College Park, Md. -- How long do you want to work [1]? How long will you be able to work [1]?

The two questions are different, as are most workers' answers. Cumulatively, the answers will help decide whether the majority of American workers are able to maintain a decent standard of living in their "retirement years."

Recently, at the Knight Center for Specialized Journalism in Kansas City, Mo., 28 business [2] writers from around the country studied the broad topic of workforce globalization. Interestingly, the big issue often was often eclipsed by a narrower focus on the aging workforce. It was an elephant in the room.

Offshoring of jobs, competition from low-wage countries, and trade barriers were all on the agenda. But discussions repeatedly turned to U.S. public policy -- and workplace decisions -- that affect older workers and retirees. The worrisome drift is that our nation isn't moving quickly enough or decisively enough to deal with the fact that more Americans are living longer, living healthier and wanting or needing to work [1] longer.

Policies and practices since World War II have conditioned U.S. workers to accept as givens their access to 30-year-and-out programs, buyout packages at age 55 and Social Security benefits at age 62 or 65.

Speakers had a common message to those entitlement sentiments: Retirement "as is" is not sustainable.

That's why "retirement years" is in quotation marks. More workers will have to work [1] longer, but how long is conjecture. In 2008, the first of the baby boomers will turn 62, the earliest eligibility age for Social Security retiree benefits. If they, like recent 62-year-old workers, opt for retirement [3], half of them will begin collecting benefits.

AARP surveys suggest as many as eight out of 10 boomer retirees expect to continue working, at least part-time. Currently one out of four 65- to 69-year-olds remains employed. That disparity seems to indicate that unless financial need demands it or boomers' fervor for work [1] wanes in the meantime, there will be a dramatic change in the composition of the older workforce.

Of course, boomers, like those before them, might become ill or disabled and unable to work [1]. Others, also like those before them, might retire [3] early because they're financially comfortable and have no desire to work [1]. But the repeated subscripts to the older workforce predictions -- fuzzy as they may be -- are that public policy and private employer policies aren't changing fast enough.

Two principal suggestions:

• Psychologically and politically unpalatable as it may be, America must consider means tests for Social Security benefits, and it should have moved already to gradually increase the benefits eligibility age.
• Employers must quickly change attitudes and policies to deinstitutionalize retirement [3]. That means improving the hiring, training, retraining and retention of older workers and introducing more phased-in retirement [3], prorated benefits and part-time or job-sharing options.

  To be sure, you'd be hard-pressed to find a survey where workers said, "Please raise the retirement [3] age." But demographics say we must consider it.

  Diane Stafford's workplace column appears weekly in The Kansas City Star.

  Source: The Kansas City Star. Powered by Yellowbrix.