Three Score Years and When?

New Ipsos research undertaken for BUPA explores attitudes and opinions about an aging population and workforce, among the general public and senior HR executives.

Summary Of Findings

• According to the general public old age begins at 66. It ranges from 61 for the youngest (15-24) to 71 for the oldest (75+). Men think old age begins earlier than women do.
• Nearly nine in 10 think the healthcare system in place needs changing to cope with an increasing number of elderly. More than half (51%) consider treating the very elderly a high priority for the NHS.
• About half (52%) think today's society places too much importance on youth and about another half (47%) say young people have an obligation to support their parents.
• Only one in three believe an ageing population brings more benefits than problems and 42% of respondents feel at risk of developing age-related diseases.
• People wish to live on average until 85. This figure is higher among the oldest groups.
• For the chance to turn 100 people would be more willing to give up travel, sex and eating and drinking whatever they wanted (around four in 10) than the company of family & friends and their health & vitality (only 5%).
• One in four would give up money. The older are keener to give up sex, the younger to give up money.
• Unhealthy food is the hardest to give up: one-fifth of the respondents would require to be awarded 10 or more extra years on their life in order to do so.
• Long life is good value: nearly two in three think it's better to be sensible and live longer, 45% think it's everybody's duty to try to live as long as possible and nearly half (49%) believe that scientists should continue to keep trying to prolong people's life-span.
• Personal advantages for living longer are the possibility of enjoying more aspects of life according to two in five, being there for family and friends (16%) and seeing grandchildren grow up (14%). Society benefits from knowledge, experience and skills.
• The main personal drawback for scientists being able to prolong life is a higher chance of developing an age-related disease (according to one in five) and having less money (11%).
• Women think they can afford to retire earlier than men do. Three in five overall pick an age between 60 and 65.
• Money is the primary benefit of staying at work over normal retirement age according to three in 10 and mental stimulation second (23%).
• For one in three respondents the main drawback is not being physically well enough to meet the demands of the job and, for one in four, having less time for themselves.
• People would stay at work until 70 if they needed the money (88%) and if guaranteed they were fit and healthy.
• According to one in four nobody should be stopped from working no matter how old they are.
• According to HR managers and directors, the appropriate retirement age should be 64 on average (65 the modal age). They predict it will rise to 70 in 20 years.
• Experience is the most valued benefit if older employees stay at work and more sickness the main drawback.
• HR executives think employers will need to consider several changes to cater for an ageing workforce: introduce more flexible working hours (26%), provide different health benefits (21%) and change the way of thinking towards elderly people (19%).
• Four companies in five think they won't be much affected by the new age discrimination law.

Download the report: Three Score Years And ... When? pdf, 736KB

Technical details

This report presents the findings of two surveys conducted for BUPA by Ipsos to investigate the attitudes towards an ageing society and the effects of prolonging life.

General Public

The first is an Omnibus study.

• In total 1,003 interviews were conducted among British adults aged 16+.
• Interviews were carried out using CATI (computer assisted telephone interviewing).
• Fieldwork was conducted between 11 and 13 August 2006.

HR Directors

The second is an ad hoc study conducted among HR directors and managers of medium and large British companies.

• In total 200 interviews were conducted among senior HR executives in companies with more than 50 employees.
• Quotas were set for company size. 50% of the sample are companies with 50-199 employees and 50% companies with 200+ employees.
• Data presented in this report are weighted to British company-size distribution.
• Interviews were conducted using CATI (computer assisted telephone interviewing).
• Fieldwork was conducted between 8-21 August 2006.