Are you sure you want to delete this post?
I'm not sure what to read into these statistics compiled by the University of Sorbonne-Paris. For example, they define older workers as the 55-64 age group and make a big deal of the "U.S. economy has become more productive by pushing older workers into the labor force, but the average productivity per worker has declined as a result." Huh?
First they note that the percentage of those in the older group who are currently working has widened to 61% in 2014, up from 60% in 2004. Wow one percent in 10 years. This is not only statistically insignificant, but it also makes no mention of the fact that the retirement age in the USA is 66 and the age at which you are entitled to go on Medicare is 65. Maybe it's different in France, but unless you are in a higher income bracket with a nest egg of savings, there is little incentive for one to retire and leave their stated "older work force, 55-64, before the age of 65...the year you are eligible for Medicare. So there is no push of older workers into the work force...they are there already...at least until age 65 or 66. Now I will fully admit that some workers have chosen to work beyond age 66 to maybe age 70, but that age group was not a part of the Sorbonne study.
The other big revelation is that the core group of workers in the age bracket 25-54 has shrunk from 79 percent in 2004 to 77 percent in 2014. Again not a big drop, but less to do with work environment and more to do with the fact that the baby boomer bubble is getting older every year. That's as basic as you can get, but the study makes no mention of it. People have aged out of the core group into the older worker group. Pretty simple math.
Nevertheless, their main conclusion centers around how disappearing pensions have contributed to inequality. I have no disagreement with that...it is intuitive, but there are many other contributing factors for workers staying in the work force longer that are probably more significant and are not even mentioned. However, they have conflated that argument with the premise that disappearing pensions have pushed older workers into the labor force, and thus the U.S. economy has taken jobs away from younger workers who could be more productive. That is a flawed finding.