Last month the first baby-boomers turned 60. The enormous generation born between 1946 and 1964 is heading towards retirement. The coming "demographic cliff"  will see vast numbers of skilled workers disappear from the labor force. The workforce is ageing across the rich world. Within the EU the number of workers aged between 50 and 64 will increase by 25% over the next two decades, while those aged 20 -29 will decrease by 20%. Given that most societies have a tendency to retirement at around 65, companies have a problem of knowledge management, of making sure that the boomers do not leave before they have handed over their expertise along with the office keys and their e-mail address. If you look hard enough, you can find companies that have begun to adapt the workplace to older workers. The tools they use to achieve are flexible working, telecommuting, and so forth. Some companies spend "a lot of time" on the ergonomics  its factories, making jobs there less tiring. Likewise, for more than a decade, prefix = st1 /Toyota, has been unusually keen to employ older workers. IBM uses its alumni network to recruit retired people for particular projects. But such examples are unusual. A survey in America last month by Ernst & Young found that "although America foresees a significant workforce shortage as boomers retire, it is not dealing with the issue . " Why are firms not working harder to keep old employees? Mostly they are not hanging on to older workers the only way to cope with a falling supply of labor. The participation of developing countries in the world economy has increased the overall supply--whatever the local effect of demographics  in the rich countries. In the author's opinion American firms are not doing anything to deal with the issue of the ageing workforce mainly because   _  .
they have other options to consider they are unwilling to hire older workers they are not sure of what they should do they have not been aware of the problem