The Hidden Workforce:

What We're Wasting When We Pit Generations Against Each Other

I watch my son navigate his early career with a kind of digital fluency that amazes me. He can bounce between platforms, absorb information at lightning speed, and adapt to change in ways that feel almost instinctive. He, in turn, has watched me think through complex problems with a depth that comes from my lived experience, seeing patterns, understanding consequences, knowing which battles are worth fighting. We're not competing, but sharing the same battle in a bewildering, complex world. And yes, it could be complimentary for some.

Yet every workplace seems designed as if we're one or the other, as if hiring me means not hiring him, as if his fresh thinking somehow cancels out my hard-earned insight. The UK is throwing away billions in untapped potential by treating this as an either/or choice instead of recognising what we could help build together giving both of us opportunity to contribute in our own unique ways.

The False Competition

The media loves to frame this as conflict: young workers disrupting everything while older workers cling to outdated ways. Or older workers taking jobs that should go to the younger leaders. This narrative isn't just wrong, it's also costly, both in monetary terms and in relation to our overall mental health and sense of identity.

In reality, nearly half of UK recruiters admit they see 50 plus year-olds as “too old” to hire, despite clear evidence that keeping older workers in employment could add £9 billion a year to the economy. We’re not just wasting skills, we’re throwing away growth.

My son’s experimentation and fresh thinking. Me bringing lived insight with its emotional intelligence. His generation grew up with this constant flux and information overload, learning to move quickly and adapt instinctively. My own learned resilience through economic crashes, career pivots, through life experiences with its challenges that don't fit onto a CV.

These aren't interchangeable skills. A 25-year-old's appetite for risk and change isn't the same as a 50-plus year-old's ability to see around corners and solve problems quietly. Both are valuable. Both are much needed. But this risk and need for change is subjective. I do take risks and I want to adapt to change but in different ways that my son would.

What Complementary Actually Looks Like

It works when it's designed intentionally. Project teams that include a digital-fluent strategist, someone with deep sector knowledge, and a connector who bridges vision with delivery. Teams where mentorship flows both ways, where experience provides stability while fresh thinking provides an energy of growth for both different mindsets.

A lot of the time this happens by accident, not always by design. Most recruitment processes, role specifications, and workplace expectations assume everyone should fit the same model even though they recruit for specific skills. Assuming we all have similar ones. We talk about flexibility, but what we usually mean is: fit into the way we've always done things, without disrupting the status quo.

What if, instead, recruitment took a genuinely person-centred approach, valuing depth alongside speed, foresight alongside innovation, calm problem-solving alongside bold experimentation? That approach doesn’t just feel fairer; it’s economically smarter. Other countries are already proving it: the UK’s employment rate for 55–64 year olds is just 65%, compared to 75–81% in nations like Switzerland, Iceland, and the Netherlands. That gap is wasted talent.

The Real Cost of Getting This Wrong

Right now, the UK faces a perfect storm: labour shortages across key sectors, a rising population of over-50s leaving work earlier than expected due to the pandemic, growing pension strain, and a fundamental mismatch between available jobs and what people actually need to live decently.

The common response is "let's get people back to work." But back to what? If we don't rethink how we structure work, especially for those who've faced disruption, health challenges, or simply don't fit traditional moulds, we're setting people up to fail again.

I know this from experience. As a late-diagnosed neurodivergent adult with a non-linear career, I've had to carve paths through systems that were never built for someone like me. I've run a social enterprise not because I wanted to be an entrepreneur, but because traditional employment couldn't accommodate who I was or what I needed.

But one of the biggest hidden losses has been structured learning and support. I've missed out on over 15 years of digital training that would have happened naturally in traditional employment. I didn't have the money or capacity to invest in learning new systems when I was just trying to survive. That everyday support of being able to ask a colleague how to do something, or call IT when stuck, is something most people take for granted.

Now, as a self-employed person, I have to find someone, book an appointment, maybe pay, maybe ask for a favour. I don't learn well in formal classes, and YouTube tutorials just leave me with more questions. What I need is someone I can ask in the moment, not a full course three weeks from now. That doesn't exist for people like me. It's lonely, and it makes every step harder.

But actually I'm not alone in this. There are thousands of us, people with valuable experience and skills who've been pushed to the margins by rigid thinking about what work should look like and who should do it.

What We're Really Wasting

When we treat generations as competitors instead of collaborators, we lose more than productivity. We lose wisdom. We lose innovation. We lose the kind of nuanced problem-solving that comes from different perspectives working together.

And the stakes are high. Economists estimate that early exits of older workers already cost the UK £31 billion a year in lost productivity and £11.5 billion in tax revenues. This is not just about personal dignity, it’s about national prosperity.

My son’s generation faces challenges I never had to navigate: climate anxiety, a broken housing market, the uncertainty of the gig economy, and the growing shadow of automation. My generation, in contrast, lived through deep recessions, industrial decline, and the long arc of social progress that reshaped rights and opportunities.

Together, we hold perspectives shaped by different storms and could tackle problems neither of us could solve alone. Apart, we’re both diminished. We’ve built structured pathways for young people starting out, internships, graduate schemes, apprenticeships. But where are the equivalent pathways for those of us returning, restarting, or shifting direction later in life? What would it look like to design that kind of supported re-entry?

Building Something Better

What would intentionally intergenerational workplaces look like? Not token gestures or forced mentoring schemes, but genuine structural change that recognises different ways of contributing, learning, and leading.

Through my writing and connections I'm starting to explore this in practice, in workplaces, in policy, in how we think about contribution across the lifespan. Not as charity or accommodation, but as smart business and human design. The future of work isn't younger or older. It's intentional. It's intergenerational. It's designed for humans, not spreadsheets.

Maybe it's already starting, quietly, in the spaces where people are brave enough to say: "I still have something to give. Just let me give it differently." And where others are wise enough to reply: "Show me how." Because younger people aren’t just looking for technical skills or career tips. Many are seeking mentors who can offer perspective, emotional steadiness, and lived insight.

That kind of guidance doesn’t come from an instruction manual, it comes from deeper experience. So when we exclude older workers, we don’t just lose productivity, we lose the chance to build workplaces where wisdom and curiosity meet.

These reflections are part of a wider journey I’m making into how we design work with dignity, inclusion, and contribution at its core. I’m always keen to connect with others exploring similar questions, whether through research, collaboration, or practical initiatives that test new ways of working.