Survey claims Brits will have seven different jobs before retirement
UK workers reckon they'll rack up a tally of seven different roles before calling it a day on their careers, with job-hopping every seven years on average, research reveals. A survey involving 2,000 employees highlighted the lure of a better salary (56%), improved work-life balance (42%) and chances for advancement (26%) as top factors for a career move. Additional causes for jumping ship include superior workplace perks (26%) and escaping unhealthy office dynamics (24%). Moreover, the appeal of a snug 9 to 5 gig is undeniable, with 95% cherishing the predictability and stability it offers.
The insights suggest that 76% of respondents believe millennials and younger are more prone to switch careers frequently than their older counterparts. This generational split is underlined by 39% of the entire poll willing to consider a job change – driven by an eager 65% from Generation Z and only 32% from Generation X.
Almost half of Generation Z respondents confess to job-hopping every few years in search of progress, whereas a sturdy 60% of baby boomers tend to stick it out long-term with one employer. Spanning all age brackets, 44% have had experience working in various industries during their professional life.
Speaking about the findings, Alexander Allen from Funding Circle mentioned: "Our research shows that people value passion over money when pursuing a job."
He went on to say, "It's been interesting to find out how perceptions compare between different generations when it comes to changing jobs or starting a completely new career. It's heartening to note that amidst the numerous job openings, organisational culture is held in high regard, with 50% of respondents considering a job switch due to unsavoury work environments or better perks."
He said that although monetary rewards will always be a significant draw, flexible working schedules allowing employees to have a better work-life balance hold almost equal value. Highlighting the importance of expert guidance, the spokesperson continued, "Knowing what support small businesses need comes through years of experience, and making sure they have the right tools available to succeed is crucial."
Laura Daly, a thriving small business owner from Essex, attributed the success of her bridal shop, Bellissima Weddings, to the vital assistance provided by Funding Circle. Her enterprising spirit, honed by diverse roles such as being a professional singer, dancer, and model, eventually led her to start her business alongside her husband Michael over two decades ago.
Laura's early years of employment played a pivotal role in laying the groundwork for the business skills she employs today. The engaging entrepreneur shared: "When I worked in a supermarket, my task was to engage customers and promote whatever offers there were each day. I learned very quickly that if you engage people in conversation and let them tell you something about themselves first, you can sell something to them much easier than if you jump straight into a sales pitch."
"In my 20s I was dancing – and I loved every minute of it. The self-discipline and ability to take personal criticism without being offended were lessons that have stuck with me for life."
Thanks to Funding Circle's support, which provides small businesses with the finance they need to expand and enhance their enterprises, Laura has successfully grown her business.
She explained: "I knew what we wanted, and realised it would take a huge lump of money to do what we wanted to do. We had got to the point where we desperately needed to refurbish the whole shop. I started to look at where we could borrow and I loved the minute we started looking at Funding Circle.
"I said to my husband Michael if we're going to take money from anyone, it's going to be them. I never felt like I'd sold my soul to the bank. It was a completely different way of thinking and it filled me with confidence into actually taking the money."
The study, carried out by OnePoll, revealed that 73% of Generation Z are open to embarking on a radically new career - but only 33% of Baby Boomers feel the same. Over a third, or 35%, of those aged between 60-78 believe their generation values stability over change, contrary to just 18% of 18 to 28 year olds.
Conversely, 37% of the younger demographic see frequent job swaps as 'normal' – this is in stark contrast to a mere four percent of Boomers.
The OnePoll.com survey has uncovered that 36% of those aged between 60 and 78 believe the job market is tougher for the younger generation now than it was when they began their careers. A total of 30% of respondents attribute this to the current economic climate, particularly affecting young individuals who are keen to switch career paths.
Laura offered pearls of wisdom to youthful job hunters braving the competitive job scene, urging them to "choose a career path that gives you joy or feeds a passion".
She continued: "It really is true that if you do a job that you love, it will never feel like work. Scope out organisations and companies that offer upward mobility and in-house training to get you there, there's never any shame in starting at the bottom - some of the best CEO's have done just that."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
2 days ago
- Times
Which generation had the worst property deal? Our charts tell the story
Much debate rages around which generation actually had it worse when it came to getting onto the property ladder. Many baby boomers, those born between 1946 and 1964, remember the painful days of mortgage rates as high as 17 per cent, while today's first-time buyers are contending with comparatively higher house prices. The estate agency Hamptons looked at the data to try to work out which generation had the worst deal. Here is what it found. Despite an overall rise in house prices those Generation Z first-time buyers who got on the ladder in 2020 would be the first to have experienced real-terms property values fall during their first five years of ownership. Average prices have dropped 3 per cent when adjusted for inflation, accordiong to Hamptons. A typical millennial (those born between 1981 and 1995) who bought their first home in 2011 in their mid-twenties made an average real-terms gain of 13 per cent over five years. Whereas a Generation Xer (born between 1966-1980) who bought their first home in 1996 enjoyed 44 per cent growth in real terms over the first five years. Hamptons said that a baby boomer first-time buyer in 1979 benefited from average real-terms house price growth of 35 per cent in the first five years. Someone of the so-called silent generation (born between 1928-1945) who bought a first home in 1968 saw the value of their home rise 106 per cent in real terms in the first five years. Having struggled to get on the property ladder, the youngest homeowners now face being stuck on the first rung. In April 1968 the average house price was 4.29 times the typical annual salary, according to the Office for National Statistics. This, apart from two spikes in the early 1970s and late 1980s to early 1990s, remained largely constant for the rest of the 20th century. An average home in April 1979 was 4.29 times the average wage, and 3.8 times in April 1996. But a period of sustained house price growth followed, with the average property rising 173 per cent between 1995 and 2007 in real terms, causing the gap between wages and property values to widen. In April 2011 the average home was 6.58 times the average salary. In April 2020, this had increased to more than 7.69, hitting a peak of 8.23 in September 2022. David Fell, an analyst at Hamptons, said: 'House prices have risen much faster than wages over the last couple of decades mostly thanks to falling mortgage rates. Since interest rates were reduced to rock bottom levels in response to the 2007 house market crash, buyers could generally borrow significantly more money than someone earning the same salary 20 or 30 years ago, pushing prices up.' Between the mid-1970s and early 1990s the Bank of England base rate, which influences mortgage rates, was often in double figures, hitting a high of 17 per cent between November 1979 and July 1980. In response to the 2007-08 financial crisis it was cut to 1 per cent in February 2009 and remained at this rate or lower until June 2022, when the Bank began raising it in an attempt to tackle inflation. It hit a high of 5.25 per cent in August 2023 and is on the way down again now — this month it was cut from 4.25 per cent to 4 per cent. The average mortgage rate offered across the market is 5 per cent, according to the analytics firm Moneyfacts. • Did right-to-buy cause Britain's housing crisis? But Neal Hudson from the property market researcher Residential Analysts said that lower mortgage rates only tell part of the story. 'Yes the rates were higher in the 1970s and 1980s, but these people were borrowing much lower multiples of their income,' he said. 'Buyers are now borrowing nearly double what they were back then, so it takes a much lower mortgage rate to create the same level of pain.' Someone paying the average house price of £213,000 in January 2020 would have paid £73,900 in mortgage payments on the average rate of 3 per cent. Hamptons based its calculations on someone with a 10 per cent deposit and a 25-year mortgage term. A homeowner who bought in 2011 — when the average house price was £234,000 and the base rate was 0.5 per cent — would have spent £48,700 on their mortgage in the first five years, assuming they had the average mortgage rate of 1.7 per cent. Yet someone who bought at the start of 1979, when the average house price was £13,800 and the base rate was 14 per cent, would have spent £41,500 on their mortgage in the first five years of homeownership, assuming the average 9.6 per cent mortgage rate and adjusting for 2025 prices. The 1979 average house price would be £55,100 in real terms today. Fell said: 'Millennials faced higher purchase prices than the previous two generations but much lower interest rates, while the boomers and Gen X paid higher interest rates but the prices were lower. 'Gen Zers, however, are being hit with relatively high prices and relatively high interest rates now as well.' Sluggish house prices combined with higher borrowing costs will also make it more difficult for those looking to move because they will struggle to build up enough equity to fund a switch to a bigger home. Hudson said: 'Previous generations have benefited from house-price growth to allow them to move into larger properties, whereas these days, it's much harder and so you're seeing people moving much less frequently.' Using Bank of England data that predicts mortgage rates up to 40 years in the future, Hamptons estimates that the average homeowner who bought in 2020 would pay about £191,000 across the first half of a 25-year mortgage term. Over the second half of their term, they would pay £208,000. • Detached houses — are they worth 22 per cent more? It is a far cry from the experience of older generations. The typical baby boomer first-time buyer paid £93,900 in real terms in the first half of their 25-year mortgage, dropping to £64,700 in the second half. Those belonging to Generation X paid an average of £112,294 in the first half, falling to £75,697 in the second. Recent increases in mortgage rates have also caught out millennials. Hamptons forecasts that this generation will have to pay £185,600 on average in mortgage payments across the second half of their mortgage, well above the £117,500 they paid the first half. 'In previous generations, homeowners would have climbed up the career ladder and inflation would have made the second half of their mortgage easier financially,' Fell said. 'With millennials and Gen Z likely to see their mortgage payments rise, it will erode that feeling that their loans are getting more manageable.' He said this was likely to mean fewer members of those generations paying off their mortgage early — a key milestone for anyone wanting to retire early. • Bellway repeats call for return of Help to Buy Those waiting to buy their first home generally need to either live with their parents or navigate the rental market, where costs have never been higher. The average monthly rent in July 2025 was £1,373 a month — 47 per cent higher than ten years ago. It cost more than three times as much in real terms to rent in the last five years than it did for someone who started a five-year tenancy in 1979. Someone who started renting in January 2020 would have paid an average of £86,750 over five years, having been caught up in the post-pandemic boom in rents. Someone who started a tenancy in 2011 would have paid £74,283 over five years in real terms, while someone who started renting 1979 would have paid £23,740 in today's prices. Higher rental costs make it more difficult to build up enough savings for a house deposit, exacerbating the challenges of getting on the property ladder amid inflated house prices. For boomers and those in the silent generation, renting was cheaper than paying a mortgage. the average tenant who started renting in 1968 would have paid £6,500 over the first five years in real terms, compared with £7,990 in mortgage payments. Rental costs for someone who started a tenancy in 1979 were £23,740 for the first five years, compared with £41,470 in mortgage payments. But the pendulum swung the other way for the first time in October 1992, the month after Black Wednesday, when the pound crashed and Bank rate was cut. Since then, monthly rental payments have mostly remained higher than mortgage costs, according to Hamptons. The average buyer who bought in 2020 and paid mortgage payments for five years would have paid £12,900 less than the average renter. 'This has created a bit of a financial cliff edge between those who bought and those who didn't, in a way which didn't exist for older generations,' Fell said.
Telegraph
3 days ago
- Telegraph
How Rachel Reeves created a generation of accidental pension millionaires
Are you planning to contribute sums to your children or grandchildren's pensions? Get in touch at: money@ Young people are poised to inherit a colossal windfall from their parents and grandparents. Baby boomers – born between 1946 and 1964 – are expected to pass at least £5.5tn of wealth to younger generations by 2047, more than double Britain's GDP. This 'great wealth transfer' is already well under way. The inheritances of Generation Z and millennials – born between 1980 and 2009 – have almost doubled in value every 20 years since 1979, according to a report by think tank Demos. But now an inheritance tax squeeze is prompting many of the boomer generation to employ new strategies to help their descendants. Paying money directly into their retirement pots is one way to beat the taxman – and could create a lucky generation of pension millionaires. 'Significant windfall' In her Budget last year, Rachel Reeves announced that unspent private pensions will be liable for inheritance tax from April 2027. The move has prompted many boomers to raid their pension pots and give away their wealth in order to avoid a potential 40pc tax hit for their family. Inheritance tax rules mean unlimited amounts of money and assets can be gifted to friends and relatives without them paying any eventual inheritance tax, as long as the transfer happens at least seven years before the person giving the gift dies. A so-called taper tax rate of between 8pc and 32pc is applied to gifts given between seven and three years before death, once the total value of gifts made in the seven years before a person dies exceeds the £325,000 tax-free threshold. Money given less than three years before is taxed at the full inheritance tax rate of 40pc. Giving away cash to help children and grandchildren get on to the housing ladder is becoming increasingly popular. Over half (52pc) of first-time buyers received financial help from family members last year, with an average sum of £55,572, according to estate agents Savills. The total value of Bank of Mum and Dad assistance has reached £38.5bn since 2021, 71pc more than in the previous four years. However, one overlooked option is for 'surplus income' to be paid into a young family member's pension. Under current rules, a parent or grandparent can contribute up to £2,880 a year into a child's pension. A pension contribution at this level is topped up by HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) to £3,600, as basic rate income tax is claimed back on the payment, with any gains shielded from tax. If these gifts are made regularly – and do not affect the giver's standard of living – then the money is automatically exempt from inheritance tax, and the seven-year rule does not apply. Paying into adult children's pensions is also possible, although they would not benefit from tax relief. Transferring even relatively modest amounts in this way could turn younger generations into future millionaires, according to accountancy firm RSM. The firm calculates that contributing the £2,880 maximum each year would give a grandchild a pension pot of £105,000 by the time they turn 23, assuming 4pc annual growth. Even if they don't save another penny, the pot would likely be worth over £607,000 by age 67. Annual returns of 5pc would boost this to over £1m. Chris Etherington, of RSM, says: 'There will usually be an upfront income tax cost to consider for anyone withdrawing sums from their pension. That should also be taken into account when determining the best course of action and the overall potential benefits. 'However, many may consider it makes sense to incur an upfront income tax liability so they can make gifts earlier and in turn, secure the financial future of generations to come while also reducing their inheritance tax exposure.' Ian Cook, of wealth management firm Quilter Cheviot, says decades of investment growth mean beneficiaries could net a 'substantial sum' by the time they come to retire. He added: 'Contributing to a child or grandchild's pension can be a smart way to pass on wealth without triggering an immediate inheritance tax bill. 'For some families, pensions are also appealing because the funds are locked away until at least the normal minimum pension age, currently 55, but rising to 57 in 2028. 'This avoids the concern that can come with gifting large sums into a junior Isa, where the recipient gains full control at 18, an age at which not everyone is ready to handle a significant windfall.' Growing wealth divide This strategy could prove to be a lifeline for the young people fortunate enough to inherit wealth. Experts have warned that Britain faces a 'pension savings crisis', as the current 8pc minimum contribution level is not enough to fund adequate retirements. Under auto-enrolment rules, employees put at least 5pc of their salaries into a pension, in addition to a minimum 3pc employer contribution and government tax relief. Labour has committed to not changing these rates during this Parliament. On current contribution rates, an average earner on a £35,000 salary risks falling £700,000 short of a 'comfortable' living standard in retirement, according to the Pensions and Lifetime Savings Association, a trade body. Boomers – on average – have it better. Some are lucky enough to enjoy lucrative 'defined benefit' pensions which guarantee an inflation-linked income in retirement, based on final or average salary. These schemes are close to extinction in the private sector, as they have become too expensive for employers to maintain. They have been replaced by much less generous 'defined contribution' schemes, where the final value depends on how well investments perform. It's easy to see why many younger people see owning a nice house or having a good pension as impossible – unless they inherit it. Differences in pension wealth and the swelling value of homes have widened the generational wealth gap over the last 20 years. A study by the Resolution Foundation think tank found that between 2006-08 and 2018-20, median wealth among Britons in their 60s rose by 55pc in real terms, but for those in their 30s, it fell by 34pc. At the same time, the share of Britain's wealth held by the under-40s has fallen from 7.5pc in 2010 to 4pc today. Molly Bloome, of the Resolution Foundation, warns that younger generations are becoming more reliant on financial gifts, and that this form of trickle-down economics will only widen the generational wealth gap. 'There's a big element of luck at play – you can't choose who your parents are, and having wealthier parents obviously puts you in a much better position, especially if they own their own home.' But there is an implicit obligation attached to these transfers, she adds. 'It's a case of, 'Help me on to the housing ladder, then I'll help you pay for care in old age'. It's not just a one-way street.'
The Sun
06-08-2025
- The Sun
The workers most likely not to have enough money in retirement – and all the ways to get on track
NOT all workers are going to have enough money to get them through retirement - and new analysis has revealed who is most likely to be affected. It may come as a surprise to some but half of baby boomers are expected to fall short of having an adequate income in retirement, according to research by asset manager Vanguard. 1 The generation born between 1946 and 1964 is well-known for having bumper pensions and mortgage-free homes. But the new analysis reveals middle-income baby boomers are the most at risk of falling short in retirement. Only 40% of people in the middle-income bracket, earning between £32,600 and £46,599, were projected to meet their expected retirement income. Overall, 51% of baby boomers are expected to do so. Even when it came to high-income boomers earning over £74,600, 62% of them are predicted to meet their expected retirement income. That leaves a pretty significant 38% who won't. Most low-income workers (74%) on less than £17,700 a year will be able to maintain their lifestyle as they'll be largely relying on the state pension. However many of them will still fall short of the minimum retirement living standard. People most likely to be on track for retirement had a "gold-plated" defined benefit pension. These schemes offer a guaranteed income in retirement that's linked to inflation, making them very valuable. What are the different types of pensions? Few private employers offer pensions like this any more so they're less common among younger generations. Vanguard's analysis found 69% of baby boomers with defined benefit pensions were "retirement ready". But just 28% of those without were. Experts have long been warning of a pension savings crisis in the UK that could leave many of us out of pocket in retirement. They say the current minimum contribution level is not enough to fund retirements properly. Auto-enrolment rules mean employees put at least 5% of their salaries into a pension, while their employer must contribute a minimum 3%. The Government is currently carrying out a review of pensions - including whether minimum contributions need to be raised. How can you boost your pension pot? If you're worried about not having enough for retirement, there are some steps you can take to boost your savings. Merge your pots You could potentially increase your savings by thousands of pounds if you merge your pension pots. You'll probably have an average of between six to 12 jobs in your lifetime, which could mean lots of different pension pots. With each one you're paying an admin fee, so by combining your pots you can cut down on fees. For example, a worker with three pension pots with £25,000 each from previous jobs who combined them and found a lower fee could add £20,000 to their retirement fund over 20 years. You should check first whether merging pots is the right move for you, though. You can read more on that here. Track down lost pension pots Millions of people have "lost" pension pots from previous employers. Estimates suggest there are 3.3million lost pots worth a combined £31billion. Each lost pot is worth a whopping £9,393 on average. You may have lost track of your pot if you've changed jobs. Luckily there are things you can do to track it down. If you have lost your paperwork, you can still trace your pension pot by contacting your previous employers. They should be able to tell you which pension scheme you are enrolled on. Or, you can use the Government's free Pension Tracing Service that can help you track down lost pension pots - Take your state pension later If you're able to, delaying receiving your state pension can earn you nearly £700 extra per year. Most people apply for the state pension as soon as they reach the eligible age of 66. But if you delay your claim, you can get higher payments. You can get an extra 1% for every nine weeks that you delay your claim. That means that for every year you delay, you boost your payout by just under 5.8%. This can be a sensible option if you don't need the income immediately. The full new state pension is worth £230.25 a week, so over the 2025-2026 tax year you could boost your payments by about £13.35 a week. This works out at about £694.20 a year, according to analysis by Quilter. Top up your National Insurance Another way of boosting your state pension is by topping up gaps in your National Insurance record. You need 35 NI years to get the full new state pension, and 10 years to get anything at all. Anyone who has had career breaks, worked abroad, been self-employed, or spent years in low-paid jobs may have gaps in their NI record. Boosting your record costs different amounts depending on the year you top up. The rate is usually around £824 for each missing year, adding £328 a year to your pension. This boost lasts for life, so you could quickly make back what you spend. If you buy five years of missing contributions, paying around £4,100 in total, you'll get an extra £1,640 every year for life. Over 10 years in retirement, you'll have pocketed an extra £16,400.
