All over the world, people are working past the usual retirement ages. In some cases, this is due to the minimum age rising, and in others, people need or want the income, the security. But, as I’ve discussed before (e.g., The Retirement Age Myth), many people are continuing to work because they want to, because being 65, 70, 80, even 90 is not the same today as it once was. The idea of retiring at 65 today often feels as foreign as it would feel to a 45-year-old.

This trend is not going to go away, especially as more and more boomers approach and pass retirement age, whatever that age may end up being.

All over the media, we see constant discussion about the possible growing rift between the generations as younger people are (or simply feel they are) being edged out of the workforce by the over-65 crowd. Many take for granted as fact that every person who chooses not to retire is essentially taking a job from a younger person.

Yet this is not always true.  A  Bloomberg article quotes Eric Thode, senior expert at the research institute Bertelsmann Stiftung, who points out that countries like Germany and Sweden, which “have high rates of senior employment[,] also have high rates of youth employment. . . . Other countries fail both groups.”

Experienced workers are also filling positions that younger workers are not qualified for simply because they haven’t had the time to build the necessary skills, experience, and specialized knowledge. On the other hand, there certainly is a growing trend in hiring people over 60 for retail and similar jobs because of the perception that they will be more responsible than a younger employee. Even if they require a higher wage, the savings in training costs alone, a problem plaguing high-turnover service jobs, can be worth it.

But even with all of this in mind, focusing on ways to get more people to retire, under the belief that this will free up jobs for subsequent generations, is a mistake. Even if it were realistic, which it’s not (as I note above—eschewing retirement is a trend that will only continue to grow), increasing the numbers of people receiving retirement benefits would offset the possible gains in youth employment.

So what can we do about this situation, particularly about the possibility of increasing conflict and distance among generations over perceived and real job competition?

First, we need to communicate with each other about it. This seems obvious, but how often do the generations really talk about this situation with each other? It tends to get talked about through politicians and the media rather than in collaborative, hands-on, deliberately multigenerational conversations.

These conversations are crucial not only to get our fears and perceptions out in the open but also to clear up the misconceptions that can lead us all to make decisions based on incorrect information or assumptions.

Second, we need to explore alternative solutions together based on the probable future, not the past. Yes, social security was an effective solution to many problems that stemmed from the Great Depression, and it continues to be a necessary element in our economy, but pursuing ways to once again push millions of post-65 people out of the workforce is not going to work. Being 65 today is not even close to what it was in that era.

Third, we should look at generational partnerships, such as job sharing/mentorship arrangements that enable two people to be employed instead of one, enable training costs and salary to combine, stretching a company’s dollar and quickening the pace at which younger employees can gain the skills, knowledge, and some of the experience they need to be more valuable to that company and in the marketplace. These could work with a shifting percentage of time, starting with the mentor working 3/4 of the job, then gradually decreasing to 1/2, then 1/4, with an ultimate shift into mentoring another employee or into a consultant arrangement.

Which brings me to my fourth and final point (in this post, anyway). We need to encourage people over 60 (and in fact over 40 and 50) to remain employed by starting their own businesses. These could be simple solopreneur operations or larger operations that would not only remove the competition for the same job between two generations, it would generate employment.

As I’ve talked about many times before, the future of the marketplace (and the world) lies in the rapidly growing values-based business model. More and more people are spending their money consciously, choosing to buy from companies who are making a difference in the world over those who aren’t, and more often than not, these are small women-led businesses.

People, organizations, and governments need to focus on encouraging experienced professionals and executives, especially women, to start businesses with a strong focus on the Triple Bottom Line—people, planet, profits. In this way, we can solve or at least ameliorate multiple societal problems simultaneously through the specific social missions of these companies as well as their effect on the job market, offering a way for all generations to make a living and a difference, and to secure their future and that of the world for generations to come.

Amazon #1 Best Seller Author of 11 books including The Ageless Way, Gray is the New Green, Visionaries Have Wrinkles, The Greatness Challenge and more.

These historic first few weeks of July reminds us of just how much we have been through together, as a nation and as individuals, from the civil rights movement we honor because of Martin Luther King, Jr., to women’s rights, so much of which is embodied in Roe vs. Wade, the landmark Supreme Court decision made over 40 years ago. To this month where that same court passed legislation that allows same sex couples to get married in all 50 states and where we in the US celebrate our freedom that so many fought so hard to accomplish.

Only that isn’t what the voice of our society is focusing on. The problem is that instead of seeing what has been accomplished, in our present as well as our past we are quick to be offended. We are listening to respond. Instead of listening to learn.

These are words that I hope everyone can take to heart, not only in terms of where we are headed as a nation, but in terms of where we are headed as individuals, generations, personally and professionally. Now is the time to act on that big vision you have inside you, to act knowing it will be imperfect, to act on something so big that it simply can’t be carried out entirely in a lifetime or two lifetimes or ten. Nor alone on your own!

Millennials, early and late Boomers, and Matures—are becoming more vocal about putting aside the generational stereotypes and looking at the common ground.

The question then becomes not whether these generations will work well together but how, and what changes we are likely to see in the future of society and government as a result of the changing, more age-diverse face of tomorrow’s leaders.

The Age of Greatness won’t be ushered in by nations or corporations or even non-profit organizations. It will be ushered in by individuals, like you and me, acting on what moves us and discovering that the more of us who do so, the more we will resonate with each other across all generations. Collectively, what moves us will create a movement that changes the world, rippling out into the next 4, 40, 400 years  . . . and beyond.

 With those words in mind what have you contributed to the voice of society this week? Are you proud of what you’ve said or done? How would you change it?

Karen Sands, MCC, BCCPhone: 203.266.1100 Email: karen@karensands.com Website: www.karensands.com Address: PO Box 43 Roxbury, CT 06783-0043

First, the fundamentals. Tinder, for anyone unfamiliar with the name, is known as a popular dating app that you can download to your phone or other technological device (like an ipad or ipod touch) and search through photos and brief descriptions of people in your local area who you might want to meet. You can swipe each photo either left or right, depending on whether or not you find the person attractive. If a person also shows interest in your Tinder information, messaging is enabled and you can begin chatting and take it from there.

A newly created paid version of the previously free app, called Tinder Plus, has now been launched. In this new premium addition, users can undo an accidental swipe, which in the past would have meant that information was lost. Additionally, there is a Tinder Passport function, which apparently will let users change their location to navigate between not only those who are local, but others in destinations around the world, as well.

What’s causing a stir is that this new premium edition comes at a literally higher cost for people over a certain age.

Tinder is one of over 150 brands (along with OKCupid.com, Chemistry.com, Ask.com) owned by IAC, a media conglomerate chaired by Barry Diller (IAC.com). According to a March 2, 2015 All Tech Considered blog by Sam Sanders on NPR.com (“Tinder’s Premium Dating App Will Cost You More If You’re Older”), “Tinder told NPR that U.S. users will pay $9.99 for Tinder Plus if they’re under 30, and $19.99 per month if they’re 30 or older. U.K. users between the ages of 18 and 27 will be charged 3.99 pounds per month, and users 28 and older will be charged 14.99 pounds per month.”

This isn’t the first occasion in which Tinder has been accused of some type of discrimination. In her July 3, 2014 thinkprogress.org post, “The Tinder Lawsuit: What We Don’t Talk About When We Talk About Women in Tech,” Jessica Goldstein writes “Tinder co-founder and former marketing executive Whitney Wolfe is suing the dating app she helped start. She’s accusing co-founder Justin Mateen and Chief Executive Officer and co-founder Sean Rad of harassment, discrimination, verbal abuse, and erasing her title and contributions to the company because, in their words, she was a ‘girl’.” That suit, one among several regarding sexism in Silicon Valley, was apparently settled.

Despite this information, Tinder is not the only site charging regular monthly fees for anyone seeking companionship. Websites such as topconsumerreviews.com have reviews about various online dating sites, which include information about pricing structures. While the bulk of sites appear “free to join,” depending on which membership level and services you want, most will then have monthly membership fees ranging from approximately $10 to $60.

But back to Tinder and its particular under 30/over 30 divide… Tinder’s website includes a line saying “Any swipe can change your life.” What do you think? Will you download, swipe and support this service? Or are you more in favor of taking a swipe at the company’s distinctly ageist approach and finding other forums for your dating desires?

(Image Credit: flames by Crystl, Flickr.com)