Determinants of Hispanic and non-Hispanic Workers’ Intent to Work Past Age 65: An Analysis From the Life Course Perspective

Abstract

Background: The average retirement age in the United States (U.S.) has increased over the past few decades. However, the rate of increase for Hispanics is lower than that for non-Hispanics. For Hispanics, the decision to retire later may be more influenced by their migration history and context rather than health or finances. Objective: This study aims to explore the differences in the determinants of intentions to delay retirement (i.e., work beyond the age of 65) between Hispanics and non-Hispanic Whites in the U.S. Methods: A pooled sample was generated from all waves of the Health and Retirement Study (1992–2014), including a unique record for each non-institutionalized individual aged 55–61 who was employed. All eligible Hispanics (n = 3,663) were included, while a random sample of non-Hispanic Whites (n = 3,663) was selected. Logistic mixed models were conducted for each group, and a Two-fold Oaxaca–Blinder decomposition analysis was used to explore differences between the groups. Results: The results indicate that non-Hispanic Whites are more likely to plan to postpone retirement. Furthermore, significant differences were found between Hispanics and non-Hispanic Whites regarding their intentions to delay retirement, specifically related to socioeconomic indicators such as individual earnings, amount of debt, level of education, and parents’ level of education. The differences between the groups were primarily influenced by the amount of debt, having a defined benefit plan, and parents’ level of education, reflecting the cumulative disadvantage experienced by Hispanics over their life course. Conclusion: Most existing research on the topic has focused on middle-class Whites, while few studies have examined race or ethnicity as the primary focus or explored the extent to which commonly identified predictors of delayed retirement apply to different ethno-racial groups. This is significant because Hispanics and other disadvantaged groups tend to experience financial insecurity during retirement, which directly impacts their health and well-being.

Keywords

delayed retirement Hispanics retirement intentions retirement timing life course theory decomposition analysis

Introduction

As the number of older adults facing decades of healthy living beyond the retirement age of 65 increases, delayed retirement is becoming more common. The percentage of workers aged 25 and older who expect to retire at age 66 or later has risen from 18% in 1998 to 52% in 2016 (EBRI, 2008, 2017). Many economists and policy experts argue that working longer is necessary to ensure financial security in retirement (Munnell & Sass, 2008). However, the factors influencing retirement decisions are complex, particularly among marginalized groups. Hispanics, the largest minority group in the United States (U.S.), have traditionally been younger than other population groups, but as the older population becomes more diverse, their numbers are growing.

Currently, Hispanics make up about 19% of the U.S. population, and this is projected to increase to nearly 30% by 2060 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2022). Moreover, the older Hispanic population is one of the fastest-growing groups, expected to increase by 252% over the next two decades (Johnson et al., 2017). The growing proportion of diverse older adults, including Hispanics, faces potential cumulative disadvantages such as differences in working conditions, health disparities, income and wealth disparities, and inequities in access to retirement plans. Extending their working lives could help them increase wealth for retirement.

Addressing this issue is crucial because disadvantaged groups tend to experience more retirement insecurity and poverty in old age. In the U.S., Hispanics aged 65 and older had a poverty rate of 18.7% in 2021, compared to 8% for non-Hispanic Whites (Congressional Research Service, 2022). This becomes even more important as the aging population increases, putting pressure on the Social Security System and the financial security of older adults.

One aspect of retirement security and planning that has received less attention is the ethno-racial differences in retirement planning. Studies have shown that minorities, such as non-Hispanic Blacks and Hispanics, are less likely to plan to postpone retirement than non-Hispanic Whites (EBRI, 2007; Montalto et al., 2000; Sanzenbacher et al., 2017). However, most studies on retirement timing have focused on middle-class White samples, and qualitative studies have shown limited preparedness and culturally relevant factors affecting retirement timing among Hispanics (Lytle et al., 2015).

Recent research using the Health and Retirement Study (HRS) has revealed significant differences between Hispanics, Blacks, and non-Hispanic Whites in terms of retirement expectations and outcomes. For example, Hispanics and Black older adults are more likely to have unmet retirement expectations, face limited working opportunities, and have fewer flexibilities to continue working (Abrams et al., 2022). Understanding these differences and the factors influencing retirement timing among Hispanics can help policymakers and retirement planning agencies promote retirement planning and financial security among all aging groups. This study aims to build on prior research and expand the literature by comparing Hispanics and non-Hispanic Whites in the U.S. to unravel the cultural complexities surrounding retirement timing.

Common Predictors of Planned Retirement Age From a Life Course Perspective

Both the life course theory and empirical research suggest that later-life and retirement outcomes can be traced back to pre-retirement years (Crystal et al., 2017; Flippen & Tienda, 2000). This aligns with the principle of cumulative advantages and disadvantages, which states that inequalities tend to accumulate from childhood to old age (McNamara & Williamson, 2013; O’Rand, 2009).

Migration History and Education

Higher socioeconomic status (SES) and better health have been found to be associated with the intention to postpone retirement (Munnell et al., 2004, 2016; Sanzenbacher et al., 2017; Williamson & McNamara, 2001). SES during childhood and throughout life determines access to education and health insurance, among other factors (Smith et al., 2016). Hispanic adults in the U.S. have lower rates of high school and college graduation, are more concentrated in low-wage jobs, and have lower incomes and health insurance coverage, suggesting lower retirement savings (Blanco et al., 2015; CDC, 2015; Johnson et al., 2017; Prickett & Angel, 2017; Sun et al., 2007; The Aspen Institute, 2017; Tienda & Mitchell, 2006; U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

These patterns align with broader racial economic inequalities in the U.S., which have been exacerbated by the expansion of the Hispanic population in the 1970s and the challenges faced by Hispanics in joining the workforce (Tienda & Mitchell, 2006). Migration experiences significantly influence social mobility and wealth accumulation over the life course (Angel & Angel, 2018; Tienda & Mitchell, 2006).

Hispanic Working Experience

Aligned with the cumulative disadvantage principle, Birkett and colleagues (2017) found that retirement experiences and outcomes are shaped to a large extent by career trajectories. Race, ethnicity, and educational attainment are strong predictors of wealth and income accumulation over the life course (Emmons & Noeth, 2015). Studies have shown that individuals’ wages are negatively associated with planned and actual retirement age (Munnell et al., 2004; Williamson & McNamara, 2001). Hispanic immigrants, in particular, have faced challenges due to changes in the economy since the 1970s, which have diminished market conditions and eroded wages in low-skill jobs where they are overrepresented (Angel & Angel, 2018; Tienda & Mitchell, 2006). Additionally, lower educational levels among Hispanics impose extra challenges to retirement wealth accumulation (Tienda & Mitchell, 2006).

Furthermore, having debt, such as a mortgage, is associated with an increased probability of remaining in the workforce at an older age (Montalto et al., 2000; Sanzenbacher et al., 2017). Discriminatory practices in the labor market have also affected opportunities for racial and ethnic minorities, including Hispanics, who tend to have lower health and pension coverage due to educational and occupational trajectories (Angel et al., 2014; Johnson et al., 2017; Prickett & Angel, 2017; Tienda & Mitchell, 2006). Compared to other groups, Hispanics have the lowest pension coverage rates, and female Hispanics are less likely to be covered by their own plans, reflecting their precarious working conditions (Angel et al., 2014).

Additionally, even when Hispanics participate in employer-sponsored benefits, they tend to contribute and save less than non-Hispanics (Angel & Angel, 2015). Having employer-sponsored retirement plans, such as defined benefit (DB) or defined contribution (DC) plans, decreases the likelihood of working longer (Montalto et al., 2000; Munnell et al., 2004; Szinovacz et al., 2013).

Health Determinants

Another fundamental principle of the life course theory is the association between the timing of transitions and events in an individual's life and their developmental consequences (Elder & Giele, 2009). Research indicates that adverse or poor health conditions are negatively linked to planned and actual retirement, as well as the decision to postpone retirement (Sanzenbacher et al., 2017; Munnell et al., 2004, 2016; Williamson & McNamara, 2001). Therefore, it is expected that an individual's current health status will influence their planned retirement timing.

Specifically, better health is anticipated to increase the likelihood of intending to retire after the age of 65. This effect is likely to be stronger among non-Hispanics compared to Hispanics. Hispanics tend to exhibit better health than their White counterparts, a phenomenon known as the “Hispanic health paradox.” Despite Hispanics reporting poorer health compared to non-Hispanic Whites and having similar socioeconomic profiles to Black Americans, their mortality rates are similar to non-Hispanic Whites, and they even have longer life expectancies, living approximately 3.3 years longer on average (Sudano & Baker, 2006). However, extended lives for Hispanics do not necessarily translate to healthier lives, as they tend to experience more chronic diseases than non-Hispanic Whites due to lack of health insurance and healthcare access throughout their lives (Calvo et al., 2017; Prickett & Angel, 2017).

Additionally, research by Szinovacz and colleagues (2013) suggests that having employer-sponsored health insurance increases the likelihood of working beyond the age of 62 but not beyond 65. This finding could be explained by the fact that most individuals become eligible for Medicare at the age of 65, which may influence retirement decisions among non-Hispanics. However, Hispanics face limitations in health insurance coverage and access to Medicare due to eligibility requirements. Their lifelong financial disadvantage, inadequate savings, and longer life expectancies put them at a higher risk of relying on Medicaid in old age (Angel & Angel, 2015, 2018). In comparison to non-Hispanics, Hispanics aged 65 and older are more likely to rely solely on Medicare or Medicare Advantage (47% vs. 41%) and are less likely to supplement it with other health insurance options. Hispanics are also less likely than non-Hispanic Whites to complement Medicare coverage with employer-based health insurance (14% of Hispanics compared to 32% of Whites) and more likely to rely on Medicaid as a supplement (CDC, 2015; Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, 2016). Consequently, it is expected that, unlike non-Hispanics, having health insurance coverage through one's current job will significantly increase the likelihood of postponing retirement for Hispanics.

Individual and Family Factors

According to the life course perspective, our lives are interconnected with the lives of others, and these relationships are considered valuable resources that assist individuals in navigating through life (Elder & Giele, 2009). In this context, the retirement behavior and intentions of a spouse or partner can shape an individual's own retirement decisions. Research has shown that being married or in a partnership is associated with a higher planned retirement age (Munnell et al., 2016) since partners often plan their retirements together.

Furthermore, women tend to postpone retirement less often than men (Munnell et al., 2004; Szinovacz et al., 2013; Williamson & McNamara, 2001). This aligns with the principle of linked lives because women are more likely to leave the labor force temporarily or reduce their working hours to fulfill caregiving responsibilities or due to childbearing. This gender difference in retirement behavior is particularly significant among the Hispanic population, as intergenerational transfers play a crucial role in the lives of Hispanic-Americans (Angel, 2008; Aspen Institute, 2017; Berry, 2006; Blanco et al., 2017).

Material transfers, which are cultural and social symbols acquired during childhood, shape the financial, social, and retirement decisions of some Hispanics. Many Hispanics embrace a collectivist view of life and adhere to the concept of “familismo,” which emphasizes the role of family in providing support. This belief may influence their retirement planning and saving behaviors, as they rely on the idea that family members will take care of each other. Consequently, prior research suggests that Hispanics engage in more non-financial family transfers, such as caregiving for older parents and grandchildren, compared to other groups (Angel, 2008; Richmand et al., 2012). Additionally, the timing of childbearing can also influence women's retirement timing (Damman et al., 2015; Svensson et al., 2015).

Retirement Planning Among Hispanics

Research indicates that Hispanics, as a group, tend to engage in little to no retirement planning, which can have implications for their retirement preparedness. Studies have shown that a lower percentage of Hispanics, compared to non-Hispanic Whites, report planning for retirement savings. For example, Sun et al. (2007) found that only 35% of Hispanics reported planning for retirement savings, whereas over 70% of non-Hispanic Whites did. Additionally, a qualitative study by Blanco et al. (2015) among middle-aged and older low-income Hispanics in Los Angeles revealed that many did not have a specific planned retirement age; instead, they expressed a desire to work until they were physically unable to do so.

The experiences of immigration are expected to influence retirement timing, as lives are shaped by historical context and the time and place in which individuals live (Elder et al., 2006; Elder & Giele, 2009; Hendricks, 2012). Foreign-born Hispanics and non-Hispanics, particularly those who have more recently migrated, may have a greater need to save for retirement and may be more likely to plan to postpone retirement compared to their native-born or long-term foreign-born counterparts in the U.S.. This is because foreign-born individuals may not be eligible for Social Security or Medicare benefits due to their shorter length of stay or migratory status, leading to shorter or non-existent periods of contribution. This effect may be more pronounced among Hispanics, as a significant percentage (about 40%) of foreign-born Hispanics is undocumented (Angel & Angel, 2015; Tienda & Mitchell, 2006).

Furthermore, Hispanics, who are already less financially prepared for retirement compared to other groups, are less likely to have private pensions and rely more on the public component of the Social Security system. However, Social Security benefits have decreased and are projected to further decrease over time. Hispanics also face the challenge of stretching their retirement savings over a longer period, as they tend to live longer than their non-Hispanic White counterparts (Rix, 2001). In this context, planning to delay retirement could potentially benefit Hispanics more than other groups. By extending the years of contributing to Social Security and taking advantage of incentives to postpone retirement, Hispanics can increase their retirement savings. These incentives may include an increase in saving for each additional year of delaying retirement up to the age of 70.

Therefore, it becomes even more important to consider a wide range of individual, contextual, and historical factors when examining intentions to delay retirement among Hispanic workers compared to other groups. Additionally, identifying predictors of intentions to work longer can help us better understand the conditions under which these intentions can be modified through management practices or policies. Hence, the current study aims to explore potential differences in the determinants of intentions to delay retirement (i.e., working beyond the age of 65) between Hispanics and non-Hispanic Whites living in the U.S..

Methodology

Data and Sample

The data for this study was obtained from the HRS, which is a panel survey conducted in the U.S.. The HRS collects information from adults over the age of 50 and has been conducted in multiple waves from 1992 to 2014. For this study, a pooled sample was created using data from all waves of the HRS.

To generate the sample, each respondent's latest wave in which they reported an intended time of retirement or the intention to never retire was selected. To account for the fixed effects of different waves, wave dummy indicators were included in the models.

The sample for this study consisted of non-institutionalized individuals aged 55–61 who were working either full or part-time. Initially, self-identified Hispanic individuals meeting these criteria were selected, resulting in a sample of 3,663 Hispanics. To enable a comparison between Hispanic and non-Hispanic White workers, a comparative sample of 3,663 non-Hispanic Whites was randomly selected from the full sample of non-Hispanic Whites, which consisted of 14,871 individuals.

It is important to note that the HRS sample is predominantly composed of Mexican-origin Hispanics (Fisher & Ryan, 2018). Additionally, foreign-born Hispanics included in the sample are likely to be highly acculturated, as they have lived in the U.S. for an extended period, typically over 20 years (Bodvarsson & Van den Berg, 2009; Tienda & Mitchell, 2006).

Measures

For a full description of all measures, please see Table 1. The dependent variable was planned retirement age measured as a binary variable where 0 = planning to retire at 65 or younger (26.46%) and 1 = planning to retire after the age of 65 or never (73.54%), as the most commonly recognized retirement age had been 65 years for the cohorts included in the analysis. A dummy variable was used as many respondents stated they would never retire rather than a specific year for retirement. Sensitivity analysis were conducted using different operationalization of the outcome, such as 1 = 61 years or younger; 2 = 62–64; 3 = 65; 4 = 65 and older, or dividing the 4th category into two as 4 = 65–69 and 5 = 70 and older, or leaving 62 in a separate category. There were no significant differences between those retired at 65 and older. Similarly, there was no difference by separating before 65 into categories. All operationalization yielded to similar results. Planned retirement age was used instead of actual retirement age as many Hispanics do not retire yet and because the authors wanted to focus on expectations rather than realizations of retirement timing. Retirement expectations are associated with various institutions like pension systems and several factors related to the position of the individual in the labor market (Ilmakunnas et al., 2018). Thus, studying expectations would capture the subjectivity of retirement timing.

Table 1.

Description of Variables Included in the Study.

Variable	Indicators	Measurement	Description
Planned retirement age		Dummy variable: 1 = planned retirement age over 65 years (including those who never plan to retire); 0 = planned retirement age of 65 or younger	The difference between the year at which the respondents plan to retire or stop working completely, and the year of birth. The respondents planned retirement age was assessed with two variables. First, if the respondent plans to stop work altogether, then he/she is asked when. Second, the respondents were asked when he/she thinks he/she will stop work or retire. This variable was dichotomized.
Health status	Subjective health status	Dummy variable: 1 = poor or fair health; 0 = good to excellent health	The respondents were asked to assess their own health status using a Likert scale, which ranged from 1 (excellent) to 5 (poor), which was recoded.
Health status	Work limitations	1 = yes; 0 = no	The respondents were asked: “do you have any impairment or health problem that limits the kind or amount of paid work you can do?”
Socioeconomic status (SES)	Individual earnings	Nominal dollars. Transformed using natural logarithm to correct for skewness	Annual sum of the respondent's wage or salary, payments of bonuses, overtime work, commissions, tips, wage or salary from a second job, military reserve earnings, professional practice, or trade income
	Home ownership	Dummy: 1 = yes; 0-no	Indicates whether the respondents fully or partially own a house
	Amount of debts	Nominal dollars. Transformed using natural logarithm to correct for skewness	Sum of the value of all housing (mortgage) and non-housing debt (i.e., credit card balances, medical bills, life insurance policy loans, among other debt). Separating mortgage from other debts did not prove to have significant differences while the total amount proved to be a better indicator of SES.
Work-related	Pension coverage	0 = no coverage; 1 = DB; 2 = DC; 3 = DB&DC	Indicates whether the respondent is covered by a pension from current or prior employer
Work-related	Health insurance	Dummy: 1 = yes; 0-no	The respondents were asked if they had health insurance coverage by an employer-offered health plan
Forced retirement		Dummy: 1 = yes; 0-no	The respondents were asked “Thinking back to the time you (partly/completely) retired, was that something you wanted to do or something you felt you were forced into?”
Early life predictors	SES during childhood	1 = was pretty well off financially (reference group); 2 = about average; 3 = poor	The respondents were asked to recall their general SES during their childhood (before age 16)
	Health status during childhood	Dummy variable: 1 = poor or fair health; 0 = good to excellent health	The respondents were asked to recall their subjective health status during childhood (before age 16), response categories ranged from 1 (excellent) to 5 (poor)
	Parents’ levels of education	Years	Years of schooling completed by the parent with the highest level of education (or of the parent who raised them if they grew up in a single parent household).
Other key predictors	Marital status	1 = married/partnered; 0 = not married or partnered
	Born in the U.S.	1 = yes; 0 = no
	Level of education	Number of years of completed schooling
	Gender	1 = female; 0 = male
	Age	In years
	Race	1 = White; 0 = other

Independent variables included health status measured with two categorical indicators: subjective health status, expectations of living to 75 + years old, and work limitations; three measures of SES: individual earnings, home ownership, and amount of debt; indicators of work-related predictors were included, such as the respondent's pension coverage, and health insurance coverage. Additionally, forced retirement indicating whether the respondent retired involuntarily was also included. Finally, three subjective measures were used to assess early life predictors or childhood conditions: SES during their childhood, subjective health status during childhood and parents’ levels of education. Other key independent variables include marital status, gender, whether the respondents were born in the U.S. or not, level of education, race (1 = White; 0 = non-White), and age (in years).

Analytic Strategy

First, we assessed if there were differences regarding the outcome variable and key predictors between Hispanics and non-Hispanic Whites by fitting a series of simple regression models that can accommodate multiply-imputed data; we focused on the F statistic and its p-value. Either OLS, logit, ordered logistic, or multinomial logit models were estimated depending on the level of measurement of the dependent variable. Second, we estimated separate binary logistic regression models for Hispanics and non-Hispanic Whites to evaluate how the selected predictors influence whether Hispanics and non-Hispanic Whites intended to retire after the age of 65 (delayed retirement) relative to before or at the age of 65 (on time or early retirement), while accounting for all other variables in the models.

Finally, to assess for differences between groups, the two-fold Oaxaca–Blinder decomposition analysis was performed (Oaxaca & Ransom, 1994). To specifically assess if there was a significant difference between groups and which variables were the main predictors of the difference if any. Oaxaca–Blinder decomposition analysis uses means of the outcome and separate the differences on the outcome on an explained and unexplained component (Jann, 2008). For the purpose of the study and considering the nature of the outcome, logit function was used, following the updated Oaxaca–Blinder package described by Yun (2004), which also includes a general effect of unknown factors. All analyses were conducted using Stata SE 15.1. The equation for logit distribution is as follows:

Δ {\bar{Y}}^{N H} - {\bar{Y}}^{H} = [\sum_{i = 1}^{N^{N H}} \frac{F (X_{i}^{N H} {\hat{β}}^{N H})}{N^{N H}} - \sum_{i = 1}^{N^{H}} \frac{F (X_{i}^{H} {\hat{β}}^{N H})}{N^{H}}] + [\sum_{i = 1}^{N^{H}} \frac{F (X_{i}^{H} {\hat{β}}^{N H})}{N^{H}} - \sum_{i = 1}^{N^{H}} \frac{F (X_{i}^{H} {\hat{β}}^{H})}{N^{H}}]

where, N^j is the sample size for group j (NH = Non-Hispanic and H = Hispanics). X is the vector of independent variables for group j and variable i. The first part of the equation refers to group differences regarding distribution of X, while the second portion refers to differential effect of the predictors of Y.

For sensitivity analysis, we conducted a linear Oaxaca–Blinder decomposition analysis, and the results yield to the same conclusions. Additionally, the sample size for both groups is the same, selected randomly as specified earlier, to avoid bias estimates. Finally, the predictors order can alter the estimates for the logit extension. Therefore, reverse order of the predictors was used, and the results yield to the same results with minimum differences. Multicolinearity did not appear to be a concern for any model (VIF < 1.60).

Handling of missing data. Imputations available from RAND were used for complex financial measures such as income and assets as well as for the CESD. For other independent and control measures, multivariate imputation by chained equations (MICE) method was used (van Buuren et al., 1999; Schafer & Graham, 2002). For the variables used in the study, missing data imputed using this method ranged from 0.0% (i.e., variables imputed using RAND or HRS imputations, such as income, and variables such as gender, marital status) to less than 4% (for childhood variables, health coverage, years of education), with exception of parents’ level of education (22.9% of missing data), and home ownership (45% of missing data, this question was asked just if the respondent was the primary respondent and omitted in RAND data).

Results

Descriptive and Bivariate Statistics

As depicted in Table 2, when comparing Hispanics and non-Hispanic Whites, we find that Hispanics are less likely than non-Hispanic Whites to plan to postpone retirement (58% vs. 77%, p < .05). Additionally, Hispanics tend to report poorer health status than non-Hispanics White (22% vs. 14%, p < .05), lower individual earnings (∼27 K vs. ∼36 K, p < .05), and lower amounts of debts (31.5 K vs. 55 K, p < .05). However, the ratio between earnings and debts are higher for Hispanics than non-Hispanic Whites. Hispanics are less likely to own a house (72% vs. 81%, p < .05), to have pension coverage of any type (p < .05)—either DB, DC, or both, and to have health coverage provided by the employer (71% vs. 81%, p < .05). Additionally, Hispanic's parents had lower levels of education (9y vs. 12y, p < .05), and were more likely to be poor or have a SES about average during childhood (p < .05); they were also more likely to report poor health during childhood (8% vs. 5%, p < .05). All other predictors were no significantly different between Hispanics and non-Hispanic Whites.

Table 2.

Descriptive Statistics of All Study Variables Using Multiple Imputed Data Comparing Hispanics and Non-Hispanic Whites.

Variable	Hispanics (N = 3,663)		Non-Hispanic Whites (N = 3,663)		F-statistic
Variable	Mean (SE)	% (n)	Mean (SE)	% (n)	F-statistic
Planned retirement age (1 = over 65 years)		57.50 (2,106.23)		76.98 (2,820)	308.24***
Health status
Subjective health status (1 = poor/fair)		22.39 (820)		13.75 (504)	91.05***
Work limitations (1 = yes)		10.80 (396)		11.05 (405)	0.12
Socioeconomic status
Individual earnings ($)	26,998.49 (547.06)		35,903.92 (742.94)		93.17***
Home ownership (1 = yes)		72.30 (2,648)		81.28 (2,977)	39.64***
Amount of debt ($)	31,517.65 (1,359.49)		54,959.67 (2,757.40)		58.14***
Work-related predictors
Pension coverage
Not covered		51.92 (1,902)		46.92 (1,719)	22.21***
Defined benefit plan (DB)		20.67 (757)		17.53 (652)
Defined contribution plan (DC)		17.19 (630)		24.31 (891)
Both (DB & DC)		10.20 (374)		11.22 (410)
Health coverage (1 = yes)		70.93 (2,598)		81.24 (2976)	104.92***
Forced retirement (1 = yes)		32.33 (1,184)		33.89 (1,241)	0.63
Early childhood predictors
Parents’ level of education (years)	8.98 (0.08)		11.55 (0.06)		750.01***
SES during childhood
Pretty well		6.91 (253)		7.71 (282)	90.90***
Average		58.05 (2,126)		66.32 (2,429)
Poor		35.02 (1,283)		22.94 (840)
Health status during childhood (1 = poor/fair)		7.50 (275)		4.60 (169)	46.95***
Key demographics
Married/partnered (1 = yes)		76.41 (2,799)		77.20 (2,828)	0.64
Level of education (years)	11.68 (0.63)		13.39 (0.04)		508.50***
Born in the U.S. (1 = yes)		71.63 (2,624)		94.95(3,478)	793.83***
Gender (1 = Female)		47.46 (1,739)		50.16 (1,837)	5.35*
Control variables
Age (years)	58.0.7 (0.03)		58.26 (0.03)		20.88***
Race (1 = White)		75.59 (2,769)		100 (3,663)	NA

*p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001.

Note. F values were calculated through a series of bivariate models to accommodate imputed data—either multinomial, linear, or logistic regression was used.

Multivariate Statistics

Table 3 presents findings from the logistic regression models with control variables for both Hispanics and non-Hispanic Whites. There are differences on how each variable influence the probability of planning to postpone retirement for each group. On one hand, health status was no significant among non-Hispanic Whites. However, having a limitation to work decreased the probability of planning to work past the age of 65 by 33% for Hispanics (OR = 0.77, p < .05). For both Hispanics and non-Hispanics, owning a house was associated with a decrease of 38% and 33% on the probability of planning to postpone retirement for Hispanics and non-Hispanic Whites, respectively (p < .05). For both groups, owning a house was associated with a decrease on the probability of planning to delay retirement past the age of 65—38% for Hispanics (OR = 0.62, p < .05) and 33% (OR = 0.67, p < .05) decrease for non-Hispanic Whites. Additionally, for non-Hispanic Whites, increased debts were associated with a slight increase on the probability of planning to postpone retirement (OR = 1.00, p < .05).

Table 3.

Results of Logistic Regression Models With Controls (Model 2) of Planned Retirement Age Over 65 Years. Comparing Hispanics and Non-Hispanic Whites Living in the U.S. Aged 55–61 Years.

	Hispanics (N = 3,663)		Non-Hispanic Whites (N = 3,663)
Predictors	OR (SE)	p-value	OR (SE)	p-value
Health status
Subjective health status (1 = poor/fair)	0.97 (0.10)	.71	0.78 (0.12)	.10
Limitation to work (1 = yes)	0.77 (0.09)	.04	0.97 (0.15)	.83
Probability of living to 75+	1.00 (0.00)	.70	1.00 (0.00)	.60
Socioeconomic status
Individual earnings ($)	0.99 (0.00)	.10	1.00 (0.00)	.31
Home ownership (1 = yes)	0.62 (0.09)	.00	0.67 (0.13)	.03
Amount of debt ($)	0.98 (0.00)	.77	1.00 (0.00)	.01
Work-related predictors
Pension coverage
Not covered	Ref.		Ref.
Defined benefit plan (DB)	0.36 (0.04)	.00	0.25 (0.03)	.00
Defined contribution plan (DC)	0.56 (0.06)	.00	0.49 (0.06)	.00
Both (DB & DC)	0.46 (0.06)	.00	0.34 (0.06)	.00
Health coverage (1 = yes)	0.75 (0.08)	.01	0.80 (0.12)	.14
Forced retirement (1 = yes)	1.74 (0.19)	.00	1.63 (0.32)	.02
Early childhood predictors
Parents’ level of education (years)	0.99 (0.01)	.36	1.05 (0.02)	.00
SES during childhood
Pretty well	Ref.		Ref.
Average	1.04 (0.12)	.68	1.01 (0.12)	.90
Poor	1.34 (0.24)	.10	1.11 (0.26)	.64
Health status during childhood (1 = poor/fair)	1.41 (0.17)	.00	1.24 (0.21)	.19
Key demographics
Married/partnered (1 = yes)	0.85 (0.08)	.08	0.67 (0.13)	.00
Born in the U.S. (1 = yes)	0.69 (0.07)	.00	3.94 (0.77)	.00
Level of education (years)	1.01 (0.01)	.29	1.03 (0.02)	.15
Gender (1 = female)	0.69 (0.05)	.00	0.64 (0.09)**
Control variables
Age (years)	1.17 (0.03)	.00	1.07 (0.03)	.01
Race (1 = White)	0.99 (0.09)	.81	——–
Constant	0.00 (0.00)	.00	0.01 (0.01)	.00
LR chi-squared (df)	615.19(22)***		930.52 (21)
McFadden pseudo R-squared	0.14		0.24
% of correctly classified cases	70.02%		78.91%

Note. OR = odds ratio; SE = standard errors. Sample wave dummies (1992 was used as reference), and the selection correction estimate were omitted from the table. The selection correction estimate was not significant (p > .05). There were significant differences between waves—the latest waves were associated to postponing retirement (p < .05).

For both Hispanics and non-Hispanic Whites, having pension coverage compared to not having it is associated to decreased odd of planning to postpone retirement. Having a DB plan or both DB and DC was associated with a larger decrease on the odd of planning to postpone retirement. Hispanics having a DB was associated with a 64% (OR = 0.36, p < .05) decrease, and having both was associated with a 54% (OR = 0.46, p < .05) decrease. While for non-Hispanic Whites, the decrease associated with having a DB plan was 75% (OR = 0.25, p < .05), and having both was a 66% (OR = 0.34, p < .05). The effect size is larger for non-Hispanic Whites. Having a DC plan was associated with a decrease of 54% (OR = 0.56, p < .05) and 51% (OR = 0.49, p < .05) for Hispanics and non-Hispanic Whites, respectively.

In opposition to what was expected, SES during childhood was not a significant predictor among Hispanics. However, increased parental education was associated with increased probability of planning to postpone retirement (OR = 1.05, p < .05) among non-Hispanic Whites. Additionally, having poor health during childhood was associated with an increase of 41% on the probability of planning to delay retirement for Hispanics (OR = 1.41, p < .05), but was not significant among non-Hispanic Whites.

For Hispanics, being born in the U.S. decreased the odds of planning to delay retirement by 31% (OR = 0.69, p < .05), while for non-Hispanic Whites, being born in the U.S. increased the odds of planning to delay retirement (OR = 3.94, p < .05). For non-Hispanic Whites, being married decreased the odds of planning to postpone retirement by 33% (OR = 0.67, p < .05). For both, Hispanics and non-Hispanics, being female was associated with a decrease on the probability of planning to delay retirement—31% decrease for Hispanics (OR = 0.69, p < .05) and 40% decrease for non-Hispanic Whites (OR = 0.60, p < .05). Finally, while age was not a significant predictor among Hispanics, age was associated with an increase in the probability of retiring later for non-Hispanic Whites.

Decomposition Analysis of the Difference Between Hispanics and Non-Hispanic Whites

To further explain the differences found between Hispanics and non-Hispanic Whites, an Oaxaca–Blinder decomposition analysis was performed. There is a significant 20% difference on the probability of retiring past the age of 65 years between Hispanics and non-Hispanic Whites (p < .000). Non-Hispanics have a probability of planning to postpone retirement of 77%, while non-Hispanic Whites have a probability of 56% of planning to postpone retirement. The explained components refer to the portion of the difference explained by cross-group differences in the independent variables (difference in the slopes), while the unexplained component refers to the proportion of the difference, which is not explained by the independent variables, attributed to difference in the intercept and unaccounted variables (Jann, 2008).

As depicted in Table 4, both the explained and unexplained components were significant (p = .02 and p = .00, respectively). The explained portion indicates the increase on the probability to intent to postpone retirement for non-Hispanics if they had the same characteristics as Hispanics, that is a 10% increase (b = 0.10, p < .05). Owning a home (b = −0.01, p < .05), amount of debts (b = 0.11, p < .05), having a DB (b = 0.01, p < .05) or DC (b = −0.01, p < .05) compared to no pension coverage, parent's level of education (b = 0.03, p < .05), being born in the U.S. (b = −0.06, p < .05), being female (b = −0.002, p < .05), and age (b = 0.003, p < .05) explained the cross-group differences, which accounted for about 50% of the difference.

Table 4.

Results of Two-Fold Oaxaca Decomposition Analysis—Logit.

Predictors	Coefficient (SE)	p-value
Decomposition
Non-Hispanics	0.77 (0.01)	.00
Hispanics	0.56 (0.01)	.00
Difference	0.20 (0.10)	.00
Explained	0.10 (0.01)	.02
Unexplained	−0.15 (0.02)	.00
Explained
Socioeconomic status
Home ownership (1 = yes)	−0.01 (0.00)	.04
Amount of debt ($)	0.11 (0.00)	.01
Work-related predictors
Pension coverage
Not covered	Ref.
Defined benefit plan (DB)	0.01 (0.00)	.00
Defined contribution plan (DC)	−0.01 (0.00)	.00
Both (DB & DC)	−0.00 (0.00)	.26
Early childhood predictors
Parents’ level of education (years)	0.03 (0.01)	.00
Key demographics
Born in the U.S. (1 = yes)	0.06 (0.01)	.00
Gender (1 = female)	−0.002 (0.00)	.03
Control variables
Age (years)	0.003 (0.00)	.02
Unexplained
Socioeconomic status
Amount of debt ($)	0.02 (0.01)	.01
Work-related predictors
Pension coverage
Not covered	Ref.
Defined benefit plan (DB)	−0.02 (0.01)	.01
Defined contribution plan (DC)	−0.01 (0.01)	.38
Both (DB & DC)	−0.01 (0.00)	.26
Early childhood predictors
Parents’ level of education (years)	0.12 (0.04)	.01
Key demographics
Married/partnered (1 = yes)	−0.05 (0.02)	.04
Born in the U.S. (1 = yes)	0.25 (0.03)	.00
Control variables
Age (years)	−1.02 (0.06)	.01

Note. The model was adjusted by selection waves. Non-significant predictors were omitted from the table. SE = standard errors.

The unexplained component quantifies the change on the intention to postpone retirement for Hispanics when using the non-Hispanics coefficients in the model, which is a decrease of 15% on the probability to postpone retirement. Amount of debts (b = 0.02, p < .05), having a DB plan versus none (b = −0.02, p < .05), parent's level of education (b = 0.12, p < .05), being married or partnered (b = −0.05, p < .05), being born in the U.S. (b = 0.25, p < .05), and age (b = −1.02, p < .05) explained the difference on the intercept of the groups—or unaccounted factors. Being age and born in the U.S. the predictors with the strongest effect, this reflects the migration history of Hispanics to the U.S. and the cumulative disadvantages faced by them compared to non-Hispanics (Angel et al., 2014; Crystal et al., 2017; Johnson et al., 2017; Prickett & Angel, 2017; Tienda & Mitchell, 2006), along with cultural differences highlighted by Blanco and colleagues (2015) and Angel and colleagues (2014).

In summary, there were significant differences regarding SES and childhood predictors between Hispanics and non-Hispanic Whites. Even if Hispanics tend to have lower wealth, they tend to plan to retire earlier than non-Hispanics. Long-life working conditions and cumulative disadvantages could explain this paradox, as highlighted by the unexplained components of the model.

Discussion

Hispanics in the U.S. tend to retire earlier than non-Hispanic peers, despite having a longer life expectancy (EBRI, 2007; Montalto et al., 2000; U.S. National Center for Health Statistics, 2017). This early retirement pattern among Hispanics increases their risk of financial insecurity in later life. Understanding the factors that contribute to delayed retirement among Hispanics is important for identifying modifiable factors that can help them plan for a more financially secure future. In this study, we applied the life course theory to examine how various factors associated with delayed retirement differ between Hispanics and non-Hispanic Whites in the U.S.

Our findings revealed significant differences between the two groups, with Hispanics, on average, planning to retire 19 years earlier than non-Hispanic Whites. Consistent with the cumulative disadvantage principle proposed by the life course theory, Hispanics experienced poorer health during childhood and adulthood, reflecting their limited access to healthcare throughout their lives. Their parents also had lower levels of education, and Hispanics reported lower SES during childhood. As a result, Hispanics had lower levels of education, lower earnings, higher debt-to-income ratios, and were less likely to own a house or have employer-sponsored pension and health insurance coverage. These disadvantages contributed to diminished working opportunities for Hispanics compared to their non-Hispanic White counterparts, perpetuating a cycle of disadvantage across generations (Angel et al., 2014; Crystal et al., 2017; Johnson et al., 2017; Prickett & Angel, 2017; Tienda & Mitchell, 2006).

When examining the predictors of delayed retirement within each group, we found that Hispanics who did not have health limitations, did not own a house, did not have pension or health insurance coverage, had better health during childhood, were born outside the U.S., and were non-White were more likely to plan to postpone retirement. Among non-Hispanic Whites, higher levels of education (for themselves and their parents), being married, and being born in the U.S. were associated with a higher likelihood of postponing retirement. Similar to Hispanics, non-Hispanic Whites who did not own a house and had higher levels of debt were also more likely to postpone retirement.

Our findings align with prior research on the general population in several ways. Higher levels of education, homeownership, and pension coverage were associated with a decreased probability of delaying retirement (Munnell et al., 2004; Williamson & McNamara, 2001). Furthermore, having a DB pension plan was associated with earlier retirement compared to having no pension plan, and having a DB plan was also associated with earlier retirement than having a DC plan. These factors contribute to higher wealth accumulation and increased retirement affordability. The difference in retirement planning between Hispanics and non-Hispanic Whites can be partly explained by the presence or absence of a DB or DC pension plan. Lack of workplace benefits plays a role in the retirement planning disparity between the two groups.

Regarding health coverage, while prior research has found it to be unrelated to retirement postponement (Szinovacz et al., 2013), we found that having health coverage was significant for both Hispanics and non-Hispanic Whites and decreased the odds of planning to postpone retirement. This effect was more pronounced among Hispanics, reflecting their limited access to health insurance and healthcare in general. However, the difference in retirement planning between the two groups was not explained by differences in health limitations or overall health status.

Hispanics have lower levels of education compared to their non-Hispanic White counterparts. Their lack of education and English proficiency has limited their job opportunities, resulting in overrepresentation in low-wage jobs that offer lower benefits such as health insurance and pension coverage (Angel et al., 2014; Johnson et al., 2017; Prickett & Angel, 2017; Tienda & Mitchell, 2006). These factors have been associated with higher disability rates and an increased risk of chronic conditions (Calvo et al., 2017; Tienda & Mitchell, 2006). Additionally, due to factors such as lack of contributions, migratory and citizenship status, and length of stay in the U.S., Hispanics may not be eligible for Medicare, which poses an extra challenge, especially for undocumented Hispanics who lack social benefits and legal resources (Angel & Angel, 2018; Tienda & Mitchell, 2006). These observations are supported by the decomposition results that explain the differences between both groups.

Our findings in this analysis of Hispanic workers deviated from research on the general population in several ways. First, contrary to expectations, the amount of debt was not a significant predictor among Hispanics. However, the amount of debt was a significant predictor of the difference between the two groups. These results may be influenced by cultural factors and the economic situation of Hispanics. On one hand, the collectivist view of life within the Hispanic community, where family takes care of family, may reduce concerns about debt as they feel they have people to rely on during retirement. Additionally, the precarious economic situation of Hispanics, especially foreign-born Hispanics, may mask the effect of debt as they tend to face financial struggles (Johnson et al., 2017; Tienda & Mitchell, 2006). This is supported by the significance of being born in the U.S. in the difference between Hispanics and non-Hispanic Whites. Further research is needed to explore the complexity of this phenomenon.

Second, the level of education among the respondents did not significantly predict the intention to postpone retirement beyond the age of 65 years among Hispanics and non-Hispanic Whites. However, other childhood predictors of SES were significant and aligned with expectations, reflecting cumulative advantage/disadvantage over the life course. Parental level of education was a key and stronger predictor of the differences between the two groups, supporting the cumulative disadvantage principle.

Third, in contrast to prior research focused on the general population (Sanzenbacher et al., 2017; Munnell et al., 2004, 2016; Williamson & McNamara, 2001), health status and having health problems that limit one's ability to work were not significant predictors of planning to retire after the age of 65 among non-Hispanic Whites. However, having limitations to work was a significant factor among Hispanics. It is possible that their self-perceived health status influences actual retirement timing rather than planned retirement timing, especially among Hispanics who tend to focus on the present (Hilton et al., 2012). This may also reflect limited access to healthcare among Hispanics (Blanco et al., 2015, 2017). Additionally, health status was not a significant predictor of the difference in planning to postpone retirement between Hispanics and non-Hispanic Whites.

No prior work has examined early life predictors, but we found significant effects and differences between groups regarding childhood predictors. Hispanics were more likely to have poorer SES during childhood, and their parents presented fewer years of education compared to their non-Hispanic White counterparts. These factors influence their working opportunities during adulthood and later years. When testing the difference between Hispanics and non-Hispanic Whites, we found that parents’ level of education, being born in the U.S., and the amount of debt were the strongest predictors of the difference between Hispanic and non-Hispanic Whites, supporting the principle of cumulative advantage/disadvantage of the life course theory. This principle states that inequalities and difficulties tend to accumulate from childhood to old age, and these differences are exacerbated over time (McNamara & Williamson, 2013, p. 10). This extends to SES and health differences.

Additionally, for Hispanics, the decision to stay in the workforce longer may have less to do with projected finances and more to do with cultural values and migration experiences (Lincoln Financial Group, 2014; Richman et al., 2012; The Aspen Institute, 2017). Factors such as their view of aging, time of arrival in the U.S., migratory status, religiosity, family structure, and intergenerational transfers to relatives within and outside the U.S. can influence Hispanics’ retirement plans. Hispanics tend to be less prepared for retirement, which is reflected in the lack of wealth and higher poverty in retirement, largely shaped by Hispanics’ level of education, labor conditions (lack of access to retirement saving plans), and low wages. There might be other cultural factors influencing Hispanics’ retirement, such as the intention to go back to their countries of origin to retire, help older parents, or support extended family in the U.S. (Angel, 2008; Blanco et al., 2015; The Aspen Institute, 2017). Some researchers have explored these factors using qualitative approaches (e.g., Blanco et al., 2015), but there is still much we do not know about Hispanics’ retirement intentions, and such data was not available in the HRS data. Further research should study these unique components of the Hispanic population.

Policymakers and retirement planning agencies should consider Hispanics’ unique traits when developing retirement plans that are culturally relevant and supportive. This is especially important considering the challenges faced by the Social Security System in the U.S., as the older adult population continues to increase and the dependency ratio continues to decrease. Hispanics, who could greatly benefit from longer working careers, face systemic challenges due to their migration history and context of migration to the U.S. Action is needed to decrease poverty in old age and address financial insecurity for all groups, reducing the burden of retirement insecurity in terms of care, health, and other issues.

This study is not without limitations. First, a pooled sample was necessary to amass a sample of Hispanic workers aged 50–61 that was large enough for generalizable analyses, but this introduces potential issues specific to a certain economic period, such as changes in the full retirement age or other macro-economic changes. Wave indicators were included in the models to control for fixed effects and temporal/contextual differences. Additionally, a randomly selected sample of non-Hispanics was used to avoid overestimation due to sample size.

Second, examining retirement intentions is important in addition to research on actual retirement timing. Identifying predictors of intentions to delay retirement helps us better understand motivational influences on behavior that individuals may not have full control over. It also helps us identify where and how to target strategies for behavior change (Ajzen & Madden, 1986). Planned retirement age reflects intentions and subjective aspects of retirement planning. Therefore, it was used instead of actual retirement age to identify modifiable factors that can help Hispanics plan for a more financially secure later life.

The Oaxaca–Blinder decomposition analysis using non-linear extensions has faced criticism due to the challenge of studying mean differences on the outcome. However, an updated package of Stata for Oaxaca was used, specifying logit as the distribution. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to test for bias estimates, and similar results were obtained.

Finally, the analysis of secondary data limits the inclusion of several important measures, such as subjective reasons for expecting to retire at a certain age and culture-specific variables. Additionally, regarding the early life predictor variables, retrospective data was used, which required participants to recall events from their childhood, introducing the possibility of inaccuracies. Future research should identify and test a wide range of potential variables that could influence retirement timing among Hispanics.

In conclusion, this study contributes to the knowledge based on working longer and retirement timing in later life by focusing specifically on Hispanic middle-aged workers and comparing them to a comparable sample of non-Hispanic Whites. Hispanic older adults should be a group of particular concern because they have a longer life expectancy than other groups, yet they possess fewer socioeconomic resources and experience worsened health in old age. As a result, they face a greater risk of poor outcomes due to inadequate or uninformed retirement decision-making, leading to increased financial insecurity during retirement. This paper takes an initial step toward identifying whether commonly identified predictors of delayed retirement in the general population, and among non-Hispanic Whites, also extend to Hispanics. This serves as a foundation for more nuanced studies that focus on Hispanics’ retirement planning and preparedness, identifying unique factors that contribute to retirement decisions. Future research should explore how unique cultural values affect retirement planning and timing among Hispanics, with the goal of reducing poor retirement outcomes for this group and minimizing costs for society as a whole.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Ethics Approval

This project was approved by the IRB office at Boston College (no. 19.115.01e).

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The current study was part of a doctoral dissertation funded by the Institute of Aging at Boston College awarded on May 2018. Health and Retirement Study, public use dataset. Produced and distributed by the University of Michigan with funding from the National Institute on Aging (grant number NIA U01AG009740). Ann Arbor, MI.

ORCID iD

Antonia Diaz-Valdes

Author Biographies

Antonia Díaz-Valdés, PhD, MSW, has been an Assistant Professor at the Society and Health Research Center at Universidad Mayor Chile, since June 2019. She has a PhD on social work from Boston College (March-2019). She has taught research methodologies on undergraduate and graduate courses at Boston College and Catholic Pontific University of Chile, among other universities. Nowadays, she taches quantitative methodologies and qualitative methodologies for the Public Policy Doctoral Program at Universidad Mayor. She also teaches research methods in Data Science at Universidad Mayor. Finally, she is currently guiding three doctoral students. Currently, she is also working with two undergraduate students at Universidad Mayor (Medicine), one undergrad student from John Hopkins (Biology) and one master's student from Columbia University (Public Health) and a doctoral student from Universidad Mayor (PhD in Public Policy). She has conducted and collaborated on several research projects in India, Guatemala, Honduras, USA, and Chile. Her research focus is on retirement systems, retirement timing, planned retirement age, the effect of retirement on health and well-being, physical health among older adults, substance use and suicidal behaviors among adolescents, the intersection between retirement, depression and alcohol, food security and reading comprehension among school-age children and the use and adoption of cleaner cooking stoves.

Christina Matz-Costa, PhD, is an Associate Professor in the Boston College School of Social Work where she is Chair of the Older Adults & Families Field-of-Practice and Director of the Spier Fellows in Aging program. She is also Co-Director of the Center on Aging & Work with Jacquelyn James. Her research focuses on meaningful engagement in later-life and its effects on the health and well-being of individuals, families, organizations, communities, and society. She is a co-lead on the American Academy of Social Work and Social Welfare's (AASWSW) Grand Challenge focused on “Advancing Long and Productive Lives,” and in 2019 she was inducted as a Fellow of the Gerontological Society of America (GSA). Funded by a National Institute on Aging P30 pilot grant with the Boston Roybal Center for Active Lifestyle Interventions and the Boston College Institute on Aging, she developed and pilot-tested (RCT) a behavioral intervention (called Engaged4Life) designed to encourage community-dwelling of older adults to embed physical activity, cognitive activity, and social interaction into their everyday lives in contexts that are personally meaningful and natural via technology-assisted self-monitoring of activity levels, psycho-education, goal setting, and peer support. She is currently adapting this intervention for new populations and planning to test its effectiveness on a larger scale. She has co-authored more than 40 scholarly articles and book chapters and numerous reports/issues briefs. In 2018, one of her publications won the MatherLifeWays Institute on Aging Innovative Research on Aging Silver Award and in 2014, another publication was awarded the AARC/MECD Patricia B. Elmore Award for Outstanding Research in Measurement and Evaluation. Christina was a John A. Hartford Geriatric Social Work Faculty Scholar (2012-2014), an Early Career Work and Family Scholar (2013-2014) and earned acceptance into the National Institute on Aging (NIA)-funded Institute on Aging and Social Work (2012-2014). She teaches courses in research methods and advanced practice with older adults in home and community settings at the master's level. In 2017 she won the Teaching Excellence Award and in 2017 the Mentor of the Year award at the Boston College School of Social Work. Finally, she serves on the board of the Encore Boston Network and the steering committee of the Sloan Research Network on Aging & Work. She has facilitated working partnerships with several Boston-area community organizations including ReServe Greater Boston, Empower Success Corps, the Waltham Council on Aging, Massachusetts Service Alliance, and Generations Inc.

Mathew S. Rutledge, PhD, is an Associate professor of the practice in the Boston College Department of Economics, where he teaches courses in statistics, microeconomic theory, and the public policy of aging. He is also an affiliated researcher at the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College, where he conducts research on labor market outcomes for older workers, social security claiming behavior, disability insurance application, pension coverage, retirement saving, retirement expectations, employer demand for older workers, unemployment insurance, and health insurance coverage. He has also worked for the Economic Research Initiative on the Uninsured and the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston. He earned a bachelor's degree from Boston College, and a doctorate in economics from the University of Michigan in the fields of health economics, labor economics, and public finance.

Esteban Calvo, PhD, is a life-course sociologist and social epidemiologist interested in positive aging processes. Much of his work attempts to identify and understand the social factors experienced throughout life that influence the health and happiness of older adults, as well as to evaluate public policies and interventions that contribute to improving their well-being and benefit society as a whole. His current research agenda includes three threads: (1) assessing the impact of life-course statuses, transitions, and trajectories on a variety of health outcomes, from self-reports to physical measures and biomarkers; (2) understanding how individuals react to social contexts and public policies that they experience over the life course; and (3) improving our understanding of the challenges and opportunities posed by demographic change to aging-related policy throughout the world. His recent publications analyze the effects of work and retirement on health, the emotional impact of unemployment and pension policy, and the cultural and structural determinants of social security reforms and health policies. He is currently involved in a long-term project, ranging from biological markers to social contexts, with the ultimate purpose of understanding the patterns of alcohol consumption and its effects on cardiovascular health and mortality of older people in more than 20 countries around the world. He has received awards from the American Public Health Association, the American Sociological Association, the Gerontological Society of America, and the Retirement Research Foundation.

References

Abrams

Clarke

Mehta

(2022). Work at age 62: Expectations and realisations among recent cohorts of Americans. Ageing and Society, 42(5), 1213–1233. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0144686X20001531

Ajzen

Madden

T. J.

(1986). Prediction of goal-directed behavior: Attitudes, intentions, and perceived behavioral control. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22(5), 453–474. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(86)90045-4

Angel

J. L.

(2008). Inheritance in contemporary America: The social dimension of giving across generations. The John Hopkins University Press.

Angel

J. L.

Angel

(2018). The public cost of low earnings across the life course. Journal of the American Society on Aging, 42(2), 41–47. https://www-jstor-org-443.web.bisu.edu.cn/stable/26556359

Angel

J. L.

Prickett

K. C.

Angel

(2014). Retirement security for black, non-Hispanic white, and Mexican-origin women: The changing roles of marriage and work. Journal of Women, Politics & Policy, 35(3), 222–241. https://doi.org/10.1080/1554477X.2014.921541

Angel

J. L.

(2015). Latinos in an aging world: Social, psychological and economic perspective. Routledge.

Berry (2006). What accounts for race and ethnic differences in parental financial transfers to adult children in the United States? Journal of Family Issues, 27(11), 1583–1604. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X06291498

Birkett

Carmichael

Duberley

(2017). Activity in the third age: Examining the relationship between careers and retirement experiences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 103(part B), 55–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2017.08.002

Blanco

Aguila

Gongora

Duru

O. K.

(2017). Retirement planning among Hispanics: In god’s hands? Journal of Aging and Social Policy, 29(4), 311–331. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959420.2016.1272161

10.

Blanco

Aguila

Gongora

Weidmer

Duru

O. K.

(2015). Retirement planning among middle-aged and older Hispanics. Pepperdine University, School of Public Policy Working Papers, No 54. Retrieved from: http://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/sppworkingpapers/54.

11.

Bodvarsson

ÖB

Van den Berg

(2009). The Economics of Immigration: Theory and Policy. Springer.

12.

Calvo

Carr

D. C.

Matz-Costa

(2017). Another paradox? The life satisfaction of older Hispanic immigrants in the United States. Journal of Aging and Health, 29(1), 3–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/0898264315624901

13.

Census Bureau (2022). Quick Facts: Population. Retrieved from: https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/RHI725221.

14.

Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (2015). National center for health statistics: summary tables [table p.11]. Retrieved from: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhis/shs/tables.htm.

15.

Congressional Research Service (2022). Poverty Among the Population Aged 65 and Older. Retrieved from: https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R45791.pdf.

16.

Crystal

Shea

D. G.

Reyes

A. M.

(2017). Cumulative advantage, cumulative disadvantage, and evolving patterns of late-life inequality. The Gerontologist, 57(5), 910–920. https://doi.org/1031093/geront/gnw056

17.

Damman

Henkens

Kalmijn

(2015). Women’s retirement intentions and behavior: The role of childbearing and marital histories. European Journal of Population, 31, 339–363. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-014-9335-8

18.

Elder

G. H.

Jr. Giele

J. Z.

(2009). Life course studies: An evolving field. In Elder

G. H.

Jr. Giele

J. Z.

(Eds.), The craft of life course research (pp. 1–24). Guilford Press.

19.

Elder

G. H.

Jr. Johnson

M. K.

Crosnoe

(2006). The emergence and development of life course theory. In Mortimer

J. T.

Shanahan

M. J.

(Eds.), Handbook of the life course (pp. 3–19). Springer.

20.

Emmons

W. E.

Noeth

B. J.

(2015). The economics and financial status of older Americans: Trends and prospects. In Morrow-Howell

Sharred

(Eds.), Financial capability and asset holding in later life: a life course perspective (pp. XVII-XXV). Oxford University Press.

21.

Employment Benefit Research Institute (EBRI) (2007). 2007 minority retirement confidence survey [Fact sheet No 2]. Retrieved from: https://www.ebri.org/surveys/mrcs/.

22.

Employment Benefit Research Institute (EBRI) (2008). Age comparisons among workers [2008 Fact sheet]. Retrieved from: https://www.ebri.org/files/RCS08_FS4_Age.pdf.

23.

Employment Benefit Research Institute (EBRI) (2017). Retirement Confidence Survey [Fact sheet No 2]. Retrieved from: https://www.ebri.org/surveys/rcs/2017/.

24.

Fisher

G. G.

Ryan

L. H.

(2018). Overview of the Health and Retirement Study and introduction to the special issue. Work, Aging and Retirement, 4(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1093/workar/wax032

25.

Flippen

Tienda

(2000). Pathways to retirement: Patterns of labor force participation and labor market exit among the pre-retirement by race, Hispanic origin, and sex. Journal of Gerontology, 55(1), 14–27. https://doi.org/https://doi-org.proxy.bc.edu/10.1093/geronb/55.1.S14

26.

Hendricks

(2012). Considering life course concepts. The Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 67(2), 226–231. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbr147

27.

Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation (2016, March). Profile of Medicare Beneficiaries by Race and Ethnicity: A Chartpack. Retrieved from: http://files.kff.org/attachment/chartpack-profile-of-medicare-beneficiaries-by-race-and-ethnicity-a-chartpack.

28.

Hilton

J. M.

Gonzalez

C. A.

Saleh

Maitoza

Anngela-Cole

(2012). Perceptions of successful aging among older Latinos, in cross-cultural context. Journal of Cross Cultural Gerontology, 27(3), 183–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10823-012-9171-4

29.

Ilmakunnas

, et al. (2018). Health and retirement age: Comparison of expectations and actual retirement. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 46(19_suppl), 18–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1403494817748295

30.

Jann

. (2008). The Blinder–Oaxaca decomposition for linear regression models. Stata Journal, 8(4), 453–479. https://journals-sagepub-com-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/doi/pdf/10.1177/1536867X0800800401 https://doi.org/10.1177/1536867X0800800401

31.

Johnson

R. W.

Mudrazija

Wang

C. X.

(2017). Hispanics’ retirement transitions and differences by nativity. Journal of Aging and Health, 29(6), 1096–1115. https://doi.org/10.1177/0898264317711608

32.

Lincoln Financial Group (2014). Engaging Latino-American participants in saving for retirement. Retrieved from: https://www.limra.com/Secure_Retirement_Institute/News_Center/Third_Party_Research/_Abstracts/2014/00065_Secure_Retirement_Institute.aspx?research_id=10737431838.

33.

Lytle

M. D.

Clancy

M. E.

Foley

P. F.

Cotter

E. W.

(2015). Current trends in retirement implications for career counseling and vocational psychology. Journal of Career Development, 42(3), 170–184. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894845314545785

34.

McNamara

T. K.

Williamson

J. B.

(2013). Unequal prospects: is working longer the answer? Taylor & Francis group.

35.

Montalto

C. P.

Yuhb

Hannac

(2000). Determinants of planned retirement age. Financial Services Review, 9(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.2307/2522453

36.

Munnell

A. H.

Sass

S. A.

(2008). Working longer: the solution to the retirement income challenges. Brookings Institution Press.

37.

Munnell

A. H.

Triest

R. K.

Jivan

N. A.

(2004). How do pensions affect expected and actual retirement ages? Center for Retirement Research at Boston College, 27, 1–26. Retrieved from: http://crr.bc.edu/working-papers/how-do-pensions-affect-expected-and-actual-retirement-ages/.

38.

Munnell

A. H.

Webb

Chen

(2016). Does socioeconomic status lead people to retire too soon? Center for Retirement Research at Boston College, 16(14), 1–11. Retrieved from: http://crr.bc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/IB_16-14.pdf.

39.

Oaxaca

Ransom

. (1994). On discrimination and the decomposition of wage differentials, Journal of Econometrics, 61(1), 5–21. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/03044076(94)90074-4 https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(94)90074-4

40.

O’Rand

(2009). Cumulative processes in the life course. In Elder

G. H.

Jr Giele

J. Z.

(Eds.), The craft of life course research (pp. 121–140). Guilford Press.

41.

Prickett

K. C.

Angel

J. L.

(2017). Transitions in living arrangements among older Mexican Americans: The dynamics of dependency and disadvantage. Research on Aging, 39(3), 396–417. https://doi.org/10.1177/0164027515613141

42.

Richman

Ghilarducci

Knight

Jelm

Saad-Lesser

(2012). Confianza, savings, and retirement: A study of Mexican immigrants. University of Notre Dame, Institute for Latino Studies, 2012(1), 3–62. Retrieved from: https://latinostudies.nd.edu/assets/95267/original/confianza_savings_retirement.pdf.

43.

Rix

S. E.

(2001). Toward active ageing in the 21st century: working longer in the United States. Tokyo, Japan. Retrieved from http://www.jil.go.jp/jil/seika/us2.pdf.

44.

Sanzenbacher

G. T.

Sass

S. A.

Gillis

C. M.

(2017). How job changes affect retirement timing by socioeconomic status. Center for Retirement Research at Boston College, 17(3), 1–8. Retrieved from: http://crr.bc.edu/briefs/how-job-changes-affect-retirement-timing-by-socioeconomic-status/.

45.

Schafer

J. L.

Graham

J. W.

(2002). Missing data: Our view of the state of the art. Psychological Methods, 7(2), 147–177. https://doi.org/10.1037//1082-989X.7.2.147

46.

Smith

R. S.

Ferraro

K. F.

Kemp

B. R.

Morton

P. M.

Mustillo

S. A.

Angel

J. L.

(2016). Childhood misfortune and handgrip strength among Black, White, and Hispanic Americans. Journals of Gerontology: Social Sciences Series B, 74(3), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbw147

47.

Sudano

J. J.

Baker

D. W.

(2006). Explaining U.S. racial/ethnic disparities in health declines and mortality in late middle age: The roles of socioeconomic status, health behaviors, and health insurance. Social Science & Medicine, 62(4), 909–922. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.06.041

48.

Sun

Barboza

Richman

(2007). Preparing for the future: Latinos’ financial literacy and retirement planning. The Business Journal of Hispanics Research, 1(2), 54–68. Retireved from: https://latinostudies.nd.edu/assets/95325/original/preparing_for_the_future.pdf.

49.

Svensson

Lundholm

De Luna

Malmberg

(2015). Family life course and the timing of women’s retirement -a sequence analysis approach. Population, Space and Place, 21(8), 856–871. https://doi.org/https://doi-org.proxy.bc.edu/10.1002/psp.1950

50.

Szinovacz

M. E.

Martin

Davey

(2013). Recession and expected retirement age: Another look at the evidence. The Gerontologist, 54(2), 245–257. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnt010

51.

The Aspen Institute (2017). Sí se puede: building retirement security for Latinos and the U.S. Finances and Assesst. Retrieved from: https://assets.aspeninstitute.org/content/uploads/2017/10/Building-Financial-Security-for-Latinos-in-the-US-Brief-Web.pdf.

52.

Tienda

Mitchell

(2006). Multiple origins, uncertain destinies: Hispanics and the American future. The National Academies Press.

53.

U.S. Census Bureau (2017). Current Population Survey 2017 [Data set]. Retrieved from: https://www.census.gov/cps/data/cpstablecreator.html

54.

U.S. National Center for Health Statistics (2017). Health, United States, 2016: with chartbook on long-term trends in health [Report No.2017-1232]. Retrieved from: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/hus16.pdf#015.

55.

Van Buuren

Boshuizen

H. C.

Knook

D. L.

(1999). Multiple imputation of missing blood pressure covariates in survival analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 18(6), 681–694. Retrieved from: http://www.stefvanbuuren.nl/publications/Multiple%20imputation%20-%20Stat%20Med%201999.pdf. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19990330)18:6<681::AID-SIM71>3.0.CO;2-R

56.

Williamson

J. B.

McNamara

T. K.

(2001). Why some workers remain in the labor force beyond the typical age of retirement. Center for Retirement Research at Boston College, 1-34. Retrieved from: http://crr.bc.edu/working-papers/why-some-workers-remain-in-the-labor-force-beyond-the-typical-age-of-retirement/.

57.

Yun

M.-S.

(2004). Decomposing differences in the first moment. Economics Letters, 82(8), 275–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2003.09.008