At 91 years old, Alf Dubs has two key criteria for deciding whether to continue serving as a Labour peer in the UK’s House of Lords. First, he considers his ability to contribute, especially on refugee issues—a subject he's well-versed in, having fled Czechoslovakia on the Kindertransport to Britain in 1939. Second, he relies on the judgment of his family and colleagues regarding his mental fitness. Dubs has explicitly asked them to tell him if they see any signs of cognitive decline, as he does not wish to end up like some elderly peers he's observed, who appear lost in the House of Lords.
The new Labour government plans to mandate that peers retire at the end of the parliament during which they turn 80. Dubs, however, does not oppose this measure. In fact, he supports more radical reforms, such as abolishing hereditary peers and moving towards an elected second chamber. He emphasizes that age can be a "very blunt instrument," and that tenure might serve as a more appropriate measure of someone’s capacity to contribute, noting that peers like Neil Kinnock (82) and Michael Heseltine (91) continue to offer valuable input.
In the US, the debate over whether individuals can be too elderly for significant jobs has intensified, especially after an assassination attempt on Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump. Questions about President Joe Biden’s suitability for a second term at 81 have been exacerbated by his public gaffes, like mistakenly calling Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy “President Putin” at a recent NATO summit. The discussion touches on broader generational issues, including concerns that older generations are monopolizing jobs and resources.
Globally, Pew Research found the median age of national leaders to be 62, with most leaders in their 60s. A smaller percentage of leaders fall into other age brackets, and only a minority, like Biden and Trump, are in their late 70s or 80s.
As life expectancy increases and pension ages rise, more people will find themselves working longer. This trend is driven by declining fertility rates, which are causing companies to compete for fewer younger workers and, consequently, to rely more on older employees. However, overcoming ageism remains crucial. Although advancements in medicine have extended life expectancy, businesses have been slow to adjust. Labor economist John Coleman experienced this firsthand when he lost several blue-collar jobs during his research, leaving him feeling demoralized at 51.
Emily Andrews from the Centre for Ageing Better argues that the focus should be on whether people can perform their jobs, not just their age. Andrew Scott, author of "The Longevity Imperative," agrees, highlighting the need for cognitive and fitness evaluations based on role requirements rather than age alone. Institutions must adapt to balance innovation with inclusivity, providing opportunities for all age groups. After all, as Scott puts it, this isn't about special treatment for the elderly—everyone ages eventually.