Introduction
The United States is a leading figure in the industrialized world. Its prowess in industrial works – dating back from the time of the industrial revolution, has fostered the growth of several relevant industries, including construction. The construction industry, as with all other industrial endeavors, is one that is physically demanding – there is no such exception in the case of the US. People under said industry – from construction workers up to the higher figures in the hierarchy, toil on designated working days to build structures that are of the highest possible quality. The essence of their hard work lies on the premise that houses, buildings and all other forms of infrastructure have to be highly suitable to support human usage and safety. Thus, physical work in the construction industry tend to be highly demanding – an issue that receives constant issues and feedback from within the industry and concerned observers alike.
Among those who work within the construction industry, the aging workers are the ones whose welfare tends to be more fragile. Sheer commonsense would indicate that aging workers have physical characteristics that are more fragile compared to their younger counterparts. Time and constant physical exposure have eroded much of the ability of aging workers to move in line with the demands of the construction industry, but their experience in the field is nevertheless essential for the integrity of particular projects. While all construction workers would inevitably pass through their respective retirement stages, they will definitely arrive at a point when all of them would experience signs of weakness. In addition, the physical rigors of working in the construction industry discounts the notion that old age is the only physical circumstance that would compel construction workers to retire. While aging workers are understandably frailer compared to younger ones, all those working in the frontlines of the construction industry face the possibility of retiring early on in their careers. Encompassing the preceding factors, this study would tackle the different issues pertaining to retirement in the construction industry of the United States (US). The construction industry is a field in which I have endeavored to enhance my professional experience, hence the reason for its perusal in this study, which tackles retirement.
Retirement, Defined
For any contracted or tenure worker in any industry to retire naturally, he should exceed the maximum age allowable by law. Such is the general notion of retirement from employment – a person has to reach the so-called retirement age specified by labor laws in order for him to become eligible for retirement. An employee that reaches retirement age is subject to legally defined benefits, the most prominent being pension from accrued social security contributions. Yet, in terms of the construction industry, retirement finds common attribution to instances in which a worker has to stop working prematurely due to adverse physical effects resulting from his job. In other words, retirement in construction industry has something to do with injuries, diseases and disabilities subsequent to the physically demanding and rigorous nature of construction-related jobs. The use of mechanical machinery and exertion of physical force in given working days are, by no means, easy all throughout. Such activities could truly make construction workers submit to exhaustion. If workers defy their exhaustion in favor of finishing construction tasks within provided schedules, they force themselves towards unwanted circumstances such as stress, work-related accidents, diseases due to chemical exposure and the like. Such contribute to premature retirement of workers, as contextualized in this study (Welch, 2010).
Characteristics of Construction Workers in the US
Before proceeding to discussions on retirement in the US construction industry, it is best to lay out first some crucial characteristics. Firstly, the US considers people who reached 65 years of age as those eligible to retire from old age, although they still have the choice to go on practicing their employment (Choi, 2009). Statistics from The Sloan Center for Aging and Work at Boston College dating to 2009 show that around 40% of said industry constitutes workers between the 25-39 years old age bracket. A further 36% are between 40-54 years old. Aging employees, in contrast, amount only up to 11.5% (55-64) and 1.4% (above 65 years old). The same figures have revealed that men dominate the industry at 89.9% - a significant amount compared to females at 10.1% (Sweet & Pitt-Catsouphes, 2010). Levy (2007) foresaw the year 2011 as the retirement period of the first wave of baby boomers – those who were born between 1946 and 1964. The stated figures reflect that young males populate the majority of the US construction industry – one that stands as a necessity due to the physically demanding nature of the jobs therein.
Emphasizing on Premature Retirement
The fact that a large majority of young male people constitute the US construction industry implies that retirement does not happen only to workers who have reached the age of 65. The physical demands and the hazardous environment of the construction industry bring forth the issue on premature retirement. The notion that premature retirement is a risk faced by workers in the construction industry has statistical foundations to reckon. In fact, many workers belonging to the 25-34 and 35-44 age brackets figured high fatal injury rates ranging from 20-30% in the year 2001. Many of the causes of premature retirement include medical reasons such as injuries and health problems (Choi, 2009). Noise exposure is one problem in the construction industry associated with early retirement, with a hypothesized rate of 40% of operating engineers foreseen as potential victims of hearing loss due to 4-6 kHz sounds (Hong, 2005). The discovery that a majority of retirees are above 65 years old (43%) is an expected finding given the customary retirement age, although it is notable that 25% are below 50 years old (Choi, 2009).
The assertion that retirement in the US construction industry does not only happen to workers that have approached the accepted retirement age of 65 years old proves that old age is not the only reason for retirement. However, a close examination of the findings would further emphasize the fact that construction is a dangerous industry to tread in, much more with the data coming from the US – a world industrial leader that has fully developed mechanisms. The data sufficiently proves that further action should benefit the welfare of construction workers – all of which are at risk of suffering premature retirement.
Resolving Premature Retirement
Why Do Young Construction Workers Retire Prematurely?
There is a general understanding that providing a complete solution to the premature retirement problem in the US construction industry would be a farfetched idea in itself. The highly physical nature of construction alone makes up for the reason why several workers get injured, exhausted or sick with certain diseases related to the work they are doing, and sizable statistical figures have proven such. To prevent the rise of premature retirement among young workers (as stated in the previous portions, 25% of retirees are below 50 years old), industry figureheads and workers alike should have specific actions to follow.
Verily, two major factors constituting the physical productivity of construction workers constitute prospects for retirement. Quality of life pertains to age and the associated health status while work ability gauges the capacity of a worker to execute work. There is a clear understanding that the older the worker is, the lower his quality of life and work ability; hence, people aged 65 have the prospect of customary retirement with subsequent pensions and other benefits. The infliction of physical stress brought forth by construction work could severely affect a person’s work ability in relation to his quality of life. In that aspect alone, construction workers face great risks (Welch, 2010).
Injuries are crucial in understanding why a sizeable percentage of young workers (that is, those who are not yet nearing 65 years of age) have prematurely retired from the construction industry. Accidents such as falls from the ladder, hits from falling debris, and lapses in electrical work happen to young construction workers because they are perceived as being carefree (due to relative lack of responsibilities to their families), inattentive, overestimating and reckless, among others. Other young construction workers have encountered painful mistakes in handling tools, especially when they release too much effort in using hammers and other impact apparatuses. Some have met injuries from carrying too much weight, particularly in transporting materials. While some met accidents through loss of balance, there is an established finding that such tends to happen to older workers (Choi, 2009).
Indeed, there is no other solution to turning back the time to increase the quality of life of any person. Age is irreversible and it is truly inevitable for everyone to grow weaker upon getting older. Notwithstanding the race against age, there is still hope in the form of improving the work ability of construction workers, as extraneous factors characterized by the taxing environment of the construction area serve it with significant effects. Maintaining the work ability of workers will enable them to avoid early retirement.
Maintaining Work Ability
Job Accommodation. A busy atmosphere and an uncomfortable environment usually come to mind in characterizing construction areas. Workers thrive under demanding settings such as when they have to carry heavy equipment and materials, breathe dust-filled air and sometimes walk around extremely humid or hot areas, depending on the weather. It would be harmful for construction workers to remain in such kind of environment. The physical stress that they have to suffer almost every day in their lives renders them the right to attain complete rest from exhaustion. For that, the employers are highly responsible for maintaining the well-being of their construction workers, and one way in which they could do so is to provide them with sound accommodation places. Construction workers need to relax occasionally so that they would not experience burnt-out situations from what they regularly do. A neat lounge, economical yet clean sleeping areas and pristine washing areas are just some of the amenities construction workers need in order to for them to feel energized for work. The quick mobility of construction sites is not an excuse for construction employers to deny their workers with such amenities, for there are available alternatives suitable for such (Welch, 2010).
Reduction of Physical Burdens. While the foregoing statements have suggested that it is inevitable for construction workers to experience physical pain and pressure during work, it does not mean to say that alleviating their burden is impossible. To accomplish such, much emphasis should lie on ergonomic considerations, for the physical demands of construction entail workers moving and positioning themselves in potentially uncomfortable arrangements – all for the sake of getting their job done. Promoting ergonomics require reforms in work culture. Daily exercise regimens and constant safety reminders are some examples suitable for raising awareness on the importance of ergonomics. Construction company managements should introduce ways on keeping construction workers mobile and not just stationary on one position the whole day in order for them to avoid unwanted muscle strains. At the same time, it is important to identify the different challenging situations workers might encounter related to their ergonomic concerns. Countering those with the proper remedies would be an ideal move, if managements optimally understand those problems. In that way, managements would be able to practice their prerogative to value their workers’ health and safety. At the same time, managements will have better chances of avoiding undesirable costs on their end resulting from injuries or deaths of any of their workers (Welch, 2010).
Increasing Safety Measures. Both the construction company management and workers will benefit from stronger safety measures implemented within construction areas. Representatives from the management would not face liabilities arising from worker-related accidents and workers could avoid incurring injuries or gain risks that could lead to greater peril. A safety-oriented management of the construction area would raise the premium of the construction company on the workers, in that they will gain the reputation as a company that practices responsibility to everyone working under them. At the same time, the construction company would be able to abide by particular regulations if it raises safety standards. Promoting safety would involve both infrastructural and worker-related aspects. Introducing improvements to the construction area infrastructure could greatly benefit from workers who know how to act within the area in the safest manner. Setting benchmarks for safety evaluation could help improve safety standards as well (Welch, 2010).
Promoting Good Health. Promoting good health is another method that could produce a win-win situation for both the management and the construction workers. If workers learn how to maintain themselves in the pink of health, they would be able to work properly under pressing conditions provided by construction works. Managements that initiate health-friendly programs could benefit the cause of raising productivity of their workers. They do not have to worry much about work efficiency, for healthy employees could work on construction projects properly and even in a shorter span of time. Managements are entitled to keep their employees fit by enabling them to avoid hazardous vices such as excessive cigarette smoking and alcohol drinking. Through that, they could also free themselves from aggravating circumstances to their health (Welch, 2010).
Synthesis
Retirement in the US construction industry, perhaps as with other nations as well, have two important tiers based on the preceding discussions – retirement for people who have reached 65 years old and premature retirement. Construction workers 65 years old and above already have lower levels of quality of life and Premature retirement, on the other hand, is prominent in the construction industry because of the physically demanding task the latter involves, which could result to workers experiencing physical pain, incurring diseases and injuries, which could become fatal if left untreated. It is thus important to come up with measures that would mitigate instances of premature retirement by introducing measures favorable to the well-being of construction workers. In that way, construction company managements could maximize their work force resources without having to worry about costly incidents such as accidents or deaths. For the part of construction workers, they could preserve their human capital by avoiding any instances that could disable them from working or endanger their lives. Overall, lesser premature retirements could strengthen the growth of the US construction industry and it could project a positive image of itself depicting concern for safety and health to the public.
Conclusion
Retirement in the US construction industry has high relevance on the maintenance of safety and health standards of construction workers – those approaching retirement and the young ones alike. It is best to think of said industry as one that requires extra care in terms of protecting the welfare of all construction workers. While there are no qualms on the retirement age of 65 years old for US construction workers, the fact that there is a sizeable percentage of premature retirement among younger workers is a worrying sign for the industry – one that has an impact to both the industry’s reputation and productivity. It is important for all stakeholders in the US construction industry to work together for mitigating said problem through the introduction of measures promoting better standards of safety and health for construction workers.
References
Choi, S. (2009). Safety and ergonomic considerations for an aging workforce in the US construction industry. Work: A Journal of Prevention, Assessment and Rehabilitation, 33(3), 307-315.
Hong, O. (2005). Hearing loss among operating engineers in American construction industry. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, 78(7), 565-574.
Levy, S. (2007). Project management in construction, 5th ed. New York City, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Sweet, S., & Pitt-Catsouphes, M. (2010). Talent pressures and the aging workforce: Responsive action steps for the construction sector. Boston, MA: The Sloan Center for Aging and Work at Boston College.
Welch, L. (2010, March 1). The aging worker in the U.S. construction industry: Reducing the physical demands on all workers in construction is essential. Occupational Health & Safety. Retrieved from http://ohsonline.com/articles/2010/03/01/the-aging-worker.aspx
