This chapter presents the most recent data relating to demographic shifts, employment of older workers and mobility rates in Austria. It discusses the potential benefits of career mobility, focusing on both earnings and non-monetary benefits, and the link between mid-career mobility and longer working lives. It also examines differences in the extent and quality of mobility across age groups. The chapter then discusses key policy concerns for enabling higher-quality transitions in the mid-career in Austria. This includes support for companies in developing age management practices, investment in healthy workplaces and early intervention in return to work, skills development support, and consideration of the role of transitions into and out of part-time work.
Promoting Better Career Mobility for Longer Working Lives in Austria
Abstract
Austria is undergoing a significant demographic transformation. The old-age dependency ratio (the number of people older than 65 for every 100 people of working age) is projected to increase to 52.5 by 2040, from 35.4 in 2024. This transition presents social and economic challenges, but also constitutes a significant opportunity. One of the ways to harness the benefits of increased longevity is enabling longer labour market participation for workers.
The employment situation of older workers has improved markedly in Austria. In 2023, the employment rate of people aged 55‑59 was 80.8% for men and 76.2% for women. However, employment rates are much lower for people aged 60‑64, and marked gender disparities can be observed (48.1% for men, 20% for women). The effective retirement age, in alignment with these employment rates at older ages, is low in international comparison, at 60.9 years for women and 61.6 years for men.
Career mobility decreases substantially with age. At age 26, the probability of job-to-job transitions in Austria is 18.8% for men and 17.5% for women, while it is less than half that at age 45 (8.5% for men, 7% for women). The rate of job-to-job transitions has increased in Austria over time, albeit by less than the OECD average, and most of these increases are observed in younger age groups.
Lower career mobility at older ages is driven by a multiplicity of factors. Decreasing rates of career mobility across the life course reflect improvement in the job-worker match with increasing labour market experience but can also point to barriers to mobility for mid-career and older workers. This includes the accumulation of non-transferable human capital and age discrimination.
Career mobility has the potential to improve job quality and extend working lives. Career mobility is associated with increased wage growth, particularly for younger workers, and improvements in working conditions. Mobility can also be a pathway for adapting to structural labour market changes and can enable transitions to jobs better aligned with health or caregiving needs. In Austria, mobility in the mid-career is associated with fewer years spent in non-employment between the ages of 55 and 60.
Older workers are less likely to benefit from career mobility. Research has shown that involuntary mobility and mobility including non-employment spells are associated with fewer benefits for workers. Older workers are less likely to make voluntary job moves and more likely to make involuntary job moves. In Austria, the share of transitions from low-skilled to low-skilled jobs among all job transitions is 27% among workers aged 45‑64, but only 23% across all ages (24‑65).
Policy action should be taken to enable mobility into higher-quality employment for mid-career and older workers. In Austria, several areas of key policy focus emerge in this context.
Support for companies in developing age management practices, including those focused on internal mobility. While employers show interest in developing good practices in age management, international evidence shows that only a small minority of companies have actually implemented such practices. SMEs require particular support in the development of age management practices.
Investment in workplace health prevention and early intervention to enable return to work. Ill health is a major reason for voluntary labour market exit of older workers, and workers who are exposed to health risk factors at work are less likely to think they will be able to work until 65. Investment in health prevention measures in the workplace is critical in this context. In addition, where sickness absences arise, early intervention is needed to facilitate return to work.
Skills investment. Career mobility can be a way to cope with structural labour market changes, but this requires that workers have the skills needed to transition into emerging jobs and occupations. Age disparities in skills proficiency are particularly pronounced in Austria. However, older workers, particularly the age group 55‑64, are significantly less likely to participate in education and training.
Transitions into and out of part-time work. Part-time work is a particular concern in Austria, with one of the highest rates of part-time work in the OECD, largely driven by women. Female part-time work often involves transitions into lower-quality employment and persists throughout the life course. Facilitating mobility out of low-quality part-time work is a key policy priority. At the same time, however, part-time work can enable (higher) labour market participation for certain labour market groups, such as older workers and workers with health issues.
In the last decades, OECD countries have seen major increases in life expectancy, most of which are realised later in life. This is a major societal achievement, with significant benefits for individuals and potential social dividends, if the benefits of a “longevity society” can successfully be harnessed. However, population ageing, driven by lower mortality and continuously low fertility rates, also poses key challenges for societies and economies, including increasing pressure on social security systems. In this context, policy focus should be on facilitating longer labour force participation of workers, by enabling them to transition into or remain in high-quality, sustainable employment.
The Austrian population is ageing significantly (Figure 1.1). In 2024, the number of people older than 65 years relative to the size of the working age population, the so-called old-age dependency ratio, was 35.4 (OECD 32.7). This ratio is projected to increase to 52.5 in 2040 and 64.6 in 2060, exceeding the OECD averages (45.4 and 58.8, respectively). Against this background, measures to facilitate the labour market participation of older workers are crucial.
Old-age dependency ratio: persons aged 65+ per 100 people of working-age (20‑64), 1950‑2100
Source: United Nations World Population Prospects 2024.
The employment situation of older workers has significantly improved in Austria (Figure 1.2, Panel A). Between 2010 and 2023, the employment rate of men aged 55‑59 increased from 69.2% to 80.8%, while the employment rate for women increased from 50.4% to 76.2%. However, employment rates then drop significantly and gender disparities remain in the age group 60‑64, despite improvements. Employment of men aged 60‑64 was at 48.1% in 2023 (up from 28.7% in 2010), while employment of women aged 60‑64 is significantly lower (14.4% in 2010 and 20% in 2023). The continuing lower employment rate for women aged above 60 can be linked to gender differences in the retirement age, which was 60 years for women until 2024, and will gradually increase to 65 years until 2033.
In international comparison, the employment rate of workers aged 45‑54 is high, but employment of workers aged 55‑64 is lower than the OECD average, reflecting the low employment rates among workers aged 60‑64 (Figure 1.2, Panel B). The employment rate of Austrian workers aged 55‑64 is 28.5 percentage points lower than that of workers aged 45‑54. This gap is almost double the OECD average, which stands at 15.9 percentage points.
Note: OECD is a weighted average.
The comparatively low labour market participation of workers aged 60‑64 is also reflected in the early age of labour market exit (Figure 1.3). Women retire slightly later than the (current) legal retirement age on average, at 60.9 years. However, the effective retirement age for men is well below the official retirement age, at 61.6 years. For both men and women, these values are significantly lower than the average effective retirement age across the OECD (63.6 for women and 64.4 for men).
Effective labour market exit age by gender, 2022
Note: OECD is an unweighted average.
While the labour market situation of older workers has significantly improved in Austria in recent decades, there is room for further policy action to increase the quantity and quality of participation. One of the pathways towards increased labour market participation at older ages is job mobility, which can enable moves into higher-quality and more productive employment and allow for better matching the jobs held with caregiving or health needs (OECD, 2024[1]). Support for career transitions is increasing in importance in the context of structural labour market shifts such as the digital and green transitions, which may require workers to take on new jobs or new tasks within their jobs due to changes in skills demand.
1.2.1. Job mobility decreases with age
Careers – the sequences of jobs held by persons over their working lives – differ with regard to the amount of mobility they entail (Kalleberg and Mouw, 2018[2]). Mobility is a broad concept that encompasses transitions across firms (job-to-job mobility), changes in occupation (occupational mobility) or moves to a different role within the same firm (within-firm mobility) (OECD, 2024[1]). The amount of mobility across an individual career is influenced by a range of factors at individual level, such as socio‑economic characteristics and human and social capital, as well as institutional and structural influences across countries (Kalleberg and Mouw, 2018[2]).
Job-to-job mobility decreases with age. With increasing labour market experience, workers accumulate more firm-specific skills, which lowers their potential wages attainable in another firm, and therefore disincentivises mobility (Groot and Verberne, 1997[3]). From the employer perspective, the accumulation of firm-specific human capital can also disincentivise hiring, making career mobility more difficult for mid-career and older workers (Riekhoff, 2022[4]).
Moreover, as workers spend more time in the labour market, the quality of the match between their skills and their job is likely to increase, with associated wage (and non-wage) returns, while younger workers are more likely to change jobs to increase match quality (le Grand, 2002[5]; Groot and Verberne, 1997[3]). Older workers may also face specific barriers to job mobility, including age discrimination (Feldman, 2007[6]) and social norms relating to the expectation that mobility should be more common for early-career workers, meaning that later mobility is a negative signal for employers (Lam, Ng and Feldman, 2012[7]; Riekhoff, 2022[4]).
Similar to job-to-job transitions, occupational mobility also declines with age (Bachmann, Bechara and Vonnahme, 2019[8]; Forsythe, 2019[9]). In countries like Austria with strictly defined occupation-specific credentials, attachment to specific occupational careers is potentially even stronger, which may constitute an impediment to occupational mobility (Kalleberg and Mouw, 2018[2]). However, previous research has shown that rates of occupational mobility in Austria are in line with the EU average (Bachmann, Bechara and Vonnahme, 2019[8]).
In accordance with theory and the international evidence, data from Austria shows that job-to-job mobility drops significantly with age (Figure 1.4). While men are overall slightly more mobile than women, there are significant decreases in the probability of job-to-job transitions with increasing age for both genders (Panel A). The probability of a job-to-job transition is 18.8% for men and 17.4% for women at age 26, but drops to 8.5% and 7%, respectively, by age 45. Data from other countries also shows that in international comparison, the rate of job-to-job transitions is relatively low in Austria, and the age gradient in transition probabilities rather steep (Panel B).
Probability of job-to-job transitions, 2002‑19
Note: Job-to-job mobility captures both job-to-job hopping and workers experiencing a short unemployment spell between jobs (less than 12 months).
Source: OECD calculations based on linked employer-employee data for Austria, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Hungary and Portugal.
In the context of the major structural transformations affecting today’s labour market, careers may increasingly be fragmented and characterised by more regular transitions (Bimrose et al., 2015[10]; DiPrete, Goux and Maurin, 2002[11]). Research suggests that while a segment of the workforce may continue to follow a traditional career path where mobility is limited to the early career, a substantial portion of workers will experience mobility across the life course (Kovalenko and Mortelmans, 2014[12]). OECD calculations confirm that the rate of job-to-job transitions has increased in most countries (Figure 1.5). This is also the case for Austria, though the rate of transitions has increased by less than the OECD average. However, on average across the OECD, the most significant increases in the rates of transitions are observable in younger age groups. In Austria, increases in the rate of job-to-job transitions for the age group 55‑64 are negligible, while a small increase is observed for workers aged 45‑54.
Percentage point change in the rate of job-to-job transitions between 2012/14 and 2018/20 by age
Note: Data are adjusted to control for the composition of the labour force by education and age. The bars represent the contribution of each age group to the overall change in mobility. The methodology is the same as that used in OECD (2019[13]), OECD Employment Outlook 2019: The Future of Work, https://doi.org/10.1787/9ee00155-en and is based on Farber (2010[14]) “Job Loss and the Decline in Job Security in the United States”, www.nber.org/books-and-chapters/labor-new-economy/job-loss-and-decline-job-security-united-states. The pink bar is the unweighted average of the 27 countries shown.
Source: OECD (2024[1]), Promoting Better Career Choices for Longer Working Lives: Stepping Up Not Stepping Out, https://doi.org/10.1787/1ef9a0d0-en, Figure 2.1.
1.2.2. Career mobility has the potential to improve job quality at all ages and enable longer working lives
While career mobility is not a goal in itself, it has significant potential for improving the job quality and labour market outcomes of workers. Mobility should be associated with improvements in labour market position if it improves the quality of the job-worker match (Groot and Verberne, 1997[3]). In these cases, it enables moves along the job ladder, leading to improvements in wages and other non-monetary benefits (Causa, Luu and Abendschein, 2021[15]). In other cases, however, mobility may be associated with a loss of firm-specific human capital and lead to wage losses (Bachmann, Bechara and Vonnahme, 2019[8]).
Career mobility can lead to improvements in wages and working conditions
Empirical research has shown that career mobility can have both negative and positive effects on individual earnings, depending on the type of labour market transition. One crucial distinction is between voluntary and involuntary transitions; the latter are much more likely to be associated with downward wage mobility (Bachmann, Bechara and Vonnahme, 2019[8]). In accordance with international data, research from Austria has shown that involuntary mobility is associated with downward earnings mobility, while the reverse is true for involuntary mobility (Raferzeder and Winter-Ebmer, 2006[16]).
Relatedly, workers who undertake direct transitions, from employer to employer, tend to experience significant wage gains compared to those who stay in their job, while those who experience a career break in between jobs (indirect transitions) see negative effects on their wages (Hahn, Hyatt and Janicki, 2021[17]; Riekhoff, 2022[4]; Schmelzer, 2010[18]). While phases of unemployment between jobs can be used for active job search, they are negative signals from an employer perspective and more likely to be associated with job-hopping between insecure, low-paid jobs (Schmelzer, 2010[18]). The disadvantage associated with mobility via unemployment differs by institutional context, however; it may be especially pronounced in countries like Austria and Germany with tighter occupational boundaries (Schmelzer and Ramos, 2015[19]). These considerations illustrate the importance of intervening early to facilitate mobility into high-quality employment while individuals are still employed.
Most of the literature on earnings implications of career mobility focuses on the early career, where career mobility is likely to have pronounced effects on earnings due to increases in match quality and higher potential wages in alternative employment. It is less established whether the positive earnings effects associated with mobility also apply for older workers. OECD (2024[1]) finds that the wage growth associated with voluntary job changes is less pronounced for older workers, while involuntary job changes are particularly costly for older workers.
Importantly, job mobility can have substantial benefits which extend beyond wages, such as improvements in working conditions, the opportunity to transition to new career paths, avoidance of unemployment or reconciliation of work with other responsibilities (Damelang, Schulz and Vicari, 2015[20]). For workers in low-skilled jobs or jobs with poor working conditions, job transitions can faciliate entry into better-quality employment. Mobility also can be helpful for workers who are no longer able to stay in their current job, for instance due to health constraints, changing skills demand or care obligations (OECD, 2024[1]).
Research has demonstrated that job mobility is frequently associated with improvements in job quality beyond wages. External upward mobility is associated with increased satisfaction with objective working conditions and work-life balance, while internal mobility is related to increases in satisfaction with future career prospects (Fasang, Geerdes and Schömann, 2012[21]). In line with the empirical evidence on earnings mobility, enhancements in job satisfaction are lower if mobility is accompanied by unemployment, even after re‑employment (Ibid.). In addition, job mobility is positively related to both formal and on-the‑job learning in subsequent employment, a relationship that is particularly pronounced for older workers (Westerman, 2021[22]).
Mobility could enable longer labour market participation of older workers
Transitions into jobs with different tasks or job demands could be particularly beneficial for mid-career and older workers, who may wish to move to different roles in order to enable longer, higher-quality labour market participation (Visser et al., 2017[23]). Workers’ evaluations of workplace characteristics change with age, with workers placing increasing value on flexibility in working environment and jobs with less physical activity and stress (OECD, 2024[1]). The primary benefits that older workers gain from career mobility may not lie in increased wages, but rather improved working conditions, including less physically demanding or hazardous work (Groot and Verberne, 1997[3])
If mid-career job changes lead to mobility into higher-quality jobs with better working conditions, they may enable workers to extend their labour market participation. Research from the United States suggests that voluntary job mobility is significantly associated with later retirement, across genders and levels of education (Sanzenbacher, Sass and Gillis, 2017[24]). Workers who changed jobs between ages 50 and 60 were found to be significantly more likely to still be working at ages 65 and 67.
OECD calculations point to a significant relationship between mid-career mobility and continuing employment in later life in the European and Austrian context (Figure 1.6). Workers who experienced a mid-career job change have a significantly higher probability of employment at age 60, and conversely, a lower probability of inactivity (Panel A). Calculations based on linked employer-employee data from Austria point to a relationship between mid-career mobility and longer labour market participation (Panel B). Individuals who experienced a job transition in mid-career, defined as ages 45‑54, have a lower number of years in non-employment between ages 55 and 60 than those who do not (2.8 relative to 3.2).
Note: A mid-career job change is a change in job between ages 45‑54. Panel A reports the predicted probability of being employed/inactive at 60 after a regression of a dummy indicating whether a worker self-reports being employed/inactive on the year of one’s 60th birthday, on the mid-career switch dummy. Controls for OECD Europe include demographic factors (gender, age dummies, education), health indicators (depression and overall health), labour market indicators (number of jobs in career, time entry labour market, wage of current job, industry and occupation), wealth and income indicators (household income, benefit receipt, difficulty to make ends meet, a home renter indicator), household size, and informal care responsibilities, as well as country and time fixed effects. Controls for the United States include demographic factors (gender, age dummies), health indicators (depression), labour market indicators (number of jobs in career, time entry labour market, industry, and occupation), household size, and time fixed effects. Countries include in Panel A show unweighted average predictions for Austria, Belgium, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland. Panel B reports averages over the period 2005‑20.
Source: Adapted from OECD (2024[1]), Promoting Better Career Choices for Longer Working Lives: Stepping Up Not Stepping Out, https://doi.org/10.1787/1ef9a0d0-en, Figure 1.10.
1.2.3. Older workers are more likely to experience downward job mobility
Job mobility has the potential to lead to improvements in labour market outcomes for mid-career and older workers, ultimately enabling them to participate in the labour market for longer in good health and in high quality jobs. However, data indicates that older workers, when they are mobile, are less likely to benefit from career mobility than other labour market groups. Older workers are less likely to make voluntary job moves and more likely to make involuntary job moves (OECD, 2024[1]; Bachmann, Bechara and Vonnahme, 2019[8]). Evidence from the United States on within-firm mobility indicates that young workers not only have higher rates of occupational mobility, but are also more likely to move to higher-quality occupations and that wage gains from upward mobility diminish over the lifecycle (Forsythe, 2019[9]). More vulnerable older workers, including those in lower social classes, with experience of unemployment or disability or working part-time in the late career, are particularly likely to experience downward mobility (Visser et al., 2017[23]).
OECD data shows that older workers are also less likely to transition to higher-quality jobs in terms of skill requirements (Figure 1.7). Across the OECD, the share of low-to-low skill transitions among all workers aged 25‑64 is 22%, while it is 27% in the age group 45‑64. These shares are similar in Austria (23% and 27% respectively). Low-to-low skill transitions are associated with wage growth of only 0.6% for workers aged 45‑64, while there is evidence of more substantial wage growth for moves into medium or high-skilled occupations (OECD, 2024[1]). These findings illustrate that policy support to enable older workers to undertake job transitions, where needed, into high-quality employment and on a voluntary basis, is crucial.
Low-to-low skill job changes as a share of total job-to-job changes, 2010‑20
Note: AVE is the unweighted average of the 25 countries in the chart.
Source: OECD (2024[1]), Promoting Better Career Choices for Longer Working Lives: Stepping Up Not Stepping Out, https://doi.org/10.1787/1ef9a0d0-en, Figure 2.7.
Mid-career mobility has significant potential benefits for individual workers and the labour market as a whole, including improved earnings, better working conditions and the longer labour market participation of older workers. However, significant barriers to mobility exist, particularly voluntary mobility into high-quality jobs that are associated with longer labour market participation. Taking policy action to facilitate mid-career mobility is therefore of crucial importance. In the Austrian case, important policy areas for action stretch across several fields, including support for companies in developing age management practices, health prevention and early intervention for return to work, and skills development. In addition, actions to optimise transitions into and out of part-time employment, which is strongly prevalent in Austria, need to be considered.
1.3.1. Supporting employers in introducing age management practices in the workplace
As the workforce is ageing and workplaces are becoming increasingly multigenerational, employers need support in implementing workplace practices for age management, including practices that support career transitions. Implementing holistic age management practices, such as those that address work organisation, training, health, and working time, can allow workers to stay in employment and maintain or increase their productivity (OECD, 2023[25]). Policies to improve the internal mobility of workers are mutually beneficial, as they allow employers to retain and develop firm-specific human capital and employees to enhance their careers (OECD, 2020[26]).
Implementation of age management policies is lacking in many OECD countries, despite potential employer interest (Figure 1.8). A 2020 survey conducted among a large number of OECD countries, including Austria, showed that only a very small share of employers has implemented policies for age management (less than 10% for all measures considered). However, the survey also indicates that a substantial share of companies would be very or somewhat likely to implement such policies if they were provided with examples of promising practices. This data demonstrates that providing support and resources on age management to companies could provide a significant incentive for the development of age‑appropriate workplaces. Targeting support at smaller enterprises may be especially worthwhile, as they face particular challenges in implementing age management strategies (OECD, 2023[25]).
Share of employers that have or would be very, somewhat, not too or not all likely to implement or explore implementing a specific policy if provided with examples of promising practices
Note: The question asked was “If provided with examples of promising practices and “how-to” guides on a mutigenerational workforce, how likely are you to implement or explore implementing programmes or strategies in each of the following areas?”. Respondents were about 5 900 employers from all OECD countries with the exception of Colombia.
Source: OECD (2020[26]), Promoting an Age‑Inclusive Workforce: Living, Learning and Earning Longer, https://doi.org/10.1787/59752153-en, Figure 2.11.
Action targeting employer practices must also place a particular focus on age discrimination. While anti-discrimination legislation is widespread across OECD countries, age biases in recruitment and workplace practices persist in many countries (OECD, 2023[25]). An OECD survey of employers across a range of countries showed that companies are least likely to hire job candidates who are aged 45 or older (OECD/Generation: You Employed, Inc., 2023[27]). Recent evidence from Austria also confirms the presence of age discrimination in hiring (Schönherr and Bohrn, 2023[28]).
1.3.2. Investing in workplace health prevention and enabling early return to work after illness
Ill health is one of the primary reasons leading to early labour market exit of older workers (OECD, 2023[25]). Enabling transitions away from jobs associated with ill health, as well as transitions back into employment after illness, is therefore of crucial importance. In addition, the issue of health at work can be addressed at the source by investing in health prevention in the workplace so that workers can stay in their job in good health for longer (OECD, 2024[1]).
Older workers are particularly likely to be absent from work due to sickness (Figure 1.9). Calculations based on the EU Labour Force Survey show that sickness absence rates were at 1.3% for workers aged 15‑29 in 2019, compared to 1.9% for prime‑age workers and 3.2% for workers aged 55‑64. Data for Austria align with these average values. This illustrates that investment in health at work is a particular concern for improving the labour market outcomes of mid-career and older workers.
Rates of sickness absence by age, 2019
Note: The pink markers represent the average of the 25 countries shown. Sickness absence is defined as the share of workers absent due to sickness (during the full reference week of the survey). Derived from the variable ‘nowkreas’ (reason for not having worked at all during the reference week though having a job), and the response ‘Own illness, injury or temporary disability’. The denominator is total employment.
Source: OECD (2023[25]), Retaining Talent at All Ages, https://doi.org/10.1787/00dbdd06-en, Figure 3.2.
Policy action in the realm of health at work must be two‑pronged, focusing on both prevention and rehabilitation. On the one hand, preventive health investment and reduction of health risks in the workplace is a key element. Austrian data shows that exposure to health risks in the workplace can affect the ability to participate in the labour market until retirement age (Figure 1.10). According to the Austrian Work Climate Index Survey, workers who are exposed to health risk factors at work, including both physical and mental health risks, are significantly less likely to believe that they will be able to work until age 65. Against this background, taking action to enhance health promotion measures at work and reduce the incidence of hazardous employment is significant.
Share of respondents who consider it likely or very likely they will work until 65 by exposure to health risk factors, 2022‑23
Note: The survey asked respondents to evaluate the likelihood of them being able to stay in their current job until age 65 taking into account their work and health. The graph shows respondents who responded it was likely or very likely by their evaluation of exposure to various workplace health risk factors, on a scale of 1 (strong exposure) to 5 (no exposure). Survey includes workers aged 16+.
Source: OECD calculations based on data extraction from the Austrian Work Climate Index survey.
In addition to measures for workplace health prevention, support for return to work of workers experiencing long-term sickness absence is a key concern. In Austria, there is a strong link between temporary inability to work and permanent labour market exit (Eppel, Leoni and Mahringer, 2016[29]). Support early on during a sickness absence spell or in case of repeat absences is a key strategy for return to work, to avoid skills depreciation and, for older workers, illness forming a bridge into retirement (OECD, 2024[1]). Return to work may involve transitions to new roles within the firm or even to another job, if needed, so that workers with health issues can continue to participate in the labour market.
1.3.3. Enabling transitions through skills investment
Investment in education and skills can enable workers to transition to higher-quality jobs and occupations. The need for education and skills investment is further increased by structural labour market transformations such as digitalisation and the green transition, which imply that workers increasingly need to adapt to significant changes in the labour market (Bimrose et al., 2015[10]). In this context, career mobility constitutes a facilitator for coping with structural transformations and changing skills demand (Bachmann, Bechara and Vonnahme, 2019[8]). Skills proficiency tends to decrease with age. Results from the Survey of Adult Skills 2023 (OECD, 2024[30]) indicate that there is a clear age gradient in proficiency in several key information-processing skills, including literacy, numeracy and adaptive problem-solving. While such disparities exist across the OECD, they are especially pronounced in Austria, where a large gap in skills proficiency across age groups can be observed (Figure 1.11).
Literacy, numeracy and adaptive problem-solving score by age group
Note: Adults aged 16‑65. Includes adults who were only administered the doorstep interview due to a language barrier. Unadjusted differences are the differences between the two averages for each contrast category. Adjusted differences are based on a regression model that takes into account differences associated with gender, education, immigrant background, language spoken at home and parents’ educational attainment. Doorstep interview cases for which parental education information is not collected are included in the regression by assigning them to a separate category.
Source: Elaboration based on OECD (2024[30]), Do Adults Have the Skills They Need to Thrive in a Changing World?: Survey of Adult Skills 2023, https://doi.org/10.1787/b263dc5d-en.
At the same time, older workers may face particular labour market risks due to labour market transformations. Older workers are more likely to be employed in occupations that are associated with a high risk of automation (OECD, 2024[1]). Conversely, survey evidence shows that employers are reluctant to hire older workers for AI-intensive roles (Generation, 2024[31]). Research has also demonstrated that there are links between exposure of older workers to the digital transformation and earlier labour market exit. Studies have shown that older workers with higher exposure to digital technologies are more like to retire early (Yashiro et al., 2021[32]), as are those who work in jobs that are more automatable (Lee, 2023[33]).
Despite the fact that older individuals have lower skills proficiency levels overall and may be particularly at risk due to structural labour market change, they are much less likely to take part in education and training than other groups of workers (Figure 1.12). Overall, participation in education and training in the adult population is high in Austria. However, there are significant disparities between age groups, particularly for the age group 55‑64. In 2022, only 43.3% of workers aged 55‑64 participated in education and training, compared to 59.6% for workers aged 45‑54, 61.8% for workers aged 35‑44, and 68.7% for workers aged 25‑34. Policy action to increase access of mid-career and older workers to education and training is therefore a key priority.
Participation rate of persons in education and training by age, 2022
Note: Sorted in descending order of persons aged 55‑64. Persons participating formal and non-formal training in the last 12 months.
Source: Eurostat dataset: Participation rate in education and training by age.
1.3.4. Optimising transitions into and out of part-time work
Part-time work arrangements have significant potential for prolonging the labour market participation of groups unable to participate on a full-time basis, for instance due to health issues or other commitments such as caring responsibilities. However, part-time work is often associated with lower wages and lower occupational status than full-time employment and, when it constitutes a long-term working arrangement, may be associated with substantially lower financial resources and, eventually, pensions. Policies should thus seek to enable transitions out of (often low-quality) part-time work for mid-career workers, especially when part-time work is driven, at least in part, by structural constraints such as care responsibilities.
Concerns about part-time work are particularly acute in Austria. The rate of part-time work is very high, particularly among women, who have one of the highest rates of part-time work in the OECD (Figure 1.13, Panel A). In 2023, the share of women in part-time employment was 50.6%, compared to 13.4% for men. In contrast, there are only very minor differences in the share of part-time employment by age (Figure 1.13, Panel B).
Concerns about part-time work are particularly pertinent where it is associated with moves into lower-quality employment. This is often the case for moves of women moving into part-time employment following childbirth, which tends to be associated with pervasive occupational downgrading (Abendroth, Huffman and Treas, 2014[34]; Fiori and Di Gessa, 2022[35]). In Austria, part-time work is often a permanent arrangement for mothers, which persists even as children age and after they have left the household (Riederer and Berghammer, 2019[36]). Facilitating transitions into higher-quality employment for women in part-time work at all ages is therefore a key policy concern.
Share of part-time employment by gender and age, 2023
Note: Sorted in ascending order of persons aged 55‑64.
However, part-time work, and flexible work arrangements more generally, can enable (longer) labour market participation for certain groups, such as workers with health issues and those wishing to prolong their employment towards the end of the career. In such cases, part-time work may enable employee retention and increase the quality of life of (older) workers (Eurofound, 2016[37]; Horvath et al., 2022[38]). Support for moves into and out of part-time work therefore needs to be carefully calibrated.
References
[34] Abendroth, A., M. Huffman and J. Treas (2014), “The Parity Penalty in Life Course Perspective”, American Sociological Review, Vol. 79/5, pp. 993-1014, https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122414545986.
[8] Bachmann, R., P. Bechara and C. Vonnahme (2019), “Occupational Mobility in Europe: Extent, Determinants and Consequences”, De Economist, Vol. 168/1, pp. 79-108, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10645-019-09355-9.
[10] Bimrose, J. et al. (2015), “Mid-career changes symposium”, British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, Vol. 43/3, pp. 255-262, https://doi.org/10.1080/03069885.2015.1037098.
[15] Causa, O., N. Luu and M. Abendschein (2021), “Labour market transitions across OECD countries: Stylised facts”, OECD Economics Department Working Papers, No. 1692, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/62c85872-en.
[20] Damelang, A., F. Schulz and B. Vicari (2015), “Institutionelle Eigenschaften von Berufen und ihr Einfluss auf berufliche Mobilität in Deutschland”, Journal of Contextual Economics – Schmollers Jahrbuch, Vol. 135/3, pp. 307-333, https://doi.org/10.3790/schm.135.3.307.
[11] DiPrete, T., D. Goux and E. Maurin (2002), “Internal Labor Markets and Earnings Trajectories in the Post-Fordist Economy: An Analysis of Recent Trends”, Social Science Research, Vol. 31/2, pp. 175-196, https://doi.org/10.1006/ssre.2001.0721.
[29] Eppel, R., T. Leoni and H. Mahringer (2016), Österreich 2025: Gesundheit und Beschäftigungsfähigkeit. Status quo, internationale Erfahrungen und Reformperspektiven [Austria 2025: Health and employability. Status quo, international experience and prospects for reform], Österreichisches Institutefür Wirtschaftsforschung, Wien.
[37] Eurofound (2016), Extending working lives through flexible retirement schemes: partial retirement, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.
[14] Farber, H. (2010), “Job Loss and the Decline in Job Security in the United States”, http://www.nber.org/books-and-chapters/labor-new-economy/job-loss-and-decline-job-security-united-states.
[21] Fasang, A., S. Geerdes and K. Schömann (2012), “Which type of job mobility makes people happy? A comparative analysis of European welfare regimes”, International Sociology, Vol. 27/3, pp. 349-383, https://doi.org/10.1177/0268580911423048.
[6] Feldman, D. (2007), “Career Mobility and Career Stability Among Older Workers”, in Shultz, K. and G. Adams (eds.), Aging and Work in the 21st Century, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah.
[35] Fiori, F. and G. Di Gessa (2022), “Influences on Employment Transitions around the Birth of the First Child: The Experience of Italian Mothers”, Work, Employment and Society, Vol. 37/1, pp. 196-214, https://doi.org/10.1177/09500170221082479.
[9] Forsythe, E. (2019), “Careers within Firms: Occupational Mobility Over the Lifecycle”, LABOUR, Vol. 33/3, pp. 241-277, https://doi.org/10.1111/labr.12146.
[31] Generation (2024), Age-Proofing AI. Enabling an intergenerational workforce to benefit from AI, https://www.generation.org/midcareer-report-2024/.
[3] Groot, W. and M. Verberne (1997), “Aging, Job Mobility and Compensation”, Oxford Economic Papers, Vol. 49/3, pp. 380-403, https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.oep.a028615.
[17] Hahn, J., H. Hyatt and H. Janicki (2021), “Job ladders and growth in earnings, hours, and wages”, European Economic Review, Vol. 133, p. 103654, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2021.103654.
[33] Henkens, K. (ed.) (2023), “The Skill-Specific Automatability of Aging Workers and Its Impact on Retirement Decisions”, Work, Aging and Retirement, Vol. 10/3, pp. 267-284, https://doi.org/10.1093/workar/waad008.
[38] Horvath, T. et al. (2022), Ältere am Arbeitsmarkt: Eine Vorausschau bis 2040 als Grundlage für wirtschaftspolitische Maßnahmen [Older people in the labour market: A forecast up to 2040 as a basis for economic policy measures], Österreichisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Wien.
[2] Kalleberg, A. and T. Mouw (2018), “Occupations, Organizations, and Intragenerational Career Mobility”, Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 44/1, pp. 283-303, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-073117-041249.
[12] Kovalenko, M. and D. Mortelmans (2014), “Does career type matter? Outcomes in traditional and transitional career patterns”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 85/2, pp. 238-249, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2014.07.003.
[7] Lam, S., T. Ng and D. Feldman (2012), “The relationship between external job mobility and salary attainment across career stages”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 80/1, pp. 129-136, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2011.05.002.
[5] le Grand, C. (2002), “Job Mobility and Earnings Growth”, European Sociological Review, Vol. 18/4, pp. 381-400, https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/18.4.381.
[30] OECD (2024), Do Adults Have the Skills They Need to Thrive in a Changing World?: Survey of Adult Skills 2023, OECD Skills Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b263dc5d-en.
[1] OECD (2024), Promoting Better Career Choices for Longer Working Lives: Stepping Up Not Stepping Out, Ageing and Employment Policies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/1ef9a0d0-en.
[25] OECD (2023), Retaining Talent at All Ages, Ageing and Employment Policies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/00dbdd06-en.
[26] OECD (2020), Promoting an Age-Inclusive Workforce: Living, Learning and Earning Longer, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/59752153-en.
[13] OECD (2019), OECD Employment Outlook 2019: The Future of Work, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9ee00155-en.
[27] OECD/Generation: You Employed, Inc. (2023), The Midcareer Opportunity: Meeting the Challenges of an Ageing Workforce, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/ed91b0c7-en.
[16] Raferzeder, T. and R. Winter-Ebmer (2006), “Who is on the rise in Austria: Wage mobility and mobility risk”, The Journal of Economic Inequality, Vol. 5/1, pp. 39-51, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10888-006-9021-0.
[36] Riederer, B. and C. Berghammer (2019), “The Part-Time Revolution: Changes in the Parenthood Effect on Women’s Employment in Austria across the Birth Cohorts from 1940 to 1979”, European Sociological Review, Vol. 36/2, pp. 284-302, https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcz058.
[4] Riekhoff, A. (2022), “Good or bad (in)stability? A cross-cohort study of the relation between career stability and earnings mobility in Finland”, Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, Vol. 77, p. 100674, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rssm.2022.100674.
[24] Sanzenbacher, G., S. Sass and C. Gillis (2017), “The Effect of Job Mobility on Retirement Timing by Education”, SSRN Electronic Journal, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2912417.
[18] Schmelzer, P. (2010), “The Consequences of Job Mobility for Future Earnings in Early Working Life in Germany--Placing Indirect and Direct Job Mobility into Institutional Context”, European Sociological Review, Vol. 28/1, pp. 82-95, https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcq049.
[19] Schmelzer, P. and A. Ramos (2015), “Varieties of Wage Mobility in Early Career in Europe”, European Sociological Review, Vol. 32/2, pp. 175-188, https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcv079.
[28] Schönherr, D. and K. Bohrn (2023), “Ungleichbehandlung von Älteren und Langzeitarbeitslosen bei Bewerbungen auf offene Stellen [Unequal treatment of older people and the long-term unemployed when applying for vacancies]”, SORA Institut, Wien.
[23] Truxillo, D. (ed.) (2017), “Labor Market Vulnerability of Older Workers in the Netherlands and its Impact on Downward Mobility and Reduction of Working Hours”, Work, Aging and Retirement, Vol. 4/3, pp. 289-299, https://doi.org/10.1093/workar/wax017.
[22] Westerman, J. (2021), “Should I Learn or Should I Turn? Implications of Job Mobility for Subsequent Learning at Work”, European Sociological Review, Vol. 37/6, pp. 935-951, https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcab018.
[32] Yashiro, N. et al. (2021), “Technology, labour market institutions and early retirement: evidence from Finland”, OECD Economics Department Working Papers, No. 1659, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/3ea0c49b-en.