Workforce

Workforce » Summary

Why It's Important

The impact of aging Boomers is twofold. First, as Boomers age, many will retire, leaving the workforce in great numbers. Second, those who do stay in the workforce will create new challenges for themselves and their employers, as the needs of older workers will become an increasingly important issue.

See Data By: Richmond MSA | Virginia | National

How Richmond Is Doing

Three in five employers are doing something to address the impending retirement of a large number of workers; two in five are doing something today to address the issue of accommodating older workers. (ODP EMPLOYER 2008)

Accommodating Older Workers (ODP Employer, 2008)
Business leaders say organization is ...	Doing Now	Planning to Do	Not Doing and No Plans
Addressing impending retirement of large number of workers	61%	11%	28%
Accommodating older workers in workforce	43%	28%	29%

(ODP BUSINESS LEADER, 2008)

About half (47%) of employers suggest they are prepared to accommodate older workers, but very few (12%) say they are very prepared. There are currently no measurable indicators of productivity among older workers available. (ODP BUSINESS LEADER, 2008)
Two in five employers say the aging workforce is a serious issue for their organization (ODP BUSINESS LEADER, 2008)

Two in five say the aging workforce is a serious issue for their organization

How Virginia Is Doing

Boomers as a percentage of total population and of total labor force (Richmond MSA and Virginia)

(CENSUS BUREAU, ACS 2007)

Three in four Boomers are currently in the labor force in the Richmond MSA and in Virginia (CENSUS BUREAU, ACS 2007)
Only one in ten Virginians over age 65 are currently in the labor force (11%) -- the percent is higher -- 1 in 7 (15%) -- in Richmond (CENSUS BUREAU, ACS 2007)
Boomers comprise 26 percent of the population but 37 percent of the labor force in Virginia (CENSUS BUREAU, ACS 2007)

How the U.S. Is Doing

The findings from the 2007 AHCA survey of nursing position vacancy and turnover in nursing facilities indicate that America's nursing facilities continue to experience difficulties in recruitment and retention of nursing staff. America's nursing facilities have been facing a chronic direct-care workforce shortage for more than a decade. Staff turnover continued to be high in 2007 and the large number of vacancies and the high level of turnover among CNAs continue to be a particular concern to nursing facilities as CNAs are responsible for much of the direct, hands-on resident care. (AHCA SURVEY, 2007)

In 2007, nearly 109,900 full-time equivalent (FTE) health care personnel were needed to fill vacant nursing positions at nursing facilities across the United States (AHCA SURVEY, 2007)

Vacancy rates in nursing facilities were particularly high among Staff RNs (16%) and among LPNs (11%). Vacancy rates for CNAs and Administrative RNs stood at 9.5 and above 10 percent, respectively. Vacancy rates for DONs were about 4 percent, which compares to about 7 percent of vacancies for nursing home administrator positions in 2007. (AHCA SURVEY, 2007)

National Vacancy Rates in Nursing Facilities, 2007

(AHCA SURVEY, 2007)

A comparison of hospital-based and freestanding nursing facilities in urban and rural locations shows that, with the exception of CNAs and DONs, rural hospital-based facilities have the lowest vacancy rate. Conversely, urban hospital-based facilities generally had the highest vacancy rates. (AHCA SURVEY, 2007)
Staff turnover continued to be high in 2007. Annual turnover for Staff RNs, LPNs and DONs stood at about 38 to 50 percent across all three positions. Although turnover among Administrative RNs was only about 29 percent, turnover among CNAs remained very high. Nationally, CNA turnover was estimated at 66 percent in 2007. (AHCA SURVEY, 2007)

National Turnover Rates in Nursing Facilities, 2007

(AHCA SURVEY, 2007)

According to the article titled, “Retirement age declines again in 1990s”, from the Monthly Labor Review: Between 1950-1955 the expected years of retirement for men was 12.0 years, and the expected retirement for woman was 13.6 years. Between the years 1995-2000, the expected years of retirement for men is 18.0 years, where the expected years of retirement for women is 21.7 years.

Table 2. Change in Median Age at Exit from the Labor Force & Expected Number of Years in Retirement,
1950-55 through 1995-2000, in 5-Year Increments
Period	Men		Women
Period	Median age at exit from labor force	Expected years of retirement (1)	Median age at exit from labor force	Expected years of retirement (2)
1950-55	66.9	12.0	67.6	13.6
1985-90	62.6	16.3	62.8	20.3
1990-95	62.4	17.2	62.3	21.3
1995-2000	62.0	18.0	61.4	22.0
1990-95	62.1	17.4	62.6	21.1
1995-2000	62.0	18.0	61.8	21.7
Change from 1950-55 in years --
1985-90	-4.3	4.3	-4.8	6.7
1990-95	-4.5	5.2	-5.3	7.7
1995-2000	-4.9	6.0	-6.2	8.4
1990-95	-4.8	5.4	-5.0	7.5
1995-2000	-4.9	6.0	-5.8	8.1
Percent change:
1985-90	-6.4	35.8	-7.1	49.3
1990-95	-6.7	43.3	-7.8	56.6
1995-2000	-7.3	50.0	-9.2	61.8
1990-95	-7.2	45.0	7.4	55.1
1995-2000	-7.3	50.0	-8.6	59.6

Table 2. Notes
(1) Average remaining life expectancy at the median age at exit from the labor force. Note: In all instances showing data for 1990-98 and 1995-2000, the first set of data is calculated from data adjusted to levels prior to the 1994 revision of the Current Population Survey, and the second set of data is computed from Current Population Survey data.	Sources: Median ages at exit from labor force are author's calculations. (See text for method.) Average remaining life expectancies at median age of exit from labor force are from life expectancy data from the National Center for Health Statistics life tables for 1952, 1987, 1992, and 1997.

(MURRAY, GENDELL. MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, OCTOBER 2001.
RETIREMENT AGE DECLINES AGAIN IN 1990s, 2001)