Beskæftigelsesudvalget 2019-20
BEU Alm.del Bilag 271
Offentligt
2205299_0001.png
International Journal of
Environmental Research
and Public Health
Article
Factors Contributing to Retirement Decisions
in Denmark: Comparing Employees Who Expect
to Retire before, at, and after the State Pension Age
Annette Meng * , Emil Sundstrup and Lars L. Andersen
National Research Centre for the Working Environment, Lersø Parkallé 105, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark;
[email protected] (E.S.); [email protected] (L.L.A.)
*
Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.:
+45-39-16-52-93;
Fax:
+39-16-52-01
Received: 2 April 2020; Accepted: 6 May 2020; Published: 11 May 2020
Abstract: Aim:
Analyse factors affecting retirement decisions comparing employees expecting
to retire before, at, and after the state pension age.
Methods:
In the SeniorWorkingLife cohort,
12,269 workers aged
+50
replied to questions about expected retirement age, reasons for leaving, and
reasons for staying longer.
Results:
For all groups, poor health, wish for more leisure, and economy
were the most salient expected reasons for retiring. Many would stay longer if there were better
possibilities for more leisure time, more work flexibility, and economic benefits. Those expecting to
retire
before
state pension age were
more
likely to point at desire for more leisure time as expected
reason for retiring, and
less
likely to point at economic reasons, and
more
likely to point at health
and work demands as possible reasons for prolonging working life. Those expecting to retire
after
state pension age were
more
likely to point at external factors and recognition from the management.
Conclusion:
Factors influencing retirement decisions are similar across the groups. Initiatives for
better work–life balance, healthy lifestyle, and economic incentives to continue working may help
prevent early retirement and motivate prolonging work life beyond retirement. Results also indicate
that less strenuous work is particularly relevant to prevent early retirement.
Keywords:
senior worker; ageing; occupational health; public health; workplace; sustainable employment
1. Introduction
As a consequence of the ageing population in many western countries, the proportion of older
workers and, thus, workers potentially leaving for retirement is increasing. To deal with the potential
lack of qualified workers and potential economic strain caused by these demographic changes, there is
strong political interest in prolonging work life in most western countries. Thus, knowledge on factors
that can prevent early retirement and contribute to prolonged labour market participation is becoming
increasingly salient.
Various factors influence workers’ retirement intentions and behaviour [1,2] and they have been
categorised into Push, Pull, Jump, Stuck, and Stay (e.g., Andersen, Jensen [3]). Push refers to factors
pushing the worker involuntary out of the labour market such as ill health or adverse working
conditions. Pull refers to factors pulling the worker out of the labour market such as economic
incentives and Jump to internal motivations to leave the labour market such as the wish for more time
for leisure activities. Stay refers to factors motivating the worker to stay at work such as financial gains
and work satisfaction and, finally, Stuck to factors leading to the worker being stuck involuntarily
at work, for example, because of a poor financial situation so the worker cannot afford to retire.
Push, Pull, and Jump are likely to result in early retirement, whereas Stay and Stuck are likely to result
in late retirement.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health
2020,
17,
3338; doi:10.3390/ijerph17093338
www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph
 BEU, Alm.del - 2019-20 - Bilag 271: Orientering om NFA-artikel om push and stay faktorer blandt 50+årige, fra beskæftigelsesministeren
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health
2020,
17,
3338
2 of 12
A large body of research on the topic already exists and many factors have been identified
influencing workers’ retirement intentions and behaviour. In the present study, we analyse and
compare the self-reported salience of central factors underlying Push, Pull, Jump, and Stay among
three different retirement groups: workers expecting to retire before, at, or after the state pension age,
respectively. Below we provide a brief overview of research on these central factors.
Poor health has been identified as the strongest Push factor. Health status is associated with and
predicts time of retirement [4–6] and intention to retire early or late [7–9]. These findings are confirmed
by a meta-analysis showing that poor physical and mental health are important antecedents of early
retirement [1]. When looking at qualitative studies on the topic, good health has been described as
important or even a precondition for continuing working beyond retirement age [10,11]. Interviews
with people aged 65+ who are still working, revealed that own or partners’ ill health was seen as the
only threat to continuing working [12]. All in all, ill health appears to be an important Push factor
regardless of the timing of the retirement.
Work demands may likewise push the worker out of the labour market. A scoping review
identified physical and cognitive demands at work as barriers for prolonged work participation after
pensionable age [2], these findings are supported by another review that showed that physical work
demands and work pressure were related to early retirement [13]. Qualitative findings confirm that
particularly work pressure [13,14] and to a lesser extent physical work demands [13] contribute to
early retirement. On the other hand, a longitudinal study found that psychosocial demands predicted
shorter time to preferred retirement but not exit from work per se, and physical work demands did
not predict either preferred or actual exit [15]. Furthermore, the meta-analysis by Topa, Depolo [1]
found that job stress was a less important antecedent of early retirement. Finally, high work load and
physical job demands only marginally increased the risk of early retirement among Danish nurses [7].
Nevertheless, high physical work demand is a strong risk factor for disability pension among Danish
healthcare workers [16]. Thus, high physical work demand is a strong Push factor acting through the
development of poor health leading to, e.g., disability pension and, thereby, early exit from the labour
market. However, it is less clear which role work demands play in regard to early retirement that is
not disability pension or for the duration of continuing working beyond retirement age.
Finally, interviews with people who retired early revealed that feeling that their knowledge was
not being used in the organisation contributed to pushing them towards early retirement. However,
some also reported not wanting to invest in new skills and knowledge and, therefore, retired early to
“escape” attending courses and training [14].
Other factors motivate workers to leave the labour market rather than pushing them out
involuntarily. Research indicates that the decision to retire is influenced by the spouse [8]. Married
couples tend to retire at the same time [17] and having a spouse outside the labour market predicts
early retirement [7]. Positive attitudes of the spouse with respect to retiring early predict a transition
into early retirement [6], and the wish to do enjoyable things with a non-working or older spouse was
mentioned as pulling towards early retirement [14].
Economy may also work as a Pull factor. Friis, Ekholm [7] found that low income predicted early
retirement and argue that this may be because it pays off better to continue working when you have a
higher income because the early retirement scheme “income” is relatively low.
The desire for more leisure time appears to be a strong Jump factor leading older workers towards
retirement. Interviewees reported the desire to “enjoy life now”, “wish to do other things outside work”,
“wanting more flexibility”, and “to spend more time with or taking care of family members or friends”
as motivations for retiring early [14]. A scoping review found that flexible working hours was an
incentive for prolonged work life [2], possibly because it facilitates a satisfying work–life balance.
Nevertheless, the role of the desire for more leisure as a motivation for retiring after having worked
beyond retirement age has, to the authors knowledge, not been explored explicitly.
While the abovementioned factors are likely to lead the worker towards retirement, other factors
may contribute to delaying retirement. Although ill health has been identified as a strong Push factor,
 BEU, Alm.del - 2019-20 - Bilag 271: Orientering om NFA-artikel om push and stay faktorer blandt 50+årige, fra beskæftigelsesministeren
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health
2020,
17,
3338
3 of 12
health considerations can also work as a Stay factor [10,12]. During interviews, older workers described
how continuing working keeps you both physically and mentally fit and healthy. Work keeps your
mind off pain and health problems, and work obligations and routines help resist “‘giving in’ to illness,
laziness, and low mood” [12]. Thus, the desire to keep in good health or take your mind off health
problems may contribute to prolonging labour market attachment.
Furthermore, research indicates that influence and recognition may also work as stay factors
motivating employees to continue working. High work time control has been identified as a key factor
for extended employment into old age [9]. In addition, decision authority has been found to predict
retirement preferences [15], and work autonomy was found to be associated with willingness to work
longer [18]. Blekesaune and Solem [19] found low job autonomy to be associated with early retirement
among men, but not among women, and argue that this may be because the women are stuck at
work due to their financial situation. Finally, low recognition has been found to predict retirement
preferences [15] and participants reporting high appreciation at work were less likely to retire early [6].
This is supported by qualitative results indicating that reward and appreciation is important for the
motivation to prolong working life [11].
Moreover, skill development and challenges at work have been identified as Stay factors.
Employees who report greater focus on development of skills and knowledge have been found
to be less likely to retire early [6], and challenge at work was found to predict continuing working [11]
and willingness to continue working [18]. Armstrong-Stassen and Ursel [20] propose that training and
development practices are important for perceived organisational support, which again leads to career
satisfaction and ultimately the retention of older workers. These findings are supported by the results
of a scoping review that the possibility of up-grading and learning new skills facilitates prolonged work
life after retirement. Results from qualitative studies also indicate that the possibility of developing
and using one’s skills and knowledge motivates older workers to stay in the work force [10–12].
The financial situation can also work as a Stay factor [2]. For example, financial advantages of
working have been found to predict continuing working [11], and economic incentives were found to
be associated with willingness to work until age 65 or beyond [8]. However, it can also can lead to
the person being stuck at the labour market because the person cannot afford to retire at the desired
age [4–6]. Statements from interviewees in a qualitative study illustrate how the financial situation
works both as a Stay and a Stuck factor. Interviewees reported how financial security was motivation
for prolonging work life, but in most cases it was to maintain the desired lifestyle more than to provide
for basic everyday needs, nevertheless, for some it was necessary to make ends meet [10].
Finally, just as having a non-working spouse may pull the worker out of the labour market,
qualitative findings show that not wanting to sit home alone while the spouse is working and being
single are motivations for continuing work [10].
Lastly, there are strong social norms regarding retirement age and these norms may influence
retirement timing [21], this is supported by the finding that workplace timing for retirement is an
important antecedent of early retirement [1].
As documented in the literature, the retirement decision is often complex and influenced by many
factors pulling towards either early or delayed retirement. However, less is known about differences
and similarities in regard to Push, Pull, Jump, and Stay factors between workers who intend to leave
the labour market before and after the state pension age. Are these the same factors that workers
expecting to retire early perceive as important for the retirement decision, as those who expect to
work beyond state pension age? Or the same factors that motivate prolonging work life even further?
Knowledge on similarities and differences between these two groups of workers may inform targeted
interventions to prevent early retirement as well as interventions to motivate workers, already working
beyond the retirement age, to prolong their labour market engagement even further. Therefore, using
survey data from a large representative sample of workers aged 55 or older, the present study analyses
and compares the self-reported salience of the factors for conditioning retirement intentions presented
above, among three different retirement groups: workers expecting to retire before, at, or after the state
 BEU, Alm.del - 2019-20 - Bilag 271: Orientering om NFA-artikel om push and stay faktorer blandt 50+årige, fra beskæftigelsesministeren
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health
2020,
17,
3338
4 of 12
pension age, respectively. Further, in the same way, the study also analyses and compares factors that
could potentially change such retirement decisions and prolong working life.
2. Materials and Method
2.1. Design
This study is a part of the SeniorWorkingLife project that investigates Push and Stay mechanisms
for labour market participation among workers aged 50+ years in Denmark. The study is registered as a
cohort study in ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT03634410) and the open-access protocol is published
elsewhere [22]. In the present article, we present cross-sectional data from the baseline questionnaire
survey that was sent out in July 2018 and terminated in October 2018.
2.2. Participants
For the present study, a total of 30,000 Danes aged 50 years or more (18,000 employed,
7000 unemployed, 3000 on voluntary early retirement, 2000 on disability pension) were drawn
as a probability sample within each specified strata by Statistics Denmark and invited with a personal
questionnaire-link via e-Boks (online digital mailbox linked to the Danish social security number) to
participate. We only include employed individuals in the current article. Among those who were
employed, the response rate to the entire questionnaire was 56%, but for the present analyses, those
replying only partly were included as well, yielding a total sample size of 12,269 employed individuals.
For the purpose of the present article, we divided the sample into three retirement groups (before
(N
=
6101), at (N
=
3766), and after (N
=
2402) the state pension age) based on their answer to the
question “at which age do you expect to leave the labour market permanently”? Those who expected
to retire at least one year before and after, respectively, the official state pension age were defined as
‘before’ and ‘after’ the state pension age. Those expecting to retire within one year before or after were
defined as ‘at’ the state pension age.
2.3. The Questionnaire
The questions were inspired by The Danish Longitudinal Study of Ageing [23] and the
questionnaire is described in more detail in Andersen, Jensen [3]. In short, the question regarding
factors conditioning retirement intentions contained 15 multiple-choice response options, provided in
random order and shown in Table 2. For possible reasons to stay longer, 15 multiple-choice response
options were likewise provided in random order for each respondent and are shown in Table 3.
For both questionnaire batteries, the option ‘none of the above’ was provided at the bottom of the
multiple-choice questions as the 16th option.
2.4. Statistical Analyses
The SurveyFreq procedure of SAS (version 9.4) was used to estimate prevalence and 95% confidence
intervals. For the different questions, the SurveyLogistic procedure was used to estimate odds ratios
(ORs) and 95% confidence intervals for those intending to leave before and after state pension age,
respectively, compared to those leaving at state pension age. The analyses were controlled for sex, age,
and highest obtained education. Model-assisted weights were included in the procedures, based on
information from high-quality national registers at Statistics Denmark, and took into account sex, age,
occupational industry, highest completed education, family income, family type, and origin [22].
3. Results
As shown in Table
1,
the proportion of men is notably larger among participants expecting to retire
after the state pension age, whereas the gender distribution is more even in the other two retirement
groups (i.e., before state pension age and at state pension age). The mean age of the participants is
highest among those expecting to retire after followed by at the state pension age. The proportion
 BEU, Alm.del - 2019-20 - Bilag 271: Orientering om NFA-artikel om push and stay faktorer blandt 50+årige, fra beskæftigelsesministeren
2205299_0005.png
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health
2020,
17,
3338
5 of 12
rating their health as bad or not so good is slightly larger among those expecting to retire early and
slightly smaller among those expecting to retire after the state pension age. The self-rated physical
and psychological strain at work is less among those expecting to retire after the state pension age,
and finally, the self-rated work ability is slightly better among those expecting to retire after the state
pension age. Table
1
shows the descriptive characteristics of the participants.
Table 1.
Background information for the three retirement groups.
Before
State Pension Age
(N
=
5741–6101)
Men (%)
Women (%)
Age (mean)
Self-rated health as bad/not so good (%)
Weekly working hours (mean)
Self-rated physical strain at work
(mean/scale 0–10)
Self-rated psychological strain at work
(mean/scale 0–10)
Self-rated workability
(mean/scale 0–10)
47
53
55.3
12
38.4
3.7
5.6
7.8
At
State Pension
Age
(N
=
3510–3779)
53
47
56.9
10
38.8
3.4
5.5
8.0
After
State Pension Age
(N
=
2186–2420)
71
29
59.7
6
39.2
2.8
4.9
8.2
N Varies due to Omitted Responses.
3.1. Factors Conditioning the Retirement Decision
Table
2
shows prevalence and ORs of expected reasons for leaving the labour market among the
three retirement groups. Overall, it seems that the factors that appear to be most relevant are similar
across the three retirement groups (Table
2).
The factors the largest proportion of the participants
pointed towards relate to leisure: the wish to determine for themselves what they want to do, and
to have more time for hobbies. The factors the second largest proportion of the participants pointed
towards relate to economy and retirement considerations: the possibility of receiving early retirement
pension and pension. Finally, not being capable of doing their job is likewise a factor pointed towards by
a larger proportion of the participants, followed by economic considerations and poor physical health.
Comparing participants expecting to retire at the state pension age with those who expect to retire
before and after this age, respectively, the results show that those expecting to retire early were a bit,
but significantly, more likely to point towards the two factors related to leisure as conditioning their
decision to retire (OR: 1.26 (1.14–1.39), 1.14 (1.03–1.26)).
Looking at health, work demands and well-being, there are no significant differences between
participants expecting to retire at the state pension age and those expecting to retire early or
late, respectively.
Regarding economy and retirement considerations, not surprisingly, participants expecting to
retire early were much more likely to point towards the possibility of receiving voluntary early
retirement pension. Likewise, participants expecting to retire at the state pension age were more likely
to point towards the possibility of receiving state pension than both of the other retirement groups. In
addition, the participants expecting to retire early were less likely than participants expecting to retire
at the state pension age to point at economic considerations as conditioning their decision to retire (OR:
0.71 (0.62–0.80)).
When looking at norms, those expecting to retire at the state pension age were more likely
than both of the other groups, to point towards the factor that it is common to retire at that age as
conditioning their decision to retire.
Although, in general, only a small proportion of the participants pointed towards external factors
as expected reasons for retiring, when compared with participants expecting to retire at the state
pension age, participants expecting to retire later were
more
likely to point towards the three external
 BEU, Alm.del - 2019-20 - Bilag 271: Orientering om NFA-artikel om push and stay faktorer blandt 50+årige, fra beskæftigelsesministeren
2205299_0006.png
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health
2020,
17,
3338
6 of 12
factors (OR: 1.53 (1.21–1.94), 1.97 (1.52–2.57), 1.84 (1.31–2.60)), and those expecting to retire earlier were
less
likely to point towards the external factors except for “wish from spouse” (OR: 0.64 (0.50–0.83),
0.50 (0.36–0.71).
Finally, the participants expecting to retire after the state pension age were more likely than those
expecting to retire at the state pension age, to choose the ”none of the above” factors as conditioning
their decision to retire (OR: 3.74 (2.75–5.08)).
Table 2.
Factors conditioning the retirement decision.
OR (95% CI) *
You Wrote That You Expect to Leave the Labour
Market at Age XX. Please Choose the Factors That
May Play a Role in This.
Leisure
That you want do determine yourself what you want
to do
To have more time for hobbies
Health, work demands, and well-being
That you will not be capable of doing your job
Poor physical health
That you do not thrive at the workplace
Poor mental health
Economy and retirement considerations
Possibility of receiving pension
Economic considerations
Possibility of receiving voluntary early
retirement pension
Good retirement conditions at the workplace
Norms
It is common to leave at that age in your type of work
To make space for younger employees
External factors
Wish from spouse
Termination of employment
At the request of the workplace
None of the above
Before State
Pension Age
(N
=
6101) (%)
At State
Pension Age
(N
=
3766) (%)
After State
Pension Age
(N
=
2402) (%)
Before vs. at
State Pension
Age
After vs. at
State Pension
Age
50
47
25
19
8
4
21
17
35
6
9
12
6
3
1
1
46
44
25
17
8
5
46
22
6
5
15
10
6
4
3
3
46
32
24
16
9
6
14
23
1
6
9
9
9
8
5
9
1.26
(1.14–1.39)
1.14
(1.03–1.26)
0.92 (0.82–1.03)
1.07 (0.93–1.22)
0.96 (0.80–1.15)
0.79 (0.63–1.0)
0.28
(0.25–0.31)
0.71
(0.62–0.80)
10.96
(9.01–13.32)
1.12 (0.91–1.38)
0.55
(0.47–0.64)
1.13 (0.97–1.33)
1.18 (0.96–1.44)
0.64
(0.50–0.83)
0.50
(0.36–0.71)
0.55
(0.39–0.79)
0.93 (0.81–1.06)
0.57
(0.49–0.65)
1.17 (1.00–1.36)
1.15 (0.96–1.36)
1.14 (0.90–1.43)
1.20 (0.91–1.58)
0.21
(0.18–0.25)
1.09 (0.94–1.27)
0.14
(0.09–0.24)
1.27 (0.98–1.65)
0.64
(0.52–0.78)
0.86 (0.69–1.08)
1.53
(1.21–1.94)
1.97
(1.52–2.57)
1.84
(1.31–2.60)
3.74
(2.75–5.08)
OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval. Statistical significant OR’s are highlighted in
bold
* Controlled for sex, age,
and educational group.
3.2. Possible Reasons for Prolonging Work Participation
Table
3
shows prevalence and ORs of possible reasons for staying longer in the labour market
among the three retirement groups. When looking at the factors that would potentially contribute to the
participants staying longer in the labour market, the overall pattern of which factors appear to be most
important is again similar across the three retirement groups (Table
3).
The three factors the largest
proportion of the participants point towards are leisure, flexibility, and economy. So particularly more
senior days (extra days off for senior employees), the working time being better organised according to
their needs, and that it would pay better off economically to continue working, appear to be the most
relevant factors motivating the participants to stay at work.
When comparing the retirement groups, the results show that those expecting to retire later were
less likely to point towards the two factors related to leisure as possible reasons for them staying in
the labour market for longer (OR: 0.59 (0.51–0.68), 0.69 (0.59–0.80)). Regarding flexibility, participants
expecting to retire at the state pension age were more likely to point towards “if the working time was
better organised according to your needs” than both of the other retirement groups.
When looking at health and work demands and comparing with participants expecting to retire
at the state pension age. Participants expecting to retire early were
more
likely to choose the factors
“if your health had been better” (OR: 1.35 (1.17–1.56)) and “if the work was less mentally strenuous”
(OR: 1.30 (1.13–1.50)), while those expecting to retire later were
less
likely to point towards the work
being less both physically and mentally strenuous as possible reasons for them staying in the labour
market longer (OR: 0.55 (0.45–0.69), 0.59 (0.47–0.73)).
Regarding recognition and influence at work, participants expecting to retire at the state pension
age were significantly
more
likely to point towards “if the management wanted you to stay longer” than
 BEU, Alm.del - 2019-20 - Bilag 271: Orientering om NFA-artikel om push and stay faktorer blandt 50+årige, fra beskæftigelsesministeren
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health
2020,
17,
3338
7 of 12
those expecting to retire early and significantly
less
likely than those expecting to retire later. Moreover,
those expecting to retire early were a bit, but significantly, more likely to point towards “if your work
was appreciated to a greater extent” than those expecting to retire at the state pension age.
Looking at changes and challenges at work and comparing with participants expecting to retire at
the state pension age, results show that participants expecting to retire early were a bit, but significantly,
more
likely to point towards “if there were less demands for adaptation and change” (OR: 1.18
(1.01–1.39)), while participants expecting to retire later, were
less
likely to point at this factor (OR:
0.62 (0.49–0.79)). In addition, those expecting to retire later, were more likely to point at “if there
were greater professional challenges” as possible reason for them wanting to stay longer in the labour
market (OR: 1.80 (1.36–2.39)).
Regarding the factors related to education, there were no significant differences between the
retirement groups.
When looking at the results regarding external factors, participants expecting to retire early were
a little, but significantly,
less
likely (OR: 0.76 (0.61–0.95)) to point towards “if there was support from a
spouse” and those expecting to retire later were
more
likely (OR: 1.63 (1.29–2.06)) to point towards this
factor, than participants expecting to retire at the state pension age.
Finally, participants, expecting to retire after the state pension age, were more likely than
participants, expecting to retire at the state pension age, to choose the “none of the above” factors as
possible reasons for them wanting to stay longer in the labour market (OR: 1.47 (1.26–1.72)).
 BEU, Alm.del - 2019-20 - Bilag 271: Orientering om NFA-artikel om push and stay faktorer blandt 50+årige, fra beskæftigelsesministeren
2205299_0008.png
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health
2020,
17,
3338
8 of 12
Table 3.
Possible reasons for prolonging work participation.
OR (95% CI) *
You Wrote That You Expect to Leave the Labour
Market at Age XX. Please Choose the Factors That
Would Make You Stay in the Labour Market
for Longer.
Leisure
If there were more senior days
If there was a possibility for longer vacations
Flexibility
If the working time was better organised according to
your needs
Economy
If it would pay better off economically
Health and work demands
If your health had been better
If the work was less physically strenuous
If the work was less mentally strenuous
Recognition and influence at work
If the management wanted you to stay longer
If your work was appreciated to a greater extent
If you got more influence on planning the work
Changes and challenges at work
If there were less demands for adaptation and change
If there were greater professional challenges
Education
If your opportunities for continuing education
were better
If you got a paid educational course to carry out
another job (not necessarily at the same workplace)
External factors
If there was support from spouse/cohabitant/partner
None of the above
Before State Pension
Age (N
=
6101) (%)
At State Pension Age
(N
=
3750) (%)
After State Pension Age
(N
=
2392) (%)
Before Vs. at State
Pension Age
After Vs. at State
Pension Age
44
30
34
26
17
19
17
11
13
11
12
4
5
6
4
18
43
30
37
33
13
16
14
16
11
12
11
4
5
6
6
19
28
21
28
29
12
8
8
22
9
11
6
7
5
5
10
26
0.99 (0.89–1.09)
0.97 (0.87–1.08)
0.84
(0.75–0.93)
0.71
(0.64–0.79)
1.35
(1.17–1.56)
1.13 (0.98–1.29)
1.30
(1.13–1.50)
0.59
(0.51–0.68)
1.21
(1.04–1.41)
0.91 (0.78–1.06)
1.18
(1.01–1.39)
0.91 (0.71–1.17)
0.88 (0.71–1.11)
0.88 (0.72–1.09)
0.76
(0.61–0.95)
0.94 (0.82–1.06)
0.59
(0.51–0.68)
0.69
(0.59–0.80)
0.79
(0.68–0.91)
0.89 (0.77–1.02)
0.94 (0.77–1.16)
0.55
(0.45–0.69)
0.59
(0.47–0.73)
1.39
(1.18–1.63)
0.93 (0.75–1.15)
1.04 (0.85–1.28)
0.62
(0.49–0.79)
1.80
(1.36–2.39)
1.17 (0.87–1.58)
0.87 (0.65–1.16)
1.63
(1.29–2.06)
1.47
(1.26–1.72)
*
Controlled for sex, age, and educational group. Statistical significant OR’s are highlighted in
bold.
 BEU, Alm.del - 2019-20 - Bilag 271: Orientering om NFA-artikel om push and stay faktorer blandt 50+årige, fra beskæftigelsesministeren
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health
2020,
17,
3338
9 of 12
4. Discussion
The aim of the study was to explore factors conditioning retirement intentions and factors that
could potentially prolong working life among workers expecting to retire before, at, and after the state
pension age. In general, the results indicate that there are more similarities than differences between
these three retirement groups. For all three groups, factors related to leisure, health, and economy
were the most salient expected reasons for leaving the labour market and factors related to leisure,
flexibility, and economy the most salient possible reasons for prolonging work participation. However,
the results also found some differences between the groups. Those expecting to retire before the state
pension age were more likely to point towards the desire for more leisure time as the expected reason
for retiring, and less likely to point towards if it would pay off better as a possible reason for continuing
working. At the same time, they were also more likely to point towards if their health had been better
and if their work was less mentally strenuous as possible reasons for prolonging work engagement.
Those expecting to retire after the state pension age were more likely to point towards external factors
as influencing their retirement decisions.
The most common factors conditioning the retirement decision (independent of retirement group)
were related to more leisure time (i.e., to determine what to do and more time for hobbies).
When comparing the three groups, results show that participants expecting to retire early were
a bit more likely to point towards leisure time as an expected reason for retiring. These findings are in
line with previous literature showing that the desire for more leisure time is a motivation for early
retirement [14]. Furthermore, the results show that participants, expecting to retire after the state
pension age, were less likely to point at desire for more time for hobbies as an expected reason for
them retiring, indicating that this is a weaker incentive for this group of older workers. This could
reflect, that this group experiences a higher level of work–life balance as also indicated by the results
showing that they were less likely to point at more senior days and longer vacations as an incentive to
stay in the labour market longer.
Poor physical health was a common factor across the three retirement groups as an expected
reason for retiring, which is in line with previous literature [4–12]. There were no significant differences
between the three retirement groups regarding the role of poor mental and physical health for them
retiring, indicating that health problems are a salient factor contributing to retirement for both early
and late retirees. These findings provide further support for the existing research reporting associations
between poor health and early retirement [1] and findings from qualitative studies showing that
employees working beyond retirement age mention poor health as the only reason they would stop
working [12]. However, when looking at possible reasons for working longer, participants expecting to
retire early were more likely to point at “if my health was better”, which probably reflects that a larger
proportion of these participants have health problems.
A large proportion of both workers expecting to retire before and at the age reported the possibility
of receiving pension/early retirement pension as an expected reason for their decision to retire.
This could reflect that this is a prerequisite to retire at all. Looking at possible reasons to prolong
work life, “if it would pay off better economically” was one of the factors the largest proportion of the
participants in all three retirement groups pointed at, supporting previous research indicating financial
gain as an incentive to continue working [8,10,11]. The participants expecting to retire before the state
pension age were, however, less likely to point at this factor, indicating that other factors may play a
larger role for this group of workers. Economic incentives can be regulated, e.g., by political reforms,
and it would be relevant to investigate the societal cost–benefit of stimulating people to work longer
by the use of economic incentives.
“Not being capable of doing your job” was also one of the factors the largest proportion of the
participants in all three retirement groups expect to contribute to the decision to retire. There were no
significant differences between the groups indicating that this is equally salient for all three groups.
However, when looking at the factors “the work was less physically/mentally strenuous” as possible
reasons for staying at work longer, participants expecting to retire later, were less likely to point at
 BEU, Alm.del - 2019-20 - Bilag 271: Orientering om NFA-artikel om push and stay faktorer blandt 50+årige, fra beskæftigelsesministeren
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health
2020,
17,
3338
10 of 12
these. They also rated both the physical and psychological strain at work as lower indicating that
they to a lesser extent have strenuous jobs. Physical and mental demands have been associated with
early retirement [2,13,14], it is thus likely that the less strenuous work contributes to this group of the
participants expecting to work beyond retirement age.
Although only a minority point at this, greater professional challenges appear to be a greater
incentive to prolong working even further among those expecting to retire after the state pension age.
These findings provide further support for research indicating that skill development and challenge
motivate prolonging work life [10–12,18], but this may apply more to those already expecting to work
for longer. However, when asked about opportunities for continuing education and paid education to
carry out another job, there were no differences between the three retirement groups and again, only a
minority pointing at this as an incentive to prolong working life.
Only a minority of the participants pointed at external factors such as “request from the workplace”,
nevertheless, it appears to play a larger role in the decision to retire among employees planning to
retire after the state pension age. This is further supported by the results that they were more likely to
point at “if the management wanted you to stay longer” and “if there was support from my spouse”,
as possible reasons for them staying longer, in other words, they are willing to continue working if
encouraged to do so.
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Study
The strengths of the study include the careful procedure to ensure that the estimates are
representative of workers in Denmark aged 50 years or older. To produce the large representative
sample used in the study, Statistics Denmark drew a probability sample among all eligible Danish
residents age 50 years or older and combined this with model-assisted weights based on high-quality
national registers. Furthermore, the electronic questionnaire was designed to reduce the risk of bias by
randomising the order of the response options.
The questions analysed in the present study were of a factual nature, i.e., the participants were
asked to choose which of the listed factors they believed would contribute to their decision to retire as
well as which factors they believed might motivate them to stay at work for longer. The listed factors
were inspired from the literature. For these reasons, it is not relevant to validate the questionnaire.
Nevertheless, one could argue that it is a limitation that we did not include an exhaustive list of possible
factors, conditioning the retirement decision, and thus may have missed out potential important
factors. However, firstly, as the list of factors included in the questionnaire was inspired from the
rather extensive literature on the topic, we do believe that we have included the most important
factors, secondly, we had to limit the number of factors included in the questionnaire to keep it at a
reasonable length.
A weakness of the study is that the results are based on cross-sectional data and intended behaviour
and, therefore, do not reveal whether the identified factors relate to actual behaviour (i.e., the actual
time-point of retirement). Nevertheless, the purpose of the study was to investigate similarities and
differences between the three retirement groups on factors they perceived as important for their
retirement decisions. The data are therefore adequate for the purpose of the study.
In the present study, we estimated ORs. However, it can be argued that the ORs overestimate the
values found. Thus, a direct comparison with other studies using, e.g., prevalence ratios cannot be
done. For interpretation of the present results, it is therefore also important to consider the respective
prevalence (percentages in the first three columns of Tables
2
and
3),
and not only the ORs.
Finally, the applicability of the results to countries applying different arrangements of retirement
benefits and labour market protection needs to be investigated in future research. For example,
van der Wel, Dahl [24] conclude that the welfare system of Scandinavian countries is better at protecting
against non-employment due to illness than other systems. The generalisability of the present study,
therefore, may only apply to workers in welfare states.
 BEU, Alm.del - 2019-20 - Bilag 271: Orientering om NFA-artikel om push and stay faktorer blandt 50+årige, fra beskæftigelsesministeren
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health
2020,
17,
3338
11 of 12
5. Conclusions
All in all, the results indicate that the factors, that appear to be most salient when making the
decision to retire, overall are similar for employees expecting to retire before, at, and after the state
pension age, namely, leisure time, capability to do the job, health, and economy. Thus, initiatives to
help ensure better work–life balance, enhance demand and resource fit, supporting healthy lifestyle,
and that it pays off economically to continue working may help prevent early retirement and motivate
prolonging work life beyond retirement age. However, the results also indicate that ensuring work–life
balance and finding ways to make the work less strenuous are particularly relevant to prevent early
retirement. The participants expecting to retire after the state pension age have already been prevented
from leaving work early, so to say. To motivate this group of workers to prolong work life even further,
in addition to focussing on work–life balance, healthy lifestyle, and economic incentives to continue
working, the results indicate that professional challenges at work and being encouraged to continue
working by the spouse and the workplace, may serve as motivation for at least some of these workers.
Author Contributions:
L.L.A. is project leader and responsible for the study design, questionnaire development,
definition of population and data collection. Both L.L.A., A.M. and E.S. have contributed to the study design,
questionnaire development, definition of population and data collection. A.M. drafted the manuscript. All authors
have provided important intellectual feedback on the manuscript. All authors critically reviewed and approved
the final version of the manuscript.
Acknowledgments:
The authors are grateful for important discussions and input during the development of the
study to the many people from Aalborg University, Team Arbejdsliv, National Research Centre for the Working
Environment, Statistics Denmark, as well as to the members of the Advisory Board.
Availability of Data and Material:
The authors encourage collaboration and use of the data by other researchers.
Data are stored on the server of Statistics Denmark, and researchers interested in using the data for scientific
purposes should contact the project leader L.L.A., [email protected].
Ethics Approval and Consent to Participate:
According to Danish law, questionnaire and register-based studies
do not need informed consent or approval by ethical and scientific committees. All data have been de-identified
by Statistics Denmark, will remain on the server of Statistics Denmark, and will be analysed through remote access
by the researchers.
Conflicts of Interest:
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1.
2.
Topa, G.; Depolo, M.; Alcover, C.-M. Alcover, Early Retirement: A Meta-Analysis of Its Antecedent and
Subsequent Correlates.
Front. Psychol.
2017,
8,
2157. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Carlstedt, A.B.; Brushammar, G.; Bjursell, C.; Nystedt, P.; Nilsson, G. A scoping review of the incentives for
a prolonged work life after pensionable age and the importance of “bridge employment”.
Work
2018,
60,
175–189. [CrossRef]
Andersen, L.L.; Jensen, P.H.; Sundstrup, E. Sundstrup, Barriers and opportunities for prolonging working
life across different occupational groups: The SeniorWorkingLife study.
Eur. J. Public Health
2019,
30,
241–246.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
De Wind, A.; Van Der Pas, S.; Blatter, B.M.; Van Der Beek, A.J. A life course perspective on working beyond
retirement-results from a longitudinal study in the Netherlands.
BMC Public Health
2016,
16,
499. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
Wahrendorf, M.; Akinwale, B.; Landy, R.; Matthews, K.; Blane, D. Who in Europe Works beyond the
State Pension Age and under which Conditions? Results from SHARE.
J. Popul. Ageing
2017,
10,
269–285.
[CrossRef]
De Wind, A.; Geuskens, G.A.; Ybema, J.F.; Blatter, B.M.; Burdorf, A.; Bongers, P.M.; Van Der Beek, A.J.
Health, job characteristics, skills, and social and financial factors in relation to early retirement-results from a
longitudinal study in the Netherlands.
Scand. J. Work. Environ. Health
2014,
40,
186–194. [CrossRef]
Friis, K.; Ekholm, O.; Hundrup, Y.A.; Obel, E.B.; Grønbæk, M. Influence of health, lifestyle, working
conditions, and sociodemography on early retirement among nurses: The Danish Nurse Cohort Study.
J. Public Health
2007,
35,
23–30. [CrossRef]
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
 BEU, Alm.del - 2019-20 - Bilag 271: Orientering om NFA-artikel om push and stay faktorer blandt 50+årige, fra beskæftigelsesministeren
2205299_0012.png
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health
2020,
17,
3338
12 of 12
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
Nilsson, K.; Rignell-Hydbom, A.; Rylander, L. Rylander, Factors influencing the decision to extend working
life or retire.
Scand. J. Work. Environ. Health
2011,
37,
473–480. [CrossRef]
Virtanen, M.; Oksanen, T.; Batty, G.D.; Ala-Mursula, L.; Salo, P.; Elovainio, M.; Pentti, J.; Lybäck, K.; Vahtera, J.;
Kivimaki, M. Extending employment beyond the pensionable age: A cohort study of the influence of chronic
diseases, health risk factors, and working conditions.
PLoS ONE
2014,
9,
e88695. [CrossRef]
Sewdas, R.; De Wind, A.; Van Der Zwaan, G.L.; Van Der Borg, W.E.; Steenbeek, R.; Van Der Beek, A.J.;
Boot, C.R. Why older workers work beyond the retirement age: A qualitative study.
BMC Public Health
2017,
17,
672. [CrossRef]
Proper, K.I.; Deeg, D.J.H.; Van Der Beek, A.J. Challenges at work and financial rewards to stimulate longer
workforce participation.
Hum. Resour. Health
2009,
7,
70. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Reynolds, F.; Farrow, A.; Blank, A.A. “Otherwise it would be nothing but cruises” exploring the subjective
benefits of working beyond 64.
Int. J. Ageing Later Life
2012,
7,
79–106. [CrossRef]
Van den Berg, T.I.; Elders, L.A.; Burdorf, A. Influence of health and work on early retirement.
J. Occup.
Environ. Med.
2010,
52,
576–583. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Reeuwijk, K.G.; De Wind, A.; Westerman, M.J.; Ybema, J.F.; Van Der Beek, A.J.; Geuskens, G.A. “All those
things together made me retire”: Qualitative study on early retirement among Dutch employees.
BMC Public Health
2013,
13,
516. [CrossRef]
Carr, E.; Hagger-Johnson, G.; Head, J.; Shelton, N.; Stafford, M.; Stansfeld, S.; Zaninotto, P. Working conditions
as predictors of retirement intentions and exit from paid employment: A 10-year follow-up of the English
Longitudinal Study of Ageing.
Eur. J. Ageing
2016,
13,
39–48. [CrossRef]
Andersen, L.L.; Villadsen, E.; Clausen, T. Influence of physical and psychosocial working conditions for the
risk of disability pension among healthy female eldercare workers: Prospective cohort.
Scand. J. Public Health
2019,
1403494819831821. [CrossRef]
An, M.Y.; Christensen, B.J.; Gupta, N.D. Multivariate mixed proportional hazard modelling of the joint
retirement of married couples.
J. Appl. Econ.
2004,
19,
687–704. [CrossRef]
Van den Berg, P.T. Characteristics of the work environment related to older employees’ willingness to
continue working: Intrinsic motivation as a mediator.
Psychol. Rep.
2011,
109,
174–186. [CrossRef]
Blekesaune, M.; Solem, P.E. Working Conditions and Early Retirement.
Res. Aging
2005,
27,
3–30. [CrossRef]
Armstrong-Stassen, M.; Ursel, N. Perceived organizational support, career satisfaction, and the retention of
older workers.
J. Occup. Organ. Psychol.
2009,
82,
201–220. [CrossRef]
Fisher, G.G.; Chaffee, D.S.; Sonnega, A. Retirement Timing: A Review and recommendations for Future
Research.
Work Aging Retire.
2016,
2,
230–261. [CrossRef]
Andersen, J.; Sundstrup, E. Study protocol for SeniorWorkingLife-push and stay mechanisms for labour
market participation among older workers.
BMC Public Health
2019,
19,
133. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
VIVE. 2018 11.02.2020. Available online:
https://www.vive.dk/da/temaer/aeldres-liv-og-arbejdsliv/
aeldredatabasen/
(accessed on 10 March 2020).
Van Der Wel, K.A.; Dahl, E.; Thielen, K. Social inequalities in “sickness”: Does welfare state regime type
make a difference? A multilevel analysis of men and women in 26 European countries.
Int. J. Health Serv.
2012,
42,
235–255. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
©
2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).