a balance of ideas flowing.
I TOTALLY AGREE !! GERIATRICS RULE!! I'M 62 AND I KNOW FOR A FACT I'M THE BEST EMPLOYEE MY UNIT HAS... WE'RE ONLY (5)EMPLOYEES STRONG, BUT EVERYONE ELSE IS WELL UNDER 50 AND THEY ALL HAVE AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT SET OF "WORK ETHICS"
THANX FOR THE STATS!!
A lot of knowledge and experience walks out that door when an older employee retires...It's a shame that USPS doesn't have a program for retirees that will allow them to collect their retirement and work part time for the Postal Service.
I would do it..
I don't think a mandatory retirement after 30 years would be a good idea. We would have to pay retirement benefits for a longer period of time than we would if the employees continued to work. Given the choice, seems like it would make more sense to pay an employee for working than for not working!
I've been a part-time postal employee for close to 15 years, and I may be looking for another job. Not because I don't enjoy my job, in fact I love it, but I see that they may never hire new Postmasters. They will stick to OIC's so they wont have to pay out benefits. I may never get any benefits..ever. I have a family and it's tough not knowing what will happen. I'm getting close to 40 years old. Sometimes I wish I had chosen something different because of no benefits.
I just came across this article and it was released on June 27th, my 53rd birthday. Ironic!
I think its out right wrong to keep people in details (OIC) for more then 90 days. We have so many people who have been on details for over 2 years and they keep breaking them to avoid the payment of benefits.
Post a Comment