If you’ve talked to a nurse or a teacher lately – the ones nearing early retirement age – you’ll know many are counting the hours to quitting.

They’re like anxious school kids on the last day before summer holidays.

Actually, it’s happening in all sectors of the economy, the private, public and non-profits.

People are increasingly considering early retirement. Some – nurses and teachers – are burned out. Others are boomers intent on enjoying life.

Arlene Wortsman says that phased retirement could be a handy tool.

The looming shortage of skilled workers has been well documented, so the issue of early retirement raises questions: Who is going to replace these people? And what can an employer do to slow the rising tide of early retirees?

Arlene Wortsman, labour director of the Canadian Labour and Business Centre in Ottawa, recently posted a paper on the centre’s Web site (www.clbc.ca) promoting the merits of phased-in retirement.

It’s a catch phrase that allows retirees to return to work in a number of ways that include special assignments, mentoring, job sharing, telecommuting and working reduced hours.

“Phased-in retirement is one more tool in the tool box for employers to be creative,” she says. “It’s a way to keep people and their expertise still working for the employer, while giving employees more flexibility in how they exit the workforce.”

Unfortunately, tax, pension and paperwork issues do pose barriers to phased-in retirement, she says.

“The key is that you don’t want to penalize people for this. You want government and employers to make it as easy as possible.” Wortsman points to two examples where government and industry have latched on to the idea.

In Quebec, where the province runs the Quebec Pension Plan, a phased-in retirement program was developed in 1996. It allows employees between the ages of 55 and 70 to reduce their work hours and still enjoy full QPP benefits without penalty (either through maintaining their level of contributions or drawing payments from the plan).

And just recently in New Brunswick, provincial nurses began working under a collective agreement that includes phased-in retirement. It’s noteworthy that the deal was struck 2 1/2 years ago, but only recently came into effect because of paperwork required through the federal bureaucracy.

“It wasn’t an easy task. But it is going into place now, and the nurses are clearly interested in it,” Wortsman says.

“Nurses have a history of retiring earlier than other parts of the population. Their work is demanding. It’s physically hard. So this gives them the option to continue working but not at the same level.”

Bob Donlevy, a Calgary financial planning consultant with T.E. Financial Consultants, calls the initiatives “enlightened.”

“In the past, the term retirement meant an abrupt end, or worse, perhaps buying a leisure suit and getting on a tour bus,” says Donlevy, who conducts retirement workshops across Canada.

Four weeks ago, he held a planning session for a major Canadian oil industry service firm. About one-quarter of the people attending had planned for post-retirement employment. In most cases, they will return as contract workers.

“When we talk to employees, we don’t suggest that they go to an employer and try and finesse a deal where they’d stay on and enhance their pension while still collecting a salary,” Donlevy explains. “It complicates an employer’s world because of the regulations that are still in place.”

Normally, employees retire one day and return the next as a contractor. It’s often at the company’s request.

Donlevy says that in the case of the oil services company, it is growing so fast that it can’t find people to replace the experience and skills of retiring workers. And it will be years before the younger generation of workers closes the knowledge gap.

Donlevy and Wortsman say many organizations are resistant to the idea of phased-in retirement.

But Wortsman notes that senior HR executives with large Canadian companies have been talking to Ottawa about the concept.

“There is dialogue. Whenever you break new ground, there are obstacles to overcome,” she says. “The more that people do it, the easier it will be – because it will become an accepted way to do things (within the government and within organizations).”

Nevertheless the concept is well down the list of solutions for Canadian companies.

A 2002 survey of business, public sector and labour leaders conducted by the Canadian Labour and Business Centre found that only 14 per cent of private sector managers saw phased-in retirement as a ‘very important’ option. However, almost half (48 per cent) cited skill shortages as a serious problem.

Other findings included:

* 21 per cent of public sector managers believed 25 per cent of their workforce would retire within five years.

* Public sector managers are far more likely today to cite skill shortages as a serious problem – 32 per cent in 1996, 57 per cent in 2002.

* Of the public sector managers, 28 per cent consider phased-in retirement a very important option.

Surprisingly, while employers recognized the looming skills shortage problem, there wasn’t much evidence that they had a strategy to solve it, Wortsman says.

“There was an assumption that employers would hire more people, do some training. Some of the approaches were around increased overtime, making people work longer hours.

“It’s really short term, it burns out your employees, making them less willing to stay.”

She believes that employers will have to start looking beyond a cookie-cutter approach and adopt policies that respond to employees’ needs.

The problem is, when there is a crisis in the economy, options such as phased-in retirement get lost in the shuffle because people are looking for quick fixes, she adds.

That may change, however, when waves of skilled retirees begin dashing out the doors like giddy youngsters on the last day of school.