For much of the last century, retirement was a clearly defined stage of life. Most workers were expected to retire around 65, supported by a combination of pensions, savings, and government benefits. This was not only seen as a reward for decades of labour but also as a social and economic necessity to make room for the next generation.
Yet in 2025, this model of retirement is rapidly eroding. Economic realities, demographic shifts, cultural changes and indeed a larger digital economy which facilitates longer careers, are all forcing society to rethink the whole concept of retirement.
Over the last 100 years, life expectancy has risen dramatically – by close to 30 years for the average Australian. Where retirement at 65 once meant a few years of rest and relaxation, today most Australians can expect to live another 20 to 30 years. That longer horizon places unprecedented strain on superannuation balances, which are by no means full career for most current retirees and of course, a means tested, aged pension. For many, retiring at 65 is simply unaffordable.
Continuing to work, whether full-time, part-time, or in portfolio careers, has become less about choice and more about sustainability.
At the same time, our economy is grappling with role and skills shortages. Older workers have decades of knowledge and experience that are increasingly critical to organisations facing gaps in leadership and technical expertise. However, ‘older’ jobseekers are being advised to hide their age and only refer to the last 5 years’ experience in their resumes to limit age discrimination when seeking a new role.
A new survey of US employees by Resume Now shows that nearly nine in ten workers aged 50+ report experiencing some form of age discrimination at work, a figure that highlights just how entrenched age bias has become in workplaces. AgeInc’s Voice of Experience data shows 53% of Australian’s experiencing age discrimination whilst looking for a new job and 21% experiencing age discrimination from their current employer.
From being overlooked for promotions and training, to being excluded from challenging projects or job shortlists, many older workers find their skills and experience undervalued simply because of their age. This not only undermines their confidence and career prospects but also deprives businesses of critical expertise at a time of global skills shortages. Such widespread discrimination should make tackling ageism a pressing economic and social priority.
‘Ageism remains one of the most pervasively accepted types of occupational discrimination, requiring both cultural and legal activism to create significant policy changes.’
However, Jobseeker’s comments on Glassdoor mentioning age discrimination increased by 133% during the first quarter of 2025 and employers seem to be stubbornly refusing to include age as a DEI or ESG concern, with PwC reporting that only 8% of employers include age in their DEI strategies.
However, for organisations that do focus on age inclusivity and include age as a diversity pillar, there are huge benefits to be had, which will only increase as our population continues to age. So why isn’t age a more prevalent consideration amongst Australian DEI practitioners?
DEI initiatives were designed to close opportunity gaps for historically marginalised groups, particularly, in Australia, in relation to gender, first nations, and sexuality, reflecting decades of systemic inequity. Ageism is only now gaining greater visibility as people live longer and increasingly want, and need, to extend their working lives. Legal action related to age discrimination is rising, (up 645% in the UK and 2023 saw the first successful Federal case in Australia) yet cultural awareness has not kept pace with the demographic reality or the decline of retirement as an economic norm. As a result, many older workers are pressured, or expected, to exit the workforce earlier than they would like and/or are less able to secure a new role as they are seen to be less valuable than younger jobseekers.
This raises the challenge for DEI practitioners as to whether they should concentrate resources on the ‘traditional’ areas of focus or broaden consideration to address age inclusivity as well.
For years now, affirmative action and DEI programs have sought to make workplaces more equitable for women and people from different ethnic backgrounds and while progress has been made, disparities persist. Women continue to earn significantly less than men and while progress has been achieved in closing the gender pay gap, we have not achieved gender equity in the workplace. However, these ongoing issues should not stop us from including age within a DEI lens, especially given that 37% of the Australian population will be aged over 50 by 2030.
The decline of retirement as an economic norm carries profound implications for employees, employers and indeed, society. Superannuation and aged pension systems must evolve. Recruitment practices must become more age inclusive. Organisations must embrace multigenerational workforces as the new standard, not the exception. And for individuals, planning for later life now means planning for multiple stages of work and ongoing contribution, not just the traditional end date.
In short, retirement, as the silent generation knew it, is over.
What comes next will be different, but represents a genuine opportunity to build economies and workplaces that harness the full potential of longer lives, creating ongoing contribution and value not just for individuals, but for society as a whole.
Comments