Will working past 62 increase my Social Security benefits with zero-earning years on my record?

That's encouraging! Do you have any idea how much my monthly benefit might increase per year? Like if I work 3 more years, would I see maybe a $100/month increase, or more like $300? Just trying to figure out if it's worth pushing retirement back.

Wow, $400 more per month would make a huge difference! That's almost $5000 a year extra. Did your brother say how many zero years he had on his record?

Thanks for explaining that. I knew about the reduction for claiming early but didn't realize these were two separate factors. So if I work until 67 (my FRA), I'd get both the higher calculation AND avoid the early claiming reduction? That sounds like a much better deal than I realized.

That doesn't sound right. If you and your neighbor had identical earning histories and you worked until 66 while they claimed at 62, the difference should be much larger than $75. There must be other factors at play - maybe they had higher lifetime earnings, or you had some years of lower earnings that affected your calculation? Social Security benefits are calculated based on a very specific formula using your 35 highest-earning years.

I tried calling twice last week but couldn't get through. Was on hold for over an hour both times before having to hang up for other appointments. Is there a better time to call them?

I had the same problem trying to reach SSA about my benefits calculation! After multiple failed attempts and hours on hold, I found this service called Claimyr at claimyr.com that got me through to a live agent in under 20 minutes. They have a demo video at https://youtu.be/Z-BRbJw3puU showing how it works. It was such a relief to finally get personalized answers about my zero-earning years situation. The agent ran different scenarios showing exactly how each additional year of work would increase my benefit.

This is EXACTLY the kind of real-world example I was hoping for! So you saw about $110-130 increase per year of additional work? That's substantial enough to make me seriously consider working longer. I do have a my.ssa.gov account, but the calculators don't seem to let me model replacing specific zero years - they just give estimates based on retirement age and assumed continued earnings. Your experience is really helpful, thank you!

You're thinking of the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP), which affects people who worked jobs that didn't pay into Social Security (like some government positions) but also had jobs that did pay into the system. It doesn't apply to everyone with zero years - only to those who earned non-covered pensions. The OP's zeros appear to be from not working, not from working in non-covered employment.

No pension here - I've always worked in the private sector when I was working. My zero years were just years I wasn't employed at all. Sounds like I don't need to worry about that windfall thing, which is a relief!

I am married (30+ years), but my husband's benefit will be higher than mine since he never had interruptions in his work history. I think I read somewhere that I can't receive both my own benefit and a spousal benefit - is that correct? Or can I get some combination?

You're correct that you can't receive full amounts of both benefits simultaneously. You'll receive your own retirement benefit, and if your spousal benefit (which would be up to 50% of your husband's FRA benefit) is higher than your own, you'll get an additional amount to bring the total up to the higher amount. For example, if your benefit is $1,525 and your husband's full benefit is $3,200, your spousal benefit would be $1,600 (50% of his). You'd receive your $1,525 plus an additional $75 to reach the $1,600 level. This makes your decision about working longer more complex, because if your own benefit never exceeds 50% of your husband's, the extra work might not increase your total benefit (though it would reduce the portion that's the spousal benefit).

That's a really good point about the additional retirement savings. I'm currently maxing out my 401k catch-up contributions, so each additional year does add significantly to that nest egg too. Sounds like the combination of replacing zero years, delayed claiming, AND extra retirement savings all point toward working longer being the smarter move in my case.

This breakdown is incredibly helpful! I never understood how the PIA formula worked before. So if I'm reading this correctly, replacing all 7 of my zero years could potentially add $600-700 to my monthly benefit? That would bring me from $1,525 to over $2,200 monthly just from the earnings record improvement alone. Combined with waiting until my FRA, that's a massive difference from claiming at 62. The health insurance point is also really important - my employer does offer COBRA for 18 months, which would bridge me to Medicare eligibility. This math definitely makes the case for working longer!

Great questions! To answer your first one - Social Security automatically uses your highest 35 years of indexed earnings, regardless of when they occurred. So if you have zeros from different time periods, the system will replace the lowest years (the zeros) first, then continue replacing your lowest earning years if you keep working. The timing doesn't matter - it's purely based on the dollar amounts after indexing for inflation. As for managing the physical and mental demands of working longer, I found a few things really helped: 1) I negotiated a more flexible schedule with my employer (4 days/week), 2) I made sure to use all my vacation time for actual rest, and 3) I focused more on mentoring younger colleagues rather than taking on the most demanding projects. Some people also explore part-time work or consulting in their field, which can still help replace those zero years while being less demanding than full-time work. The key is being honest with yourself about what you can handle and advocating for accommodations that make it sustainable.

This is exactly the kind of comprehensive perspective I needed! You're right that I hadn't considered the non-financial benefits of continuing to work. I do enjoy the mental stimulation and daily structure of my job, and the thought of suddenly having no schedule at 62 is actually a bit daunting. Your point about requesting detailed projections from SSA for different scenarios is great advice. Even if it takes some persistence to reach them (as others mentioned), having those specific numbers for my situation would really help with the decision. And the 60-80% higher benefit calculation you mentioned aligns with what others have shared - that's such a significant difference it's hard to ignore. I think I'm leaning heavily toward working until at least my FRA now, possibly even to 65 or 66. The combination of better benefits, more retirement savings time, and a more gradual transition to retirement all make sense for my situation. Thank you for helping frame this decision in such a comprehensive way!