    [Senate Hearing 110-68]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                             S. Hrg. 110-68

    THE AGING WORKFORCE: WHAT DOES IT MEAN FOR BUSINESSES AND THE ECONOMY ?

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   before the

                           SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON AGING
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                           ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                                 WASHINGTON, DC

                                   __________

                               FEBRUARY 28, 2007

                                   __________

                                Serial No. 110-3

             Printed for the use of the Special Committee on Aging

      Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/
                                   index.html

                          U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
    35-956 PDF                    WASHINGTON  :  2007
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government
    Printing Office Internet:  bookstore.gpo.gov Phone:  toll free (866)
    512-1800; DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202)512-2250 Mail: Stop SSOP,
    Washington, DC 20402-0001

                           SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON AGING

                         HERB KOHL, Wisconsin, Chairman
    RON WYDEN, Oregon                    GORDON SMITH, Oregon
    BLANCHE L. LINCOLN, Arkansas         RICHARD SHELBY, Alabama
    EVAN BAYH, Indiana                   SUSAN COLLINS, Maine
    THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware           MEL MARTINEZ, Florida
    BILL NELSON, Florida                 LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho
    HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, New York     ELIZABETH DOLE, North Carolina
    KEN SALAZAR, Colorado                NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota
    ROBERT P. CASEY, Jr., Pennsylvania   DAVID VITTER, Louisiana
    CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri           BOB CORKER, Tennessee
    SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island     ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania
                          Julie Cohen, Staff Director
                Catherine Finley, Ranking Member Staff Director

                                      (ii)

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page
    Opening Statement of Senator Herb Kohl...........................     1
    Opening Statement of Senator Gordon Smith........................     3

                                    Panel I

    David Walker, Comptroller General, U.S. Government Accountability
      Office, Washington, DC.........................................     4
    Donald Kohn, Vice Chairman, Board of Governors of the Federal
      Reserve System, Washington, DC.................................    23

                                    Panel II

    Marcie Pitt-Catsouphes, director, Center on Aging and Work/
      Workplace Flexibility, Chestnut Hill, MA.......................    49
    Javon Bea, president and CEO, Mercy Health Systems, Janesville,
      WI.............................................................    65
    Preston Pulliams, district president, Portland Community College,
      Portland, OR...................................................    69

                                    APPENDIX

    Prepared Statement of Senator Larry Craig........................    83
    Statement submitted by HR Policy Association of American Benefits
      Council........................................................    84
    Statement submitted by NCCNHR....................................    88
    Comptroller General's Highlights of a GAO forum, Engaging and
      Retaining Older Workers........................................    91
    Information submitted by AARP....................................   116
    A Report on the Survey of Students 40 and Older, conducted by the
      Portland Community College.....................................   136
    Report prepared for the Oregon Age Boom Conference by the
      University of Indianapolis.....................................   170

                                     (iii)

     THE AGING WORKFORCE: WHAT DOES IT MEAN FOR BUSINESSES AND THE ECONOMY?

                                  -------

                          WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2007

                                           U.S. Senate,
                                    Special Committee on Aging,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:32 a.m., in
    room SD-628, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Herb Kohl
    (chairman of the committee) presiding.
        Present: Senators Kohl, Carper, Casey, Smith, and Corker.

                 OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR HERB KOHL

        The Chairman. Good morning. We welcome our witnesses to
    this hearing. They will talk about both the challenges and the
    opportunities that we confront as our aging population changes
    the face of our workforce.
        Today, people over the age of 65 make up about 12 percent
    of the population, but they will make up almost 20 percent in
    the next 25 years. In other words, one out of every five
    Americans will be a senior by the year 2030.
        Experts are talking about what this demographic wave will
    mean for Social Security, Medicare and long-term care. But as
    we will hear today, we must also address another piece of the
    puzzle, namely, how the retirement of the baby-boomers will
    impact the strength of our Nation's businesses and our economy.
        According to one estimate, as the baby-boomers reach
    retirement age, businesses will face a severe shortage of 6
    million workers by 2012, and that will grow to 35 million
    workers by 2030. Slower growth in the labor force means slower
    economic growth and, therefore, lower living standards for
    everybody in our country.
        In essence, the retirement of the baby-boom generation
    threatens to limit the potential of our economy, to lower the
    speed limit on how fast it can grow. Today, the Federal Reserve
    will present a projection by its economists that economic
    growth could decline significantly to 2.2 percent by 2015,
    compared with an average of 3.2 percent over the past 40 years.
        But demography is not destiny. Today, only about 20 percent
    of men and 12 percent of women over age 65 participate in the
    labor force at all. Our challenge is to boost those numbers.
        Studies show that as older Americans live longer and
    healthier lives, many are planning to work longer. According to
    a recent survey, 80 percent of boomers expect to work past the
    traditional retirement age. Some may recognize the physical and
    mental benefits of work, while some may need the additional
    income to remain financially secure as they struggle to stretch
    their retirement savings.
        A few businesses today are paving the way to attract and
    retain older workers. One example who will testify today is
    Mercy Health System of Wisconsin, who was named AARP's number-
    one employer for older workers because of policies such as
    flexible work schedules without a loss of benefits.
        However, surveys show that while most employers are aware
    of the looming brain drain, they are not prepared for it. We
    cannot afford to wait until the retirement wave is upon us. We
    must encourage businesses to adopt policies now to attract and
    retain older workers as they are confronted with the coming
    labor force shortage.
        The message could not be more urgent, as time is short.
    For, after all, the first of the baby-boom generation will
    reach retirement age next year.
        Today, I am pleased to be introducing two bills that
    benefit older workers and businesses in America.
        First, along with Senators Cochran, Durbin, Lincoln and
    Craig, we are proposing a tax credit for businesses that employ
    older workers and offer flexible work programs without a loss
    of health or pension benefits. Many older workers would delay
    retirement if their employers, like Mercy Health System,
    offered flexible work schedules with benefits.
        Second, along with Senators Cochran and Durbin, we are
    introducing a bill to extend COBRA health coverage for older
    workers, improve their access to Federal job training programs,
    and establish a national clearinghouse of best practices for
    hiring and retaining older workers, the sort of clearinghouse
    that GAO will recommend today.
        Senator Smith and I have made this issue a priority for
    this Committee. Together, we spearheaded a Department of Labor
    task force on the aging workforce, and its findings and
    recommendations are due this summer. We are also working
    together, along with Senator Conrad, on a bill that will
    include a range of additional ideas to make it easier for older
    Americans to stay in the workforce longer.
        This effort must go beyond legislative proposals. We need
    to begin a national discussion to change the way we think about
    retirement. A one-size-fits-all approach will no longer match
    the very different plans that seniors and baby-boomers have for
    their later years. So we must incorporate this new mindset into
    our national culture. As we will hear today from our witnesses,
    our Nation's economic future depends on it.
        I turn now to my esteemed colleague and the Ranking Member
    on this Committee, Senator Gordon Smith.

              OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR GORDON H. SMITH

        Senator Smith. Thank you, Chairman Kohl, for holding this
    important hearing.
        We thank all of our witnesses and those attending today. I
    look forward to a productive discussion.
        As the Chairman has just indicated, we are about to
    experience an unprecedented demographic shift with the aging of
    the baby-boomer generation. Many, including myself, have
    referred to this as a demographic and aging tsunami.
        According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, by 2030, about
    24 percent of the population, or 66 million Americans, will be
    age 65 or older. Compare this to 2000, when just over 15
    percent of our population was over age 65.
        The aging of our population, along with a number of other
    trends, will have significant impact on many aspects of our
    society, not the least of which will be strains on Social
    Security, Medicaid and Medicare.
        The aging of America will also impact our labor market,
    including potential labor shortages. This would hurt both
    competitiveness of many American businesses and our economic
    growth as a whole.
        We also must be concerned with a possible brain drain. Our
    workforce will be losing some of our most experienced workers,
    many of whom have skills that are simply not easily replaced.
        However, the effects of these trends can be mitigated if
    older workers--and, again, I emphasize older workers by their
    own choice--decide to stay in the workforce longer. I am
    pleased to be working with Chairman Kohl to address this issue.
        In response to our urging, the Labor Department has
    convened the Task Force on the Aging of the American Workforce.
    This initiative has brought together agencies from across the
    Federal Government to collectively address the workforce
    challenges and help develop opportunities for our aging
    population.
        The task force plans to finalize its findings and
    recommendations sometime this summer. I look forward to their
    input, and I expect it will provide us with many legislative
    ideas and opportunities to get ahead of this problem.
        In addition, I am working with Senators Kohl and Conrad to
    develop legislation addressing the older workers issue.
    Specifically, our bill will provide incentives to older
    Americans to stay in the workforce longer, encourage employers
    to recruit and retain older workers, and eliminate barriers to
    working longer.
        So I thank all of you for being here today.
        I want to particularly thank one of my constituents,
    Preston Pulliams of Portland Community College. He is with us
    today. Portland Community College has been a leader in
    supporting older learners who want to remain in the workforce,
    and I look forward to hearing from him and his valuable
    insights on this matter.
        So, thank you, Senator Kohl. That is all I have.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Smith.
        Senator Corker, do you have any comments you would like to
    make?
        Senator Corker. I will listen to the wisdom of--I am
    looking forward to the report that they are going to be making
    from the floor. Thank you.
        The Chairman. Thank you so much.
        Senator Corker. Yes, sir.
        The Chairman. Senator Casey, do you have any comments?
        Senator Casey. I, as well, will wait for the testimony.
    Thank you.
        The Chairman. Thank you so much.
        We turn now to Panel 1. Our first witness will be David
    Walker, who is comptroller general of the United States and
    head of the U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO.
        Mr. Walker has long taken an active interest in retirement
    policy and issues confronting our aging population. He and his
    staff have been an invaluable resource on this issue, and their
    work has been a real catalyst for action. We are pleased that
    Mr. Walker is here today to tell us about his most recent
    contribution, a forum that he convened on older workers.
        Our second witness on the first panel will be Dr. Donald
    Kohn, who is Vice Chairman of the Board of Governors of the
    Federal Reserve System. Dr. Kohn has served as a member of the
    Board of Governors since 2002. He was sworn in as Vice Chairman
    in June of 2006.
        He has more than 20 years of experience at the Federal
    Reserve and holds a Ph.D. in economics from the University of
    Michigan. Dr. Kohn is here to discuss declining labor force
    participation in an aging society and the impact on the labor
    force and on economic growth.
        We are very pleased to have you both with us this morning,
    and we will take your testimony.
        Mr. Walker, we would love to hear from you.

    STATEMENT OF DAVID WALKER, COMPTROLLER GENERAL, U.S. GOVERNMENT
                ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE, WASHINGTON, D.C.

        Mr. Walker. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Smith, other
    senators of the Senate Aging Committee. I assume that my entire
    statement will be entered into the record, Mr. Chairman----
        The Chairman. Without objection.
        Mr. Walker [continuing]. Therefore, I will move to
    summarize.
        I am pleased to be here today to talk to you about the
    opportunities and need for incentives for older workers to
    continue to contribute their considerable skills and knowledge
    and why it is vitally important, not just to them as
    individuals, but also to our national economy.
        By the way, many people use the term ``older workers.'' I
    prefer the term ``seasoned workers'' in order to recognize the
    considerable skills, knowledge, and experience that these
    individuals, who have more years, can bring to our workforce.
        As I know you are aware of, and as I know that my colleague
    at the table will testify, there are dramatic demographic
    changes that are a certainty that we are going to face, and,
    therefore, there is a need to focus on this issue.
        There are a number of benefits that could be attained by
    better capitalizing on the tremendous national resource
    evidenced by and reflected in older workers.
        First, many of these individuals need to work longer in
    order to boost their retirement savings.
        Second, having seasoned Americans work longer will help
    employers deal with the projected labor force shortages that we
    expect to occur.
        Third, having individuals contribute their skills and
    knowledge longer will help us with economic growth and will
    enhance Federal revenues, as well as helping to defray some of
    the anticipated costs associated with the tsunami of
    entitlement spending that is on our horizon.
        Last, but certainly not least, several studies have shown
    that the longer people are mentally and physically active, the
    longer they are likely to live and, in many cases, the happier
    they might be.
        Despite all the potential gains of having seasoned
    Americans work longer, there are a number of barriers that have
    prevented them from doing so. Some of these are legal, some of
    these are cultural, and some of these are reflected in other
    areas.
        We clearly believe that more needs to be done by employers
    as well as individuals and possibly the Government in order to
    facilitate the more effective utilization of this large and
    growing national resource.
        At the same time, we must recognize that there are some
    Americans who, because of physical disabilities or otherwise,
    may not be able to work longer, despite the fact that our
    economy is becoming more knowledge-based, and, therefore, brain
    power rather than brawn power is really what will drive most of
    our future economic growth.
        On December 5, 2006, we held a forum at GAO on this issue.
    I believe a copy of the report has been provided to all the
    Senators, and I will not discuss it in detail. But I will tell
    you that it was a very informative session. There were a number
    of observations and recommendations that came out of that
    forum.
        It is important to note that individuals from broad
    perspectives came together, agreed on a number of issues, but
    that this summary does not necessarily reflect the opinion of
    any individual or organization that participated, including
    GAO, although I am happy to let you know what our views are in
    the Q&A session.
        Forum participants reported that obstacles continue to
    hinder the ability of individuals to work longer; that certain
    employer perceptions regarding older workers are outdated and
    need to be effectively addressed; that there are a variety of
    best practices, however, that some employers are utilizing in
    order to attract and retain more seasoned workers, including
    more flexible work arrangements and adapting their job design
    to better suit the needs and interests of seasoned workers;
    that they are also modifying their benefit programs and other
    policies to try to help achieve this objective.
        There clearly was a recognition that there is a need to
    enhance financial literacy, because, in many cases, quite
    candidly, we have individuals who are retiring who do not
    realize that they cannot afford to retire, that they will not
    have enough income to be able to maintain their standard of
    living for the period of time that they are likely to live post
    their retirement date.
        There are a number of things that I think should be
    considered, including looking to determine whether or not our
    existing pension laws, our social insurance programs, might
    need to be modified in order to encourage people to work
    longer, not necessarily to require them to work longer but to
    encourage them to work longer.
        We also need to look at our age discrimination laws and our
    employment and training practices to find out whether they
    might have to be modified in order to better capitalize on this
    resource.
        In summary, engaging and retaining older workers is
    critical for promoting economical growth, improving Federal
    finances, and shoring up retirees' retirement income security.
    Given existing trends and the aging of baby-boomers, pressures
    on Federal entitlement programs, and threats to individuals'
    retirement security, it is in our Nation's interest to
    encourage Americans to work longer.
        Despite evidence indicating the future importance of
    seasoned Americans to contribute longer to the workforce, there
    are various barriers and misperceptions that continue to get in
    the way of making progress.
        Clearly, there are things the Federal Government should
    consider doing, including, among other things, promoting the
    formation of a public-private partnership and a Federal
    clearinghouse to be able to increase awareness of this issue
    and to promote best practices among interested parties.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am more than happy to answer any
    questions that you and the other members have after my
    colleague has an opportunity to speak.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Walker follows:]
        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.001

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.002

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.003

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.004

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.005

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.006

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.007

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.008

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.009

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.010

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.011

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.012

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.013

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.014

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.015

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.016

         The Chairman. We thank you, Mr. Walker.
        Now we turn to Dr. Donald Kohn.

    STATEMENT OF DONALD KOHN, VICE CHAIRMAN, BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF
               THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM, WASHINGTON, DC

        Mr. Kohn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Kohl, Senator Smith, Members of the Committee, I
    am pleased to be here today to discuss some recent research at
    the Federal Reserve on the effect that population aging may
    have on the growth of the labor force.
        I, too, will be reading a somewhat condensed version of my
    testimony, and I will be referring to charts at the end of my
    testimony that are also on the easel over here to my right.
        As we all know, the United States is at the front edge of a
    massive and important shift in the demographic composition of
    the population. Exhibit 1 shows that, around 2003, the
    population of those age 62 and older began growing as a share
    of the population age 16 and older. According to projections
    from the Bureau of the Census, shown in the shaded area of the
    exhibit, this upward trend in aging will steepen noticeably in
    the next few years.
        A subset of the adult population is in the labor force,
    that is, are either actively looking for work or have a job,
    and this is shown in Exhibit 2. Because the participation of
    men and women in the labor force declines sharply after age 50,
    the rising share of older individuals will put significant
    downward pressure on the total labor force participation rate
    in coming years, provided the basic pattern of participation
    over the life cycle is maintained. That is the pattern you can
    see on the chart in the rise and, in particular, the fall after
    age 59 in that participation.
        Changes in the labor force behavior within age groups also
    have the potential to affect labor force participation. Exhibit
    3 shows that by the time men born in 1935 reached age 30, about
    97 percent of them were in the labor force. In contrast, only
    about 92 percent of the 30-year-old men born in 1976 were in
    the labor force.
        Now, until recently, this decline in the labor force
    participation rate of successive generations of men had been
    more than offset by a steady increase in the participation
    rates for each new generation of women. Women born in the
    1920's and 1930's had low participation rates at age 30, but
    three-quarters of the 30-year-olds born in 1960 were in the
    labor force. However, participation rates for more recent
    generations of 30-year-old women have not risen any further,
    and you can see the red line levels out in that chart.
        Economists at the Federal Reserve have developed a model
    that combines information on the decline in labor force
    participation at older ages with information on changes in the
    labor force participation across generations. Exhibit 4 shows
    the actual participation rate, the model's estimate of the
    underlying trend between 1995 and 2006, and the model's
    projection of the trend in participation out to 2015.
        Now, as you can see from the red line in that chart, the
    estimated trend has been declining since about 2002 and is
    projected by the model to fall substantially further by 2015. I
    would add that if the chart were extended, that line would
    continue to move downward.
        That decline in the overall participation rate, coupled
    with the slowing in the growth of the working age population
    projected by the Census Bureau, would be consistent with a
    slowing in the annual growth of the labor force from the
    roughly 1.25 percent average of recent years to only a .25
    percent rate of increase in labor force by 2015.
        Now, this forecast is predicated on a number of
    assumptions, some of which may not be borne out. As I outline
    in Exhibit 5, several factors that are not incorporated into
    the model may work toward raising the labor force participation
    rate. In particular, increasing longevity and improvements in
    health may induce many more individuals to remain in the
    workforce well past age 65.
        For their part, employers, upon facing slower growth in the
    labor force, may attempt to attract and retain older workers by
    enhancing wages and benefits, creating more flexible work
    strategies and schedules, and increasing training.
        Government policies can also influence the attractiveness
    of remaining in the workforce. For example, to raise
    participation rates among older individuals, policymakers could
    seek ways to preserve or enhance the incentives to work beyond
    traditional retirement age.
        Finally, to a limited extent, immigration has the potential
    to alter the future pace of labor force growth.
        Some of the influences described above may already be
    boosting the participation rate relative to the model's
    prediction. As shown in Exhibit 6, the labor force
    participation rate of individuals aged 62 and older has been
    rising markedly since 1995. To some extent, this increase
    simply reflects the aging of a generation of women who were
    more likely to be in the labor force throughout their lifetimes
    than earlier generations. However, the magnitude of the rise is
    greater than can be explained by this factor alone.
        Reflecting the considerable uncertainty that surrounds any
    long-term economic projection, economists hold a range of views
    about the pace of future labor force growth.
        A projection from the Congressional Budget Office is shown
    in Exhibit 7. The CBO foresees the pace of trend labor force
    growth slowing to .5 percent by 2015. That is a smaller
    deceleration than projected by the model that the Board staff
    has, but it is still a very significant slowing.
        As I indicated at the outset, the aging of the population
    has important implications for future generations. Because
    total output is equal to output per worker times the number of
    workers, a slowdown in the rate of labor force growth will, all
    else equal, tend to slow the growth of output, and that is
    shown in the rightmost column of Exhibit 7.
        Moreover, if the growth in the labor force is lower than
    population growth, output per person will, all else equal, rise
    even more slowly than output per worker.
        Indeed, as indicated by comparing columns 1 and 2 with
    column 3 in the exhibit, both the Federal Reserve's staff
    projection and the CBO projection for growth of the labor force
    through 2015 are lower than the growth of the population
    expected in that period by the Census Bureau. Consequently, on
    these projections, the level of output per person will be lower
    than it would have been without population aging.
        Increasing labor force participation would help reduce
    these effects, but is unlikely to completely offset them. Thus,
    without an offsetting increase in productivity growth, the
    aging of the population likely means that output per person
    will have to be lower than it would have been in the absence of
    population aging.
        Accordingly, a critical question is how that burden will be
    distributed across generations. If we do nothing, it will by
    default fall entirely on future generations. However, by
    foregoing some consumption today to increase national saving,
    we can take on some of that burden today and thereby raise the
    living standards of future generations.
        A rise in saving can achieve that shift, because the extra
    savings would be used to increase the Nation's stock of capital
    or increase our net holdings of foreign assets. Increasing the
    amount of productive assets owned by Americans increases the
    amount of consumption that future generations will be able to
    enjoy.
        Determining the best way to distribute the burden
    associated with the aging of the population should be high on
    society's list of priorities.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Kohn follows:]
        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.017

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.018

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.019

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.020

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.021

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.022

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.023

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.024

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.025

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.026

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.027

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.028

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.029

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.030

         The Chairman. Thank you, Dr. Kohn.
        Mr. Walker, your forum participants said that most
    businesses are not focused on this issue and may not act until
    there is a crisis.
        Given the labor force projections, do you think that
    Government has an important role to play in encouraging
    businesses to act sooner to attract and to retain older
    workers?
        Mr. Walker. Given the significant national implications
    that both of us have talked about, I do think that there is a
    broader public interest. I think that consideration needs to be
    given as to how public-private partnerships might be able to be
    used in order to enhance public education, and to facilitate
    sharing of best practices.
        I also think that Government should look at its own
    policies and programs to determine what it can do to lead by
    example. For example, the Government is the largest employer in
    the United States. What can and should we do in order to lead
    by example with regard to our own policies with regard to
    seasoned workers?
        Furthermore, as the Government looks down the road
    entitlement reform, namely Social Security, Medicare and
    Medicaid, tax reform and health-care reform, what can be done
    to try to facilitate and encourage people to work longer? I
    think there is a lot there.
        Hopefully, we will get some of that out of the Labor
    Department's interagency task force that you referred to
    earlier. We are anxious to see what they come up with.
        The Chairman. Isn't it true--and I think you are saying it
    is true--that our whole philosophy in this country, which has
    been at 65 people just naturally retire, and our entitlement
    programs are predicated on that and pension programs are
    predicated on that, and we sort of drum it into the mindset of
    people in our country that when you get to be 65, you retire--
    that whole philosophy must change if we are going to get older
    people in the workforce?
        Mr. Walker. Mr. Chairman, I think you are exactly right. I
    think a lot of times, people don't realize that Federal
    policies can have unintended consequences.
        Let me take my father as an example, who was an executive
    with what now will be AT&T. He, was looking into determining
    when he was going to retire, and the fact that Social Security
    said you could retire at 62 had a significant psychological
    impact on him.
        Furthermore, his employer piggy-backed on the Social
    Security early retirement age and made the employer-sponsored
    programs equivalent to the Social Security program. So, there
    were tremendous psychological factors that were involved here.
    When you get right down to it, Social Security is not material
    to his particular retirement income, but that is something we
    need to think about.
        Frankly, I would respectfully suggest, I don't know if
    there is anything as a normal retirement age anymore. Maybe
    there is an age at which you get full benefits, where you don't
    end up having a penalty if you end up leaving earlier, or where
    you might get a supplement if you retire later. But words
    matter, and I think we need to think about our terminology and
    think about our policies in light of the tremendous changes in
    the economy and in light of the workforce shortages that we are
    expected to see in the future.
        The Chairman. That is very good.
        Dr. Kohn, I think you are telling us that if we don't
    somehow anticipate what is happening, and perhaps even if we
    do, we will not be able to change the outcome; our standard of
    living is likely to be affected considerably by this change in
    demographics.
        Mr. Kohn. That is correct, Mr. Chairman. You can see it in
    the chart over there on Exhibit 7, and I think, partly, you see
    it in comparing the first or second column with the third
    column.
        We have a situation in which the labor force will be
    growing less rapidly than the population. That means each
    worker, in effect, is working for more people, and the
    consumption of the folks who aren't working, who are dependent
    on the other folks, will have to be supported by their work.
        So we will have increases in standards of living, but they
    won't be as rapid as they would be without the aging
    population. You can see, looking at, say, columns 4 and 5
    there, we have enjoyed about a 2 percent increase in average
    standards of living over the last 10, 11, 12 years. Now, look
    down to the last column, and that is about a 1.5 percent
    increase in the average standard of living. If people expect
    their recent gains to continue, they are going to be
    disappointed.
        So I think, yes, we do need to take steps to share the
    burden of how people retire and want to retire across
    generations. I think we need to take the steps that you and Mr.
    Walker have been talking about to encourage people to
    participate more in the labor force, to have more flexible work
    rules, to make sure that the Federal Government rules and the
    entitlement programs aren't putting barriers up, either
    psychological or real barriers, to people adopting a more
    flexible attitude toward retirement.
        These are serious questions that stretch across generations
    that we need to confront.
        The Chairman. Thank you so much.
        Senator Smith.
        Senator Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Walker, we are going to hear from a community college
    president from Oregon soon about skills. I am wondering, when
    you had your GAO older workers forum, did you focus at all on
    the skills gap that may exist for seniors and what we can
    better do to help remedy that?
        Mr. Walker. We did talk some about that. Probably the
    biggest skills gap that exists is that many seasoned Americans
    aren't as proficient with technology as younger workers are, in
    part, because----
        Senator Smith. I would be in that number, too, by the way.
        Mr. Walker. Yes, and I would imagine there would be a lot--
    but we don't have to identify everybody. [Laughter.]
        That is a real challenge. Now, some jobs require
    proficiency with regard to the use of technology and some
    don't. But I think that is clearly an issue that more attention
    has to be focused on, and that was probably the single biggest
    issue that came out.
        Senator Smith. Yes. You know, I am just astounded at how
    much new technology comes out every year that is baffling to
    folks. That is probably undoubtedly an area where we can do a
    better job incentivizing community colleges to reach out and
    fill that gap.
        I don't know if you have a comment on that, Dr. Kohn.
        Mr. Kohn. I agree that that is a problem for all of us, I
    think, most of us in this room. But I do think that technology
    also helps to simplify job tasks to a certain extent, and
    people can be taught. I don't think I am as teachable today as
    I was 30 years ago, but I don't think I have stopped learning,
    and I am using technology a lot better and a lot smarter than I
    did just a few years ago.
        So I think there are ways of adapting jobs and adapting the
    technology to most of the people in society. You don't need to
    be cutting-edge, high-tech to use this.
        The technology is helping, I think, and should actually
    help older workers stay in the labor force by structuring the
    jobs in a more flexible way, for example, meaning that you
    don't have to commute by car. Telecommuting and things like
    that are also a product of technology. So I think it is a plus
    as well as a problem.
        Mr. Walker. I think we also have to keep in mind that,
    because of some of the comments that have been made earlier,
    many individuals may not want to embrace learning technology
    because they are planning to retire by a certain age, because
    they want to or because they think they can afford to, which,
    in many cases, they can't.
        I think that one of the things that clearly has to happen
    is that we need to do more to help individuals plan, save,
    invest and make more informed decisions about when they really
    can afford to retire.
        There are many Americans that don't realize that, with
    expected life spans, they have to have a lot more money than
    they may have at the point in time that they retire. That would
    provide them, then, another incentive to improve their skills
    such that they will ultimately be in a position to where they
    can retire comfortably at that point.
        The Pension Protection Act also was a positive step
    forward, which Congress passed last year. It provides some
    flexibility for individuals to go from full-time work to part-
    time work and draw on their pensions. That was a huge barrier
    before, because you had to change employers in order to draw on
    your pension, which, obviously, didn't make a whole lot of
    sense.
        So we are starting to make some changes that I think are
    necessary, but much more needs to be done.
        Senator Smith. I wonder if you can speak to financial
    planning literacy. I wonder if there is more that we could do
    at the Federal Government to foster that.
        I have a bill that requires Social Security every year to
    send seniors a retirement readiness checklist what with
    questions such as will it take for you to retire, what income
    will you need, have you determined your life expectancy, and
    what are you saving?
        I think you mentioned, David, that the savings rate is
    negative. I think most people--and if there are seniors
    watching this--understand that that calculation made by the
    Government is literally about two lines: What did you make,
    what did you spend, and the net is the savings rate.
        But I wonder if you could speak to the issue of what the
    Federal Government can better do, perhaps through the Social
    Security Administration, to facilitate financial planning
    literacy.
        Mr. Walker. Well, first, it is my understanding that for
    the last 2 years in a row, Americans spent more money than they
    took home, now, possibly because of taking out home equity
    loans--I mean, there are a lot of ways you can get there. But
    the last time that that happened, it is my understanding, was
    1932 and 1933, which weren't particularly good years for the
    economy.
        Now, we are in a very different situation than 1932 and
    1933. I think one of the things we have to recognize is that we
    need to look at our education programs, and we need to start no
    later than high school and probably earlier than high school
    with regard to financial literacy. It is amazing to me how few
    young people really understand the basics.
        Unfortunately, many Americans are following the bad example
    of their Federal Government. They are spending more money than
    they make. They are adding debt at record rates, and they are
    facing increasing debt service costs due to compounding
    interest.
        So I would say that Government needs to lead by example
    more, but I would also say that we need to figure out how
    Government can work at all levels to increase financial
    literacy and related education efforts, starting early.
        Yes, we should think about what else could be done for
    individuals who are approaching retirement. But, quite frankly,
    in many cases, that is too late because people need to start
    thinking about planning, saving, investing and preserving for
    retirement so they can benefit from the miracle of compounding,
    because if they just find out late in the ball game, they have
    a lot fewer options.
        Senator Smith. Dr. Kohn.
        Mr. Kohn. Senator, financial education has been a major
    initiative for the Federal Reserve over the last few years.
    Importantly, we are responding not only to the issues that Mr.
    Walker and you are talking about, the fact that people are
    living longer and need to think more carefully about what they
    have, but also the increasing complexity of the instruments
    available to people to borrow and to save.
        People need to understand the implications of what they are
    doing, the implications of the contracts they are signing for
    their future welfare. The Federal Reserve has a number of
    programs starting in schools, working hand in hand with school
    systems across the country to start this education process. But
    it is a big and growing problem.
        The financial miracle of our markets has extended a lot of
    opportunities down the income scale, across the age scale--
    opportunities for borrowing and saving that weren't there 5,
    10, 20 years ago. But extending those opportunities means that
    we need to make sure the folks that are newly attracted in the
    financial system understand what they are getting and what the
    implications are.
        It is a big issue.
        Senator Smith. Thank you very much.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Smith.
        Senator Corker.
        Senator Corker. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you. This has been great testimony.
        Yesterday, in our offices, we went through some of the
    tremendous financial implications to our country and to
    individuals as it relates to the very subject matter you are
    talking about right now. Obviously, Congress has not been
    particularly adept at dealing with some of these upcoming
    issues, and yet people working longer and saving more can be
    one of those things that actually can give us some breathing
    room and actually be productive for us.
        I would love to hear some specific policy measures--I know
    you all have talked about incentives--both to encourage people
    to stay longer in the workforce, but also to addressing the
    savings side, which, obviously--as I traveled around the State
    of Tennessee extensively over the last couple of years prior to
    being here, I have a tremendous fear that we are going to have
    not just a tsunami as it relates to the workforce issue, not
    just a tsunami as it relates to Social Security and Medicare
    within Government, but I just see so many people that are going
    to be devastated in later years because of a lack of
    understanding about saving for retirement and not having the
    funds in place.
        I would like to hear specific proposals that we here in the
    Senate might engage in to actually correct this.
        Mr. Walker. Well, I have mentioned a few things already,
    but let me note that I think we have four serious deficits in
    America today. We have a budget deficit. We have a balance-of-
    payments deficit, of which the trade deficit is a subset. We
    have a savings deficit. We have a leadership deficit.
        Now, on the savings deficit, saving is critical to our
    future economic growth. It is critical to improving our
    standard of living over time. With savings, you get investment.
    With investment you get R&D. With R&D, you enhance
    productivity. With enhanced productivity, you can improve
    economic growth and you can improve our standard of living.
        We have dis-savings at the Federal level, because we are
    running large deficits, larger than advertised, because we are
    spending all the Social Security surplus. We have negative
    savings rates for individuals, and that is a matter of concern.
        I think Americans need to recognize the reality that Social
    Security, Medicare and Medicaid will be reformed, and that
    people will have to assume more personal responsibility for
    saving and investing and preserving those savings for
    retirement.
        Now, that is going to be for younger people more than,
    after, people who are already retired or are nearing
    retirement. You are going to see little to no changes, in all
    likelihood, for those individuals. But the people who are not
    retired or who are not approaching retirement age, are going to
    have to assume more personal responsibility.
        I think the other thing we have to recognize is we have a
    lot of tax incentives for saving. They result in a lot of
    foregone revenues. So we need to do a better job of analyzing,
    do they really increase the savings rate? Second, who benefits
    from those tax incentives?
        I think one of the things, quite frankly, that we are going
    to have to think about, possibly in conjunction with Social
    Security reform, is whether or not there base ought to be a
    mandatory savings on top of a reformed and defined benefit
    Social Security program, e.g., 2 percent mandatory savings,
    payroll deduction, going into an individual account, into a
    real trust fund, with real fiduciary responsibilities, with
    limited investment options along the lines of the Federal
    thrift savings plan, that would provide a pre-retirement death
    benefit, that would help to fund for long-term care, that would
    help to link people to the markets and how investments work.
        So I think we are going to have to think outside the box,
    because I think our historical approaches, quite frankly, have
    not been very effective.
        Mr. Kohn. Senator, I think if I could build on one of the
    remarks Mr. Walker made about people coming to realize what
    they can and can't count on in Social Security and Medicare,
    here is an example where, I think, the sooner we can act, the
    better.
        I think people have to see action by their elected
    representatives to address these problems, so they can see what
    they can and can't count on in the future, so they can do the
    planning they need to do to have the savings, the flow of
    income, that they want to have in retirement.
        These are issues in which the longer we delay attacking
    them, the worse the issues get. That demographic imperative
    means that you are not going to really cut benefits or make
    major changes for people near retirement. You want to give
    people a warning. This would be only fair. The longer we wait,
    the more that tsunami, that upswing in that chart, comes into
    play, the fewer people that can be affected by these changes.
        So I think one of the really most important things that you
    could do as our elected representatives is to tackle these
    programs soon, so that people know and can plan on what they
    need to save. That would be No. 1.
        No. 2, I agree that you should be looking at the incentives
    to save in the tax system. We have moved into the direction, to
    some extent, of taxing returns from savings a little less than
    we used to. But this is one of the issues raised by the tax
    commission last year, and that is something that you should be
    looking at. I don't know whether we are in the right place or
    not. That is really your decision.
        But I think that interaction of the tax system and savings
    would be another fruitful place to look, as well as some of the
    things that we were talking about before, whether Social
    Security, Medicare, ERISA regulations, pension regulations are,
    at least, not giving people the wrong signals about when they
    should retire.
        Senator Corker. Mr. Chairman, thank you for this testimony.
        I hope that each of you will meet personally with me later
    on. We want to set something up. We follow very much what both
    of you do, and I just see human tragedy on the horizon.
        So many people are working for companies--you go, you talk
    to them in the lunchroom where they are working, and they say,
    ``Oh, my company has a 401(k),'' and you say, ``Well, how much
    are you putting into it?'' ``Nothing.''
        I think that all of us together need to show leadership to
    cause people to really begin to act in a different way. I
    certainly realize that we in Congress have not shown much
    leadership as it relates to the financial issues that we are
    going to be dealing with down the road as it relates to Social
    Security and Medicare.
        I thank you, and I look forward to meeting with you
    personally. I appreciate it.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Corker.
        Senator Casey.
        Senator Casey. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for
    putting this hearing together. It is a very important issue.
        I want to thank both of the members of this panel for your
    testimony today as well as your work and scholarship that goes
    into the testimony you provide today.
        I want to make one comment. Senator Corker and I are in our
    first year, and we know the benefit of seasoned workers. Our
    colleagues who have been here ahead of us give us the benefit
    of that every day.
        I come from a State where we have a higher percentage of
    those over 65 than virtually any other State, other than
    Florida. The last time I checked, it was about 15.6 percent
    over 65. The rest of the country around 12.4 percent or 12.5
    percent, somewhere in that.
        So we have in Pennsylvania, I know, both the reality of
    that demographic and also, I think, the opportunity to be able
    to test ideas maybe before other States do.
        Certainly, seasoned workers--and, Mr. Walker, I am glad you
    gave us that terminology. It is important to use the right
    terminology. But I have no doubt that those workers play a
    vital role in the economy of Pennsylvania and the country.
        I think one of the important points both of you have made
    is that this isn't just a good thing to do. That, in and of
    itself, would be helpful to younger workers to have the benefit
    of that experience that their colleagues provide. I think it
    would provide, if not an economic benefit, certainly an
    intangible benefit you really can't define.
        But the point you have made is that making sure that we are
    providing incentives for seasoned workers to stay in the
    workforce longer is not just an economic benefit, but there is
    an economic imperative here.
        Mr. Walker, I was struck by your introduction in the GAO
    report, where you say in the first paragraph, ``By 2025, the
    labor force growth is expected to be less than a fifth of what
    it is today. Without a major increase in productivity or higher
    than projected immigration, low labor force growth will
    ultimately lead to slower growth in the economy and slower
    growth in Federal revenues.'' We can't say that enough, and I
    am glad that both of you have highlighted that.
        Then, also, there was a CBO number which I am reading from
    some of the summaries of the testimony: ``From today to 2017,
    CBO projects that slower labor force growth will slow average
    economic growth to 2.6 percent, compared to an average of 3.2
    percent over the past 4 years.''
        All of that by way of background to highlight the
    imperative. I guess the question I have is very simple, and I
    invite both of you to weigh in on this.
        In terms of the strategies, the real basic strategies the
    U.S. Senate should deal with, whether it is changing the
    national mindset, whether it is changing the culture of
    retirement, whether it is financial literacy, the clearinghouse
    idea that is highlighted in the GAO report, legislation or
    regulation to increase flexibility from employers--of those
    strategies--because we know what the problem is, and we know
    what the imperative is.
        Of those strategies, what are the ones that you think are
    most effective and most likely to be the subject of action in
    the U.S. Senate?
        Because too often we talk about theories, but we need to
    move the ball down the field, so to speak, expeditiously.
        Of those strategies or others, what do you think are the
    most important, first? Second, what do you think are the most
    likely to have success in the U.S. Senate and the House?
        Mr. Kohn. Well, Senator, I would hate to choose. I would
    like to say all of the above and dodge the question in that
    way. But I do think that the problem is serious enough that we
    can't afford to operate on some dimensions and not others.
        As you were talking, I was thinking about my own mother,
    who was a resident of Pennsylvania and who retired as a teacher
    and then went back to work part-time, using some of her teacher
    training, at the Philadelphia Museum of Art. She had a second
    career of 20 years after her retirement. She had the
    opportunity because it was part-time, the hours were flexible,
    and they used the skills that she had acquired as a teacher in
    the Pennsylvania school systems.
        So I think that, to a considerable extent, people, through
    their private initiatives, will do a lot to solve these
    problems. Businesses will see that their incentives are to make
    work available that people can do, to be flexible. Individuals
    will be incentivized by the fact that they are living longer
    and feeling better. They are capable of working. They get a lot
    of satisfaction, as I know my mother did out of her work
    experience. I think, to a large extent, this will be taken care
    of by the private market.
        But we need to be very certain that people in the private
    sector are educated to what is possible and what can be done.
    We have all worked in places that are reluctant to make changes
    because there could be costs to them. But if they can see that
    other firms have made changes to accommodate seasoned workers,
    that there haven't been the costs that they might fear, I think
    that this would be very important.
        So it is information, it is policies. I just don't think we
    can choose certain things.
        Senator Casey. Thank you.
        Mr. Walker. Senator, I believe that, ultimately, market
    forces will come together and they will force people to act.
        But we need to figure out what we can do to encourage
    people to act sooner rather than later, because this is a
    national imperative. This is not a want; this is a need. We
    need to do something here.
        Now, I would respectfully suggest that there are probably
    several categories.
        One category would be: What are some of the things that
    need to be done, that need to be done cooperatively, that might
    require public-private partnerships, not necessarily just
    involving the Federal Government, but also involving State and
    local Government public education, the clearinghouse idea,
    financial literacy efforts? What can be done at different ages
    to try to help in that regard?
        Second, let's make sure the Government leads by example.
    The Federal Government is the largest employer in the United
    States. Let's make sure that our Government policies and
    programs are such that we are actually leading by example here.
        Then, last, I would say that there are certain things that
    only the Federal Government can do. The Federal Government is
    going to have to reform Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid,
    sooner rather than later. The Federal Government is going to
    have to engage in comprehensive health-care reform, and it is
    going to have to engage in comprehensive tax reform, probably
    in installments over a number of years, but we need to get
    started.
        So there are certain things that we should encourage. There
    are certain things that we should do in partnership with
    others. There are certain things that we should lead by example
    as the largest employer in the country. There are certain
    things that only the Congress, in conjunction with the
    President, can do, and that has to deal with legislative
    actions.
        Senator Casey. Thank you very much.
        The Chairman. Thank you very much, Senator Casey.
        Gentlemen, I cannot say how much we appreciate your being
    here today and giving us the benefit of your experience and
    your wisdom. It has made a big contribution to this hearing and
    to the whole effort that we are engaged in. So we thank you for
    coming here today.
        Mr. Walker. Thanks.
        I would like to thank our staff. Our staff does a great
    job, and I just try to make sure I don't let them down.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Mr. Kohn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Now, we will turn to our second panel.
        Our first witness on the second panel is Dr. Marcie Pitt-
    Catsouphes. She serves as director of the Center on Aging and
    Work, a unique research center at Boston College. She holds an
    MSP from Boston College and a Ph.D. from Boston University. She
    is here to describe the impact of the aging workforce on
    businesses and what they could do, but are not currently doing,
    to prevent a brain drain.
        The second witness will be Javon Bea, president and CEO of
    Mercy Health System. I am proud to say that Mercy Health
    System, based in Janesville, WI, is ranked the number-one
    employer for older workers by AARP, in part because of its
    flexible work schedules.
        Mr. Bea's leadership and success in the business world is
    widely recognized, and I hope other companies will follow his
    example. He will discuss his company's need for older workers,
    his policies for hiring and retaining older workers, as well as
    a need for other companies to adopt similar policies on a
    Nation-wide scale.
        We have a third witness from the State of Oregon, who
    Senator Smith will say a word about.
        Senator Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        It is my pleasure to again welcome Dr. Preston Pulliams. He
    is a great Oregonian, and he is also the district president of
    the Portland Community College. He will be discussing Portland
    Community College as it is supporting older learners who want
    to remain in the workforce and partnering with businesses to
    assist them in retaining older workers.
        So thanks for coming, Preston.
        Mr. Pulliams. Thank you, Senator.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Ms. Pitt-Catsouphes.

    STATEMENT OF MARCIE PITT-CATSOUPHES, DIRECTOR, CENTER ON AGING
           AND WORK/WORKPLACE FLEXIBILITY, CHESTNUT HILL, MA

        Ms. Pitt-Catsouphes. Good morning, Senator Kohl, Senator
    Smith and Members of the Special Committee on Aging. I
    certainly thank you for the opportunity to come and speak
    before you today.
        This morning, I would like to address four key points.
        First, as we have already discussed, the time really is
    right.
        Demographers have used the metaphor of the pig and the
    python to describe how the baby-boomer population group has
    changed the contour of virtually every societal institution.
    Today, the boomers have passed the midsection of that python.
    An average of 4.6 adults will turn 65 each minute in 2007. By
    2025, this will increase to an average of 8.0 adults per
    minute.
        The projections for the aging of the labor force are also
    dramatic, and these statistics compel us to pay attention. If
    you consider older workers to be those who are 45 years and
    older--and I want to emphasize that this is an age demarcation
    that is often used at the workplace--older workers comprise
    approximately 40 percent of today's workforce.
        Labor economists anticipate a significant increase in the
    percentage of older workers over the next 5 years, a 48 percent
    increase in the number of workers aged 55 to 64 and a 40
    percent increase in those 65 and older.
        There really are three basic sets of reasons why anywhere
    from two-thirds to three-quarters of older workers anticipate
    working into their 70's.
        First, as we have discussed, our life spans have expanded,
    and most people report they enjoy relatively good health during
    their older years. This makes it possible for people to
    consider working longer. If older adults leave the labor force
    as early as 62, they could have two decades or more in
    retirement, and many boomers are telling us this is just too
    long for full-time retirement.
        Second, many boomers do not have sufficient savings, as we
    have discussed, for the 20 or more years of retirement. These
    boomers will face precarious financial situations if they
    retire completely, and a substantial number will, in fact,
    outlive their savings. This is the have-to reason.
        Third, a significant portion of boomers indicate they also
    want to work, because being employed offers many quality-of-
    life benefits.
        My second point is that flexible work options, indeed, are
    important. Although a majority of older workers expect to work
    past what has become our traditional retirement age, few of
    them, in fact, less than 10 percent, report they want to work
    on a full-time, full-year basis.
        Older workers are seeking flexible employment situations
    which includes opportunities, choice and control. These
    flexible work options can take many shapes, but they include
    options for different starting and quitting times, the number
    of hours worked, the number of months they work each year,
    provisions for entering and exiting, re-entering the workforce,
    and remote work.
        The access that older workers have to flexible work options
    may well be one of the most critical factors in their decisions
    about whether they can and they want to remain in the labor
    force. But here is the rub: Only a minority of U.S. workers has
    access to the flexible work options that they both want and
    need.
        My third point is that employers are not yet taking many
    steps to get ready for the aging of the workforce. Indeed, many
    employers are aware of the predictions about the anticipated
    labor force shortages, and they acknowledge the value that
    older workers already do add to the workplace.
        Let me first speak to the labor force shortages briefly. As
    we have discussed, many labor force economists feel that U.S.
    businesses, at least those in some industries and in some
    regions of the country, will face either workforce shortages in
    general or may not be able to find the talent they need for
    specific occupations.
        The second point is the one that is most compelling for
    employers, that, in fact, there may not be enough people to
    fill jobs in some professions which depend on experienced
    workers, and these could confront challenges if a majority of
    the boomers abruptly transition into full-time retirement.
    Specific industry sectors, such as health care, may be
    particularly vulnerable to occupational replacement needs.
        The second point here is the value of older workers. This
    past year, our Center on Aging and Work/Workplace Flexibility
    conducted a study to explore the perspectives of U.S. employers
    about the aging of the workforce, their readiness to respond,
    and including their adoption of a range of flexible work
    options.
        The first thing that is important is the employers reported
    positive attitudes about their own older workers, these they
    have already hired, particularly when compared to their
    assessments of young-adult employees and workers at mid-life.
        It is particularly important to note that the employers
    were likely to report that it is very true that older workers
    tend to bring attributes that can directly contribute to
    organizational success. These included their high level of
    skills compared to what is needed for the job, their
    professional networks, their client networks, and their desire
    to lead and to supervise.
        Despite these positive attitudes, however, only a small
    percentage of employers in our study seemed to be getting
    ready. For example, a fourth of the employers stated their
    organizations had not analyzed the demographics of their own
    workforces at all, and only a third of the employers reported
    that their organizations had made projections about the
    retirement rates of their own workers to a moderate or great
    extent.
        Over half of the employers say that they have made a
    strategic link between flexible work options and business
    effectiveness. Unfortunately, less than half of the employers
    say that they allow most or all of their full-time employees to
    access different forms of flexible work options.
        The fourth point is that employers are interested in
    information about promising practices. In closing, I would like
    to share with you just a couple of lessons I have learned about
    the ways employers pilot-test innovative practices.
        First, they want a strong business case for the innovation.
    Second, they want solid, research-based evidence about the
    probable outcomes of innovative practices.
        But as important as these first two steps are, they are
    rarely enough to spur employers into action. Business
    practitioners often want to see examples of innovative practice
    as implemented by other employers before they are willing to
    try the innovations at their own workplace.
        For this reason, this spring, our center is pilot-testing a
    benchmarking data base project for promising practices. We feel
    such a data base with rich information about the real-life
    experiences will help employers adjust to both the
    opportunities as well as the demands of our 21st-century world
    of work.
        Thank you very much.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Pitt-Catsouphes follows:]
        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.031

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.032

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.033

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.034

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.035

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.036

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.037

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.038

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.039

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.040

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.041

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.042

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.043

        The Chairman. Thank you very much.
        Mr. Bea.

    STATEMENT OF JAVON BEA, PRESIDENT AND CEO, MERCY HEALTH SYSTEM,
                             JANESVILLE, WI

        Mr. Bea. Thank you, Chairman Kohl, Ranking Member Smith,
    Members of the Committee, for this opportunity to discuss the
    shortage that we see of health-care workers coming forth in our
    industry.
        Mercy Health System currently operates 63 facilities
    throughout southern Wisconsin and northern Illinois. We are
    based out of Janesville, WI.
        As Chairman Kohl mentioned, last fall, we were named as the
    number-one employer in the Nation by AARP for workers over 50.
    Currently, 28 percent of our workers are over the age of 50,
    and we expect this number to grow in the upcoming years.
        We actually started to analyze this problem about a decade
    ago--the impending shortage of health-care workers.
        Just a couple of interesting statistics that isn't in my
    written testimony that I came across is that we employ at Mercy
    hundreds of physicians, and by 2020, the number of physicians
    that are expected to retire each year is going to be greater
    than the number who graduated last year.
        In 2001, an American Hospital Association survey showed
    that 75 percent, 75 percent, three-quarters, of the 168,000
    vacancies in health care were nurses. That is a real--it is
    hard to run a hospital without nurses.
        So, basically, we decided some time ago that we needed to
    start to change our systems of scheduling. We started talking
    to our older workers, older physicians, nurses and said, ``What
    do we need to do in order to keep you in the workforce
    longer?'' It came back, as Marcie just stated, flexibility.
    They want more control over their time, their lives, to be able
    to pursue other things.
        So we developed a system that really provides flexibility
    in hours of the day, days of the week, seasons of the year, and
    location of work site. That way, we are able to recruit older
    workers but, more importantly I think, maintain workers that we
    have invested a great deal of time, money and training in
    through the years, who are still very healthy and have
    forgotten the idea that, ``Boy, I am going to leave at age 55
    so I can pursue some interest ``or'' I can spend winters with
    my husband in Florida.'' What we have done, then, is make that
    possible for them to do it now and stay in the workforce.
        One of our most popular benefits is what we call our work-
    to-retire program, which allows employees over age 50 the
    opportunity to work reduced hours, pool hours, work at home,
    and still maintain all their benefits.
        In the work-to-retire program, if you are age 55 or over,
    you can work seasonally. So you work 1,000 a year at your
    discretion, and then you can still maintain full benefits
    throughout the entire year. So that allows individuals, as I
    said, to spend winters in Florida, to pursue other interests.
    Some people go on mission work. We just had some nurses go over
    and do some mission work in Kenya for 6 months, came back to
    their jobs, and maintained full benefits.
        What we have done, also, in addition, is invest a great
    deal of resources in training programs in order to help even
    our non-skilled personnel to be able to adapt to new technology
    changes.
        We have invested heavily in mechanical assisted lifting
    devices at all of our hospitals that allow older nurses to be
    able to lift patients more easily using these mechanical
    assisted lift devices--doing whatever we need to do to keep
    people, again, who are highly skilled, highly experienced, at a
    time in their lives where their children are raised, they do
    want to give back to society, they do want to keep working, but
    they just don't want to be in that 8:00-to-5, Monday-through-
    Friday, daily grind all year long.
        So throughout the years, we basically have also found--and
    this is more of an intangible note--that we have less
    complaints, patient complaints, regarding the care provided by
    our older workers. Our data shows that our older workers, our
    older nurses, are simply, generally--there are always
    exceptions--kinder, more patient, gentler, and they relate.
        You have to be really sick to get into a hospital today.
    You are usually older, and I think the more mature worker can
    actually relate to many of our patients sometimes more than our
    younger workers.
        So as a consequence, our older workers serve as good
    mentors. They serve as good role models. We started to discover
    on the patient floors where we had older workers that we had
    better patient satisfaction, because they were having a
    positive influence in a mentoring role on our younger nurses.
        So as a business, we really think that we benefit, as well
    as our older workers benefit. Some of our folks, because they
    are highly skilled physicians, nurses, they tell us that they
    are at a point--and with our retirement program, they are not
    so much working for the money.What they don't want to do is
    have to work the Monday through Friday, 8 to 5, all-year grind.
    So they really want to continue to contribute to society.
        So we really believe that providing programs will help
    older workers stay in the workforce. It is a win-win for
    businesses, as well as the workers.
        I think what I would like to do is just thank you again for
    inviting me and then open up to any questions.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Bea follows:]
        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.044

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.045

        The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Bea.
        Mr. Pulliams.

      STATEMENT OF PRESTON PULLIAMS, DISTRICT PRESIDENT, PORTLAND
                    COMMUNITY COLLEGE, PORTLAND, OR

        Mr. Pulliams. Good morning to Chairman Kohl, Ranking Member
    Smith and Members of the Committee. I want to thank you for the
    opportunity to testify this morning and to talk about this
    subject of the aging workforce and its impact on business and
    economy, but also what the local community college can do in
    this situation.
        At Portland Community College, we are experiencing, in
    part, a trend or a national trend in terms of aging baby-
    boomers and pre-boomers returning to college or school, not
    simply for enrichment but also for re-training and re-
    careering.
        In a conference that we are hosting today back in Portland,
    OR, at the college, we are releasing the results of three
    studies that directly impact the subject that we are discussing
    today.
        The first is the Oregon Gray Matters, which is a study of
    the impact of the aging population on Oregon's workforce.
        The second is the AARP employer poll on workers 50-plus, a
    survey of some 400 Oregonian employers to determine how they
    are preparing for anticipated work and labor shortages.
        No. 3, Boomers Go To College, which is a survey at the
    college, by the college, of students who are 40 years of age or
    older. We believe that this last report may be the first
    detailed picture of the needs and aspirations of baby-boomers
    as they enroll in college and other lifelong learning programs
    across this country.
        What we are learning from this work is that 43 percent of
    Oregon businesses report that they very likely will face a
    shortage of qualified skilled workers in the next 5 years. But
    nearly two-thirds of them have also noted that they have taken
    little or no action regarding these projected labor shortages.
        At the same time, approximately 80 percent of Oregon's
    older workers are planning on working past traditional
    retirement years. Furthermore, four out of five older students
    enrolled at the college are not taking courses simply for
    personal enrichment but to upgrade their skills and re-enter
    the workforce or re-career.
        Given the right conditions and incentives to both older
    workers and employers, Oregon can count on this aging workforce
    to meet most of its projected workforce needs within the next
    decade.
        Whether Oregon capitalizes on this great potential will
    depend on whether the State can bring together the necessary
    range of business, civic, education, and Government actions and
    partnerships to overcome the barriers older workers experience
    in working longer.
        For example, we must work to overcome the misperception
    that many employers have about older workers. While a number of
    businesses surveyed indicate that tapping into the
    institutional knowledge of long-term employees is extremely
    important, many businesses believe that older workers are more
    costly to employ.
        However, AARP's research finds that workers over 50 make up
    for any increase in health-care costs with low turnover and a
    resulting reduction in recruitment costs, training costs and
    loss of institutional knowledge.
        To maintain a competitive edge in a tightening labor
    market, employers need to help design a workplace that attracts
    and retains workers who are eligible to retire. This may
    include flexible work schedules, enhanced training
    opportunities and competitive benefits.
        To stay competitive in a changing labor market, older
    workers require skills training and education. However, few
    have the luxury to complete a 4-year degree or perhaps even a
    2-year degree through traditional semesters and quarters.
    Juggling work, home, family and school obligations, older
    students are extremely motivated to complete their studies in a
    relatively short timeframe through alternative modalities, such
    as distance learning, to enable them to translate their
    education quickly into meaningful employment.
        Colleges can do much to support the older student by
    increasing flexibility in class scheduling and content,
    providing credit for prior work experience, expanding college
    counseling and advisement services to assist older students to
    successfully reach their goals, and developing internships and
    other workplace training programs in partnership with local
    employers in the community.
        At Portland Community College, we have developed several
    strategies to help older workers stay in the workforce.
        The first is the Older Worker Transitioning Program, where
    our college, in partnership with several businesses and
    nonprofits, have begun a program to help baby-boomers near
    retirement to plan for their future. The partnership, Work by
    Design Northwest, is built around three stages for its
    participants: discover, design and engagement.
        In discover, our participant explores his finances and
    health to set the stage for planning. In design, he uses the
    information to develop a life path. In engagement, they connect
    with educational institutions, such as our college or community
    organizations, to pursue new careers, volunteer opportunities
    and other interests.
        The second is a short-term skills training by the college
    Career Pathway Program, which has developed 17 professional
    technical offerings, most of which are appropriate for older
    workers who are no longer capable of working physically
    demanding jobs. They are delivered in a compressed schedule, so
    students can get back to the workforce quickly.
        These programs, which are eligible for WIA funding and
    support, are scheduled with the working adult in mind,
    organized in cohorts so students can provide support to each
    other, linked directly to high-demand occupations.
        The college has also developed processes to provide college
    credit for prior learning, as well as for work-based learning
    that employers might provide. Our objective is to make sure
    that all legitimate college-level learning is captured and
    leads to credentialing along the way.
        The third is helping business manage the aging boom. PCC's
    departments are anticipating or working with businesses' needs
    to manage impending boomer retirement, to customize service
    training programs for employers. The planning workshops also
    lead to customized services, such as multi-generational
    management, supervisory training, mentoring programs for older
    workers so they can transition, again, into less strenuous
    work.
        In closing, I would like to thank you again for an
    opportunity to testify this morning on behalf of the 1,200
    community colleges across this country. I sincerely appreciate
    your interest and consideration in terms of the work we do in
    our institution in addressing this issue.
        Thank you very much.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Pulliams follows:]
        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.046

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.047

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.048

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.049

        The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Pulliams.
        Senator Smith, would you like to ask some questions?
        Senator Smith. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Preston, I was struck by a comment in a survey you did--
    that some businesses were fearful that to employ seniors or an
    aging population was more expensive. How big an obstacle is
    that? I think you cited AARP to show that that actually wasn't
    the case.
        Mr. Pulliams. Yes. Again, in our surveys and in terms of
    our meetings, in terms of training programs with business and
    industry, that appears to be one of those barriers that we are
    trying to address. We are also sharing those studies around our
    district so that businesses will realize that that is, indeed,
    not the case.
        But, again, in our surveys, we are finding that that is one
    of those, I guess, stereotypical kinds of views about this
    particular part of the population, but it is, indeed, not the
    case.
        Senator Smith. Do you think that businesses in Oregon have
    a sense of the labor issue and the resource that PCC is for
    them for finding qualified seniors who still want to work?
        Mr. Pulliams. Well, in terms of my experience there in the
    last 3 years, when I arrived in this position, I have had now
    many conversations with local business and industry leaders,
    managers and CEOs, and they are becoming very aware of this
    problem. As a matter of fact, in my conversations with them,
    this tends to be the number-one issue now.
        So as I get more familiar with the business and industry
    leaders in the community, they are beginning now to call me. At
    first, I was trying to knock on their doors and get
    appointments with them. In the last year, this has been really
    an issue that they are contacting me and working very closely
    in terms of these programs.
        Senator Smith. I was going to ask that. So you find a
    receptive audience and an improving audience in terms of
    employers in Oregon who are looking to you as a resource.
        Mr. Pulliams. I certainly do, Senator. Times are changing.
        Senator Smith. What kinds of businesses are you finding
    most often that you are doing business with, who come to you?
    Is there a category? Is it high-technology? Is it food service?
    Can you categorize it at this point?
        Mr. Pulliams. Usually, in areas of high-skilled areas,
    particularly technology industries, recently a lot of contact
    with health-care facilities, as was testified earlier by the
    gentleman to my right; also the construction industry,
    welding--those areas where you have the boomer generation now
    retiring and moving out of. Now employers are recognizing these
    potential shortages, and they are now contacting us.
        There is also an attraction for trained employees of color,
    because of our large enrollment of non-traditional and students
    of color in the community college sector.
        Senator Smith. Do you find that businesses are responsive
    to what Mr. Bea indicated has helped Mercy, and that is having
    flextime schedules, so that they can get seniors if they can
    provide them the kind of work schedule that still lets them
    enjoy some aspects of retirement age?
        Mr. Pulliams. I am finding that also to be the case in the
    Portland area, particularly in a number of the large health-
    care systems in our district, the realization that we simply
    have to do business differently.
        I am also facing the same situation as a large employer in
    the area in terms of shared job responsibilities, flexible
    schedules and the willingness to be non-traditional in terms of
    how we look at employees from the past.
        Senator Smith. Thank you very much, Preston.
        Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that businesses are going to
    learn the message ahead of time that they have to get creative
    in employment and how they schedule people, because the work
    pool is going to be older in the future.
        The Chairman. Thank you so much, Senator Smith.
        Marcie, Mr. Walker's forum participants said that the
    Federal Government should help create new models of employment
    for older Americans through specific legislation, for example,
    offering employers tax credits as a way to motivate employers
    to hire older workers.
        I would assume you believe that we are not going to tackle
    this problem effectively without a panoply of Government
    legislation to change the culture.
        Ms. Pitt-Catsouphes. When we talk to employers, we often
    help them think about the kinds of changes that they need to
    implement as kind of a four-step model, and I think this may
    help answer your question.
        The first huge hurdle we have to get across is awareness.
    You have heard several people testify this morning that
    although, on the one hand, employers understand the labor force
    is different and there may be occupational shortages, on the
    other hand, since it is not in front of them necessarily this
    year or this quarter, they may not be taking action steps. So I
    think that the first hurdle for us to get over is an issue of
    awareness.
        The second one that they always go through is an alignment
    with their key business strategies, and I will come back to
    that in a minute.
        The third thing, of course, is some kind of adaptive
    action, and we have talked a lot about flexible work options
    and what helps to stimulate and motivate them.
        The last piece of that is for them to assess their impact.
        I think strategies such as tax incentives are very, very
    helpful in the first two steps. It gets the attention of
    employers who might, in fact, not yet be paying attention.
        There are many employers--I am interested in terms of the
    projected retirement rates at Mercy. Last week I was at a
    conference of about 400 employers, and when we asked people
    what they expected in retirement rates, we were getting
    retirement rates of anywhere from a third to 60 percent. When
    you ask them what they are doing about it, very few of them
    indicate they are taking many steps.
        I think that, on the one hand, they have an awareness, but
    that awareness has not become so acute that they are doing
    anything. I think measures such as tax incentives get their
    attention.
        I think the second thing, when you talk about alignment
    with key business strategies, one of the first things, of
    course, that employers ask about is how that may impact some
    kind of a business case. Thought leadership is important, and,
    again, I think it gets their attention.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Javon, you seem to have been particularly effective in
    tailoring incentives for people to stay on in the particular
    business that you are operating. Is it true that there are
    general things, but there are also particular things a business
    can do, depending upon the business that they are in?
        Mr. Bea. Yes, definitely, Chairman Kohl. I think that what
    we have found is that turnover is expensive, you know,
    recruiting, training new people. So, the longer that we can
    keep our workers that are skilled--and unskilled even--in the
    workforce, we think that the resources that we expend, the
    expenses that we incur to keep our older workers in the
    workforce is offset by the savings that we have through longer
    retention.
        One other key statistic is that one-third of the current
    Nation's 750,000 physicians that are post-residency physicians
    are over age 55 and are projected to be retiring when the baby-
    boom generation is at the time of their greatest medical need.
        So, as Marcie alluded earlier, health care is especially
    facing a growing labor shortage of both skilled and unskilled
    workers, and we just decided that we needed to start now at
    putting in programs.
        Really, what it took was the commitment, the desire, to
    change our scheduling mechanisms, to change our way of doing
    business, to adapt to people who wanted to be able to take a
    season of the year off or work certain days or take an extended
    vacation. We felt that that was wiser on our part to do than
    just to find ourselves in shortages.
        Many hospitals today are closing units, entire nursing
    units, because they have nursing shortages. As I mentioned
    earlier, 75 percent of all the health-care worker shortage,
    168,000, are nurses.
        So we realized, with 63 facilities, that we needed to begin
    taking measures now, not to speak of the fact that we felt
    since the senior senator from Wisconsin is Chairman of the
    Committee on Aging, we had better step it up a notch, too, you
    know. [Laughter.]
        The Chairman. Thanks a lot.
        Preston, any comments you wish to make about this paradox,
    that while so many companies do realize that they are going to
    face a shortage of qualified workers, so few of them seem to be
    responding in a way that anticipates the problem that they are
    going to be facing in just a few short years? What are your
    thoughts about this paradox?
        Mr. Pulliams. What I am seeing in terms of our area in
    Portland, OR, is that they are really quickly beginning to
    realize that there is not a pipeline of younger workers or
    trained workers to fill those who exit in retirement and
    whatever. As that hits them, that is when they call my office
    and want to know what can the community college do.
        Also, there seems to be an increase in terms of
    partnerships now, in terms of business and industry being
    willing to work with us at the community college, in terms of
    joint programs, where they can work with us to help recruit
    perhaps skilled workers or to help counsel those who are
    retiring to perhaps come back as a part-time worker in the same
    industry. So it is changing, as was reported earlier by the
    first panel.
        The numbers are really revealing the shortage, and people
    are really grabbing onto this reality, and they are getting
    quite creative in terms of how they are addressing this. But it
    continues to be a struggle in terms of people being aware and
    of what they can do and how they can react.
        The Chairman. Thank you very much, Preston.
        Senator Casey.
        Senator Casey. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much again for
    our second panel here and this great information.
        One organizing or unifying subject in all of your
    testimony, one way or the other, that I have noticed is health
    care. I want to focus on that for a couple of moments.
        Doctor, I appreciate the work that you have done at Boston
    College, and I say that as a graduate of Holy Cross, long time
    ago rivals. But your school passed us a long time ago, so we
    are not even in the same league, athletically. I hope we are in
    the same league, academically.
        But, in particular, when you were trying to summarize your
    testimony--and I know you read or summarized this part of it,
    and I am not sure what page this is, but you said, ``Specific
    industry sectors such as health care may be particularly
    vulnerable to labor force replacement needs anticipated for
    specific occupations.'' Then you had examples, which I don't
    think you got to because of the limited time.
        Your paper says, ``Ten of the 20 fastest growing
    occupations are concentrated in health services. These
    positions include medical assistants, 59 percent growth;
    physicians' assistants, 49 percent growth; home health aides,
    48 percent growth; medical records and health information
    technicians, 47 percent growth.'' I am struck by that, because
    in our State--as I mentioned before, Pennsylvania has the
    second-highest population over 65. Our fastest-growing
    population, literally, is 85 and up. I know that Wisconsin and
    Oregon and other States are facing similar challenges.
        But in my work in State Government, we spent a good deal of
    time on long-term care issues and, in particular, this real
    urgent need for health-care workers, from the lower-skilled
    positions to the higher-skilled positions.
        I really believe that people that do this work are not only
    essential for our future in terms of the services they provide
    and the skilled care they provide, but I think they provide a
    kind of ministry that is so critical to the fabric of America.
        I know from my own experience--my father was in a hospital,
    several, in the last months of his life--last couple of years,
    actually, of his life. I knew that even what is considered a
    low-skilled worker in the scheme of skills or the range of
    skills--a nursing assistant who comes in to a bed and takes
    someone who, in his case, could not move from one side to the
    other, had to have the pad underneath his body folded the right
    way, and the tiniest little person could do that because she
    had skill. I remember my family, that might have been bigger
    than she was, couldn't do it because we didn't have that skill.
    So I reflect upon that in a very personal way.
        Tell us more about that, though, the urgency of making sure
    that those health-care jobs are filled and how grave the
    challenge is.
        Ms. Pitt-Catsouphes. Well, thank you, Senator. I appreciate
    the question.
        The health-care industry is important for us to look at for
    several reasons. When we anticipate or look at the projections
    around labor force shortages or, specifically, occupational
    replacement needs, the health-care industry is fascinating, in
    part because of course it is such a critical need for our
    country, as you pointed out.
        The second thing, which we have been focused on today, is
    that it happens to be one of those industries with several
    occupations that are so-called ``aging out.'' The third thing,
    which is equally interesting, and this has been for a while in
    certain health-care occupations, is that they have had to think
    of very creative ways of attracting new and, in many cases,
    younger workers into the so-called pipeline. So, in that sense,
    they have more experience than a lot of other industries.
        When you have this kind of double-whammy effect, you have
    an aging workforce on the one hand, but you have occupations
    that may not be attracting as many younger workers, so, as a
    consequence, all those things are happening.
        But the health-care industry is also interesting, because,
    of course, the aging of our population means there is going to
    be a higher demand.
        So, when you have all of those factors simultaneously,
    that, in fact, is one of the reasons, in addition to some good
    thought leadership, that the health-care industry is out front
    in this arena.
        Our conversations with employers would suggest that there
    are other industries that are also in similar situations but,
    of course, different occupations: for example, retail. If you
    look at the anticipated expansion of that, they have similar
    pressures as health care.
        You know, much like my colleague just commented on,
    retailers are also beginning to say that they are finding that
    customer service relations, in fact, can be improved when the
    experienced workers not only are dealing directly with
    customers but sort of modeling very positive behavior for their
    younger colleagues.
        So I think that you are exactly right, that although the
    conversations understandably turn to industry sector, that,
    really, where the pinch is felt, and that is where employers
    are paying a lot of attention, is in specific occupations.
        Thank you.
        Senator Casey. Thank you.
        I have to run, but I do want to say to both of your
    colleagues that the work that you are doing in the context of a
    community college and in the context of a health-care facility
    and institution is critically important. We appreciate that. We
    appreciate the fact that we can find and identify models that
    are working.
        I want to see how we are doing in Pennsylvania in the
    context of both of your contributions. But we appreciate the
    good examples you provide.
        Mr. Pulliams. Thank you, sir.
        Mr. Bea. Thank you.
        The Chairman. Thank you so much, Senator Casey.
        In bringing this hearing to a conclusion, I think between
    yourselves, the three of you, and the two people who testified
    before you, plus the questions and the responses that we got,
    there is a keen, keen awareness of the problem that we are
    facing.
        There are a multiplicity of recommendations that have been
    made today that probably would give us a tremendous ability to
    impact this whole problem we are facing successfully, just on
    the basis of what we have heard today, what we have said today
    and the things that we have discussed today.
        Of course, the problem, the difficulty, the challenge is to
    get the things we have discussed out there in policy, in
    position, in taxes, in reform, in legislation--not an
    unawareness of the problem or not an unawareness of what needs
    to be done, but getting it done. I mean, that is really what we
    are facing.
        I think what you have brought here by way of your
    experience, your thoughts and your recommendations really adds
    an awful lot to our understanding of the problem that we face,
    to its importance and to the solutions that we need to seek and
    find and put in place.
        So I thank you. We all thank you for journeying here to
    Washington today and for testifying in front of this Committee,
    and you have made a real contribution.
        With that, the hearing is closed.
        [Whereupon, at 12:05 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
                                A P P E N D I X

                                  ----------

                  Prepared Statement of Senator Larry E. Craig

        Chairman Kohl, I want to thank you for holding a hearing on
    this important topic. I know you are well aware of the enormous
    changes the retirement of the baby boom generation will have on
    our nation.
        We face several challenges when it comes to responding to
    our Aging workforce in a manner that is beneficial and
    practical for both baby boomers and the business community.
    Some of these challenges include concerns about the costs of
    retaining older workers or negative stereotypes about older
    Americans. Fortunately, implementing policies that will benefit
    Aging workers and benefit businesses are not mutually
    exclusive.
        As many of the witnesses today have noted, there are
    numerous reasons why older workers will benefit from staying in
    the workforce past traditional retirement age. I wanted to take
    a moment to highlight the fact that many older workers remain
    in the workforce, not simply because of financial concerns, but
    for their overall health. Several studies have shown that
    having a social network and being intellectually challenged are
    incredibly beneficial for the mental and physical health of
    older Americans. The statistics indicate that that more
    Americans are beginning to realize that. In the past 10 years,
    the percentage of men and women aged 62 and older who are paid
    employees has increased.
        However, this message has not reached all Americans who are
    facing retirement. While we should not try to force individuals
    to stay in the workforce, it is important that work place
    options are available to allow older Americans to reap the
    benefits of remaining in the workforce.
        Fortunately, businesses will also benefit from retaining
    older workers. Older workers provide invaluable institutional
    knowledge and save businesses on recruitment and training
    costs. There are negative perceptions out there about older
    workers, but some companies are already proving that older
    workers have a lot to offer.
        I am pleased that Javon Bea of Mercy Health System is here
    today to talk about their experience with older workers. If I
    may, I would like to point out what I feel is a particularly
    significant observation that Javon Bea made in his testimony.
    He noted that the older older workers in the Mercy Health
    System are ``no longer working as much for the money as they
    are working to make a contribution to society.'' This is yet
    another compelling argument for older workers. It is an
    opportunity to have employees who are personally invested in
    the work they are doing.
        Mercy Health System has provided an excellent example of
    how businesses, and older Americans, can benefit from remaining
    in the workforce. Now our goal has to be to encourage other
    businesses to follow Mercy's example.
        Finally, I just want to say that I am proud to join
    Senators Kohl and Lincoln in cosponsoring the Older Worker
    Opportunity Act. This bill will provide tax incentives for
    businesses to create flexible work programs in order to retain
    older workers. I am confident that these kind of incentives
    will go a long way in reducing the negative impact that
    retiring workers will have on our nation's economy. Given our
    evolving workforce and economy we must continue to reexamine
    our definition of retirement. Even the United State Senate,
    where the average age of a Senator is 60, can provide an
    example of Americans working past retirement age.
        Again, Chairman Kohl, thank you for calling this hearing
    and I look forward to hearing from our witnesses.
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.050

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.051

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.052

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.053

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.054

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.055

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.056

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.057

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.058

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.059

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.060

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.061

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.062

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.063

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.064

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.065

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.066

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.067

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.068

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.069

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.070

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.071

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.072

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.073

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.074

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.075

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.076

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.077

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.078

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.079

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.080

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.081

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.082

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.083

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.084

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.085

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.086

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.087

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.088

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.089

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.090

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.091

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.092

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.093

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.094

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.095

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.096

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.097

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.098

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.099

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.100

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.101

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.102

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.103

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.104

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.105

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.106

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.107

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.108

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.109

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.110

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.111

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.112

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.113

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.114

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.115

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.116

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.117

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.118

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.119

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.120

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.121

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.122

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.123

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.124

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.125

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.126

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.127

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.128

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.129

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.130

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.131

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.132

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.133

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.134

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.135

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.136

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.137

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.138

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.139

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.140

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.141

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.142

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.143

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.144

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.145

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.146

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.147

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.148

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.149

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.150

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.151

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.152

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.153

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.154

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.155

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.156

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.157

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.158

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.159

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.160

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.161

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.162

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.163

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.164

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.165

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 35956.166