Adding life to years, not years to life – as of this week, 65 is the new 60

Daily Maverick

26-05-2025

This week, the mandatory retirement age in South Africa officially goes up from age 60 to 65. On the surface, this is a policy shift driven by longer lifespans and economic realities – a global trend hitting home.
On a deeper level, it will likely affect many people, especially those over or close to 60 who were perhaps looking forward to retiring.
Many will be focusing on the practicalities: planning differently for a longer working life. For others, this change may be an opportunity for a much bigger, more vital conversation about how they plan to spend their precious leisure time in the years ahead.
A global shift
It is not just South Africa where retirement is moving out. In the US in the 1980s, there were about 2.5 million people who worked past age 65. That number is now 11 million – an increase of 400%. In that same time, the US population has only increased by 50%. The scales, it would seem, are tipping towards longer working lives.
According to futurist Tracey Follows, retirement might not even exist in the Western world by 2040. The rising cost of living and lengthening life expectancies mean it may be necessary for people to continue working into their old age to support themselves. Indeed, a recent study by Sanlam Corporate found that most South Africans will now need to work until they are 80 to retire comfortably.
Maybe this is not such a bad thing. For years, we've accepted the notion that, at a certain age, we should universally step away from purposeful contribution.
But does that truly serve us? Is a fixed retirement age an outdated concept we've clung to?
Perhaps the question needs to be not just about when we retire, but if the traditional concept of retirement – a relatively new idea in and of itself – is due for retirement.
A brief history of a recent invention
In the Stone Age, you worked till your death. Most people were dead by 20. This was the case for millions of years. Up until the 1800s, nowhere in the world had a life expectancy higher than 40 years. In the early 1900s, the average life expectancy was only 32.
Retirement as we know it was only proposed in 1881 by Otto von Bismarck, ruler of Prussia. Von Bismarck suggested the government give pensions to the few German citizens who lived over 70. Life expectancy in Germany at the time was 39 years.
The policy was passed. But the message was clear: most people will not retire as they wouldn't make it that far. That remained the message when retirement was introduced in the 1930s in the US for people over the age of 65. Life expectancy for American men was around 58 at the time.
Globally, life expectancy is now over 70. As a result, some suggest that the retirement age should be pushed to 75. Governments are not opposed to raising the threshold – in the UK, the retirement age is set to increase to 67 in the next three years. In France, millions-strong protests ensued after the government raised the pension age from 62 to 64.
The value of knowledge in an economy
Leaving aside the issue of the financial necessity of working, there is broader value for keeping older people in the working world.
Tertiary institutions across the world know the value of retaining skills beyond the age of 65. The US and Europe, for example, are teeming with professors above the retirement age. A total of 13% of US professors are over 65, compared with just 6% of other US workers. There are many reasons for this, including that professors possess invaluable expertise and knowledge.
But it's not just them: people reach the peak of their expertise in their sixties. They do not stop adding value after 65.
That is where the concept of phased retirement comes into its own. A staggered or phased retirement that sees retirees step back but still contribute could hold many benefits for organisations and workers alike: enabling skills transfer; more time to find and train new candidates; mentoring and coaching opportunities; and the retention of highly skilled workers at a reduced cost due to fewer hours worked. In South Africa, it could also create much-needed space in the workforce for unemployed young people.
Additionally, a phased approach provides retirees a chance to buy more time for family, leisure, travel and taking care of their health, without having to dip into their retirement fund.
The question then becomes, how might these phased retirees, with more time on their hands and no real financial pressure, spend their time? Stepping away from work, even partially, can result in a loss of identity and vitality for many, even if it feels like a deserved break.
Perhaps they could be encouraged to volunteer as a way to add meaning to their life and that of others. For some, it might be to start a business. According to the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor, the number of entrepreneurs over 55 is on the rise.
Are young people pointing the way?
While we can't predict the future, observing current megatrends – long-term driving forces that are likely to have a growing global impact – can give us a good sense of where things might end up.
Changing demographics is one such megatrend, and a key sign that traditional retirement could be on the way out is how younger generations already live and work. Thanks to the gig economy and remote-working options, many young people have embraced hybrid lives, integrating work with substantial leisure.
For many millennials, the idea of a traditional retirement – one focused on leisure and relaxation – has evolved into a desire for greater work flexibility.
The point is that those of us who have had the privilege to work – and who have the privilege to retire – also have the privilege to think imaginatively about what we want to do with our time, whether working or playing. If we are living longer, how can we add life to our years rather than just years to our life?
Many South Africans do not have this opportunity – not just to retire, but to work in the first place. Our unemployment rate reached 41.9% in Q4 of 2024. Many will never be employed in the formal economy – they won't have retirement plans, phased or otherwise.
It's a stark reminder that in our country, retirement and leisure are not universal rights, and we should not squander them. DM