Deprivation and Early Involuntary Retirement: Area-Level Analysis across English Local Authorities

Abstract

AbstractIntroductionRetirement is a major transition point in life. Falling economic support ratios in many countries have led to a rise in the state retirement age and impending changes to eligibility for state and occupational benefit schemes such as pensions as Governments seek to curb expenditure. Permanently incapacitated individuals from work may face increasing challenges in accessing financial support. Such difficulties may impact those most deprived differentially with potentially significant consequences for morbidity and mortality. Few studies thus far have examined early retirement from a societal perspective. This study explores involuntary retirement in this regard.MethodsA retrospective analysis of the association between deprivation with IHR success rates for Local Authorities (LA) in England between 2015-18 was conducted. Deprivation status was assigned according to the proportion of Lower-Layer Super Output Areas in the most deprived 10% nationally using data from the National Statistics SocioEconomic Classification 2015. Freedom of Information Requests were sent to all 326 LAs in England to obtain data on successful IHR applications, number of active members of respective pensions schemes and numbers of applications.Results131 LAs provided complete data for IHR applications, numbers of approved applications and eligible members. Several others provided data on application numbers but not those awarded. he national IHR approval rate was 2.16 per 1000 members, with a range of 0.16 to 8.96. There was a trend towards a greater proportion of approved application per 1000 eligible members in more affluent LAs.ConclusionThe results from this brief analysis suggest that there is an association between increasing rates of ill-health retirement and higher area-level deprivation. Policy should note that those in more deprived areas face a quadruple whammy; a greater risk of becoming incapacitated from public health and occupational exposures, more limited access to medical support, less opportunities for alternative work and potentially disproportionate disadvantage from stringent pension eligibility criteria.