Baby boomer scientists/engineers about to retire in huge numbers?

  • Engineering
  • Thread starter TomServo
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Numbers
In summary, the article seems to suggest that there won't be a huge wave of retirements of baby boomer engineers, scientists, professors, etc., leaving all these open positions to be filled by younger people. However, the baby boomer generation began in 1946, so somebody born in that year is turning 67 this year, so this wave should just be getting underway. However, the Great Recession and its slow recovery--people aren't retiring they're staying on (they lost a lot of equity), and people who would otherwise retire in the next ten years are instead planning to work for another twenty--is complicating that. Although the retirement wave may be underway now, because of the crappy economy instead of open positions it could just mean a lot
  • #1
TomServo
281
9
One thing I've been hearing for years is that *just around the corner* is this huge wave of retirements of baby boomer engineers, scientists, professors, etc., leaving all these open positions to be filled by younger people, and so it makes perfect sense to get a degree in engineering or get a PhD in a science, etc.

However, the baby boomer generation began in 1946, so somebody born in that year is turning 67 this year, so this wave should just be getting underway. But complicating that is the Great Recession and its slow recovery--people aren't retiring they're staying on (they lost a lot of equity), and people who would otherwise retire in the next ten years are instead planning to to work for another twenty. And people forty and under will work until they're in their 80s.

Even if this retirement wave were to be underway now, because of the crappy economy instead of open positions it could just mean a lot of positions are just deleted from the job market once the position holder retires.

What I'm asking is, this idea of a huge swath of open positions in science and engineering doesn't seem like it's going to pan out like everybody says, what say you?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
TomServo said:
One thing I've been hearing for years...

Who told you that?

Zz.
 
  • #3
TomServo said:
What I'm asking is, this idea of a huge swath of open positions in science and engineering doesn't seem like it's going to pan out like everybody says, what say you?

It will happen in these and virtually every other field, not because the boomers are retiring, but because the population growth rate slowed significantly. Where we used to throw people at a problem, we no longer can afford to. For example, plants that used to require staffing 24/7/365 are now running "lights out" for as many as two shifts per day. Modern control systems and communications have reduced the need for someone to be on site to alert others to a problem. Many of those grunt-work jobs that boomers took are no longer as necessary as they used to be. So you won't be seeing that kind of work.

That said, in technical work, I am seeing staff aging. For years our engineering groups, which began with people in their 30s, aged. Now the average ages hovers about 50-something.

I'm not seeing the influx of STEM educated people getting through our HR department. I have my suspicions. Many HR departments take an extremely narrow view of what a job is and what a person needs to know. You have to meet precisely their keywords and experience levels or your resume goes into the shredder. The end result is that individuals within industry are robbed from one place to another, but new people are not given much chance to advance through companies. And those companies that do allow for such advancement often lose their people to those other employers whose HR people are eager to pay more for the privilege of stealing such people.

So, no, those jobs are not coming your way. Mind you, you're needed by industry, but they've made their own little HR hell that prohibits them from hiring you.
 
  • #4
Well Zapper, I hear it all of the time from various sources:

1) The media,
2) Politicians,
3) Industry,
4) Professors,
All of whom have a vested interest in churning out more and more STEM grads or in causing alarm over a STEM shortage, and from:
5) students,
Who want to believe that there will be plum six figure jobs or professorships in their future.
 
  • #5
What I'm asking is, this idea of a huge swath of open positions in science and engineering doesn't seem like it's going to pan out like everybody says, what say you?

I agree, its bull for the most part. People want science and technology to be a means of upward mobility. And it is, for the developing world. There is not much reason to pay a scientifically trained worker in the US 60k for a job that thousands oversees can and would do for 10k.
 
  • #6
what I've been seeing is some PhD folks retiring and returning to work part-time allowing the site to maintain its knowledge and skills while not hiring as many replacements.
 
  • #7
TomServo2 said:
Well Zapper, I hear it all of the time from various sources:

1) The media,

If it's all the time, you won't have a problem coming up with three or four examples, right?
 
  • #8
TomServo2 said:
Well Zapper, I hear it all of the time from various sources:

1) The media,
2) Politicians,
3) Industry,
4) Professors,
All of whom have a vested interest in churning out more and more STEM grads or in causing alarm over a STEM shortage, and from:
5) students,
Who want to believe that there will be plum six figure jobs or professorships in their future.

So in other words, you didn't exactly get this from a well-research study that based its conclusion from well-founded data. What you got were rumors. I mean, politicians?! Students?! Seriously?

Sorry, I don't deal with such things, nor would I waste my time on them.

Zz.
 
  • #9
If there was a shortage, salaries would go up. They don't so there is no shortage. The shortage is lobbyist propaganda to push down prices - simple as that. This interview might be interesting for you: http://www.qualitydigest.com/print/21092
 
  • #10
Wow, I certainly didn't expect skepticism or suspicion. I Googled for examples but there were so many, it's simpler for me to suggest you google stories on baby boomer retiring engineers/scientists.
 
  • #11
TomServo said:
One thing I've been hearing for years is that *just around the corner* is this huge wave of retirements of baby boomer engineers ...
This certainly has been a key concern at NASA for more than a decade. NASA's Strategic Management Council has rated the potential loss of working knowledge as an agency-level risk item. NASA may be extreme in this regard. From the mid 1970s to the late 1990s NASA didn't hire much, and when they did they tended not to hire fresh-outs. To mitigate this problem, NASA mandated in 2009 that 50% of new hires be fresh-outs.
 
  • #12
Zapper, I don't think you understand me. I share your skepticism, and it is because of the lack of empirical evidence that I am suspicious.

But you certainly shouldn't be suspicious that people are advancing the idea.

What I was hoping to get were other peoples' opinions on this as it is a notion that I never see anybody challenge.
 
  • #13
TomServo2 said:
But you certainly shouldn't be suspicious that people are advancing the idea.

Then it won't be difficult to come up with the examples I asked you for, n'est pas?
 
  • #14
The coming tide of retirements has been widely reported. But here's the rub: unlike many in the generation before them, employees reaching retirement age now tend not to have pensions. And although many lost a lot in the last crash, many didn't -- only because they had not saved enough at that point.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703959604576152792748707356.html

The median household headed by a person aged 60 to 62 with a 401(k) account has less than one-quarter of what is needed in that account to maintain its standard of living in retirement, according to data compiled by the Federal Reserve and analyzed by the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College for The Wall Street Journal. Even counting Social Security and any pensions or other savings, most 401(k) participants appear to have insufficient savings. Data from other sources also show big gaps between savings and what people need, and the financial crisis has made things worse.

My opinion: don't count on this supposed wave of retirements to open up a slew of opportunities.
 
  • #15
http://www.uthsc.edu/allied/mt/documents/Laboratory%20Science%20Workforce%20Shortage%20Affected%20By%20Baby%20Boomer%20Exits.pdf [Broken]
There's one. I'm honestly a little weirded out by those of you acting like I'm a lunatic making this all up. I'm not advancing this notion, I merely report that others are talking about it, and people react with suspicion? Care to explain why?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #16
JakeBrodskyPE said:
It will happen in these and virtually every other field, not because the boomers are retiring, but because the population growth rate slowed significantly. Where we used to throw people at a problem, we no longer can afford to. For example, plants that used to require staffing 24/7/365 are now running "lights out" for as many as two shifts per day. Modern control systems and communications have reduced the need for someone to be on site to alert others to a problem. Many of those grunt-work jobs that boomers took are no longer as necessary as they used to be. So you won't be seeing that kind of work.

That said, in technical work, I am seeing staff aging. For years our engineering groups, which began with people in their 30s, aged. Now the average ages hovers about 50-something.

I'm not seeing the influx of STEM educated people getting through our HR department. I have my suspicions. Many HR departments take an extremely narrow view of what a job is and what a person needs to know. You have to meet precisely their keywords and experience levels or your resume goes into the shredder. The end result is that individuals within industry are robbed from one place to another, but new people are not given much chance to advance through companies. And those companies that do allow for such advancement often lose their people to those other employers whose HR people are eager to pay more for the privilege of stealing such people.

So, no, those jobs are not coming your way. Mind you, you're needed by industry, but they've made their own little HR hell that prohibits them from hiring you.

If it is the HR department and their narrow view of what a job is and what a person needs to know that is limiting a firm's ability to hire needed employees, then shouldn't it make sense for such firms to "shake up" their HR departments to ensure that needed positions are filled?
 
  • #17
On the OP's post, if there is a general skepticism about the upcoming retirement of the baby boomer scientists/engineers in huge numbers, and the subsequent opportunities that would open up for new graduates, then what do the rest of you foresee for the job market for a new graduate with a science/engineering background in the US within the next 2 years?
 
  • #18
TomServo2 said:
I'm honestly a little weirded out by those of you acting like I'm a lunatic making this all up. I'm not advancing this notion, I merely report that others are talking about it, and people react with suspicion?

Weird, isn't it? I went through the same process. Like, 15 years ago I, somehow, came to the belief that there was a "greying" of physicists and that they would soon see a big shortage. It's nonsense, of course, but when I expressed it myself, I got the same reaction you did.

And you got more than just suspicion; at least one response was outright hostile. One would almost think you touched a nerve.
 
  • #19
The baby boomers won't live forever nor will they work forever I don't understand the skepticism over a coming influx of retiring baby boomers.

I could see the skepticism over the opportunities it will open up.
 
  • #20
A problem that comes up on these and other forums with respect to employment of the graduate training ratio.

Consider that a professor will on average train roughly ten PhD students over his or her academic career. (I don't know if ten is actually correct - it's just a common guess that seems reasonable.) Of those ten one will eventually replace the professor. A fraction of another will account for growth. Even if you assume a 100% growth rate over a professor's typical career this leaves us with eight leftover PhD graduates. What happens to them?

The "boomer retirement" proposition, in light of this question, does not appear to lead to any deficiencies of academic bodies. I suspect that the idea commonly arises more out of wishful thinking than from actual data.
 
  • #21
Did anyone notice the OP SN vs the follow up SN? TomServo vs TomServo2
 
  • #22
Holy cow, you're right. I'm on a different browser now. One of the browsers has my original account password saved and on my phone I couldn't remember exactly what my sn and password was and I think I either made up a new account or resurrected a defunct one.
 
  • #23
Ta da! Thanks for pointing that out.
 
  • #24
TomServo said:
Ta da! Thanks for pointing that out.

I have that same problem on linked in, two acct created years apart because I couldn't remember the email I used and I switched companies too/ Now I am friends with myself kind of like a cyber wormhole
 
  • #25
jedishrfu said:
Now I am friends with myself kind of like a cyber wormhole

:rofl:
 
  • #26
Choppy's analysis makes sense to me, provided the total number of positions, filled and unfilled, stays flat. That goes for countries that are already at the saturation point for professors.
 
  • #27
TomServo2 said:
http://www.uthsc.edu/allied/mt/documents/Laboratory%20Science%20Workforce%20Shortage%20Affected%20By%20Baby%20Boomer%20Exits.pdf [Broken]
There's one.

I'm not very convinced by one of the statistics in that link.
13% of employees may retire in the next 5 years

If the average working life is 40 years (say 25 to 65 for university educated employees), in a steady state situation you would expect 1 in 40 or 2.5% to retire per year. that makes 12.5% in 5 years. So what's the big deal about 13%?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #29
I am not a prof, but I am a boomer who would really like to retire. I was laid off from HP 1yr shy of eligibility for retirement. My 401k is way shy of the amount I need to retire, so I am now working in a job at a fraction of my former income. I sure would like to retire, but it is looking more and more like the WTD plan is the one that applies to me..

Sorry youngsters, you will just have to wait your turn, meanwhile do what you can to pick up industry valued skills. ... ie have something to sell to your future employers.

WTD... work till you die.
 
  • #30
I think that retirement is really a luxury for the rich. For "regular" people, work till you die is standard fare. I won't even have my student loans paid off when I die. Any idea of retirement is just a joke.
 
  • #31
Not to mention the nightmare we'll be in if, as demographers predict, we have such a disproportionately large number of non-working elderly and a low birthrate that the economy literally collapses. Science funding will take a back seat to food scrounging for sure.
 
  • #32
Thats why we need more immigrants... To keep the ponzi scheme going. At least keep it going until I die. ;)
 
  • #33
Agreed, bring on the 'grants, skilled and unskilled. Anybody who wants to contribute to our economy should be allowed in, not treated like a leper.
 
  • #34
And "ModusPwned" made my laugh.
 
  • #35
StatGuy2000 said:
If it is the HR department and their narrow view of what a job is and what a person needs to know that is limiting a firm's ability to hire needed employees, then shouldn't it make sense for such firms to "shake up" their HR departments to ensure that needed positions are filled?

Yeah, they'll probably do it when they figure out how not to get hit with ageist preferences. Honestly, I don't envy the HR people in large companies who have to hire someone to do something that they don't understand, but do so under a torrent of laws that most people would rather not know. This is a no-win situation, and it was very likely an unintended consequence of existing laws.
 

1. What impact will the retirement of baby boomer scientists/engineers have on the workforce?

The retirement of baby boomer scientists/engineers will have a significant impact on the workforce. These individuals possess a wealth of knowledge and experience that will be lost when they retire. This could lead to a shortage of skilled workers and a knowledge gap within organizations.

2. How can organizations prepare for the retirement of baby boomer scientists/engineers?

Organizations can prepare for the retirement of baby boomer scientists/engineers by implementing succession planning strategies. This involves identifying and developing younger employees to take on leadership roles and filling the knowledge gap left by retiring employees.

3. Will the retirement of baby boomer scientists/engineers lead to a decrease in innovation?

There is a possibility that the retirement of baby boomer scientists/engineers could lead to a decrease in innovation. However, this can be mitigated by ensuring that knowledge transfer and succession planning are in place. Additionally, younger generations bring fresh perspectives and ideas that can drive innovation.

4. How will the retirement of baby boomer scientists/engineers impact the economy?

The retirement of baby boomer scientists/engineers could have a negative impact on the economy, as it may result in a shortage of skilled workers and a decrease in productivity. However, it could also create opportunities for younger generations to enter the workforce and drive growth and innovation.

5. What can be done to encourage baby boomer scientists/engineers to delay retirement?

To encourage baby boomer scientists/engineers to delay retirement, organizations can offer incentives such as flexible work arrangements, mentoring opportunities, and continued learning and development opportunities. This can help retain their knowledge and expertise within the organization for a longer period of time.

Similar threads

  • STEM Career Guidance
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • STEM Career Guidance
2
Replies
39
Views
5K
  • STEM Career Guidance
Replies
6
Views
6K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Art, Music, History, and Linguistics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • STEM Career Guidance
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • STEM Career Guidance
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • STEM Career Guidance
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • STEM Career Guidance
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
724
Back
Top