Retirement Social Security

A New Social Security Bill Would Let Some Workers Retire at 60 With Full Benefits

Michigan representative introduces new proposal for a subset of working Americans.

A Social Security graphic
Updated Oct. 20, 2026
Fact check checkmark icon Fact checked
Google Logo Add Us On Google info

Waiting until 67 to collect your full Social Security retirement benefit can be difficult if your job involves years of lifting, standing, climbing, or other physical work.

A new bill from Rep. Haley Stevens, D-Mich., would let some Americans in physically demanding careers collect their full Social Security retirement benefits starting at age 60. The proposal could be especially relevant if retirement savings are stretched thin, but one key requirement would determine who actually qualifies.

Now Available: The Definitive Guide to Retirement Income

Many successful investors eventually reach the same moment. The saving is done, the portfolio is built, and the question quietly changes from how much can I grow this to how much can I take out? Get that second question wrong and decades of good investing can come apart in a handful of years.

That is exactly what The Definitive Guide to Retirement Income helps answer.1 It covers what your retirement could actually cost, which income sources are worth using, and the withdrawal math that decides whether the money lasts. It is free today from Fisher Investments. Read More Here ›

Some workers could get full Social Security at 60

Under current Social Security rules, people born in 1960 or later reach their full retirement age at 67. You can generally start collecting retirement benefits at 62, but claiming that early can permanently reduce your monthly benefit by as much as 30%.

Stevens' Blue Collar Social Security Fairness Act would create an exception for workers who spend enough of their careers in physically demanding jobs. Those who qualify could begin collecting their full retirement benefit at 60 rather than waiting until 67.

"Michiganders who work with their hands shouldn't be forced to wait until their bodies give out to retire," Stevens said when announcing the legislation. "If we want to honor the dignity of work in this country, we need to lower the retirement age for physical laborers."

The proposal mentions construction, roofing, nursing, and manufacturing as examples of physically demanding occupations.

You'd need enough years in a physically demanding job

Working in one of those fields for a few years wouldn't necessarily be enough to qualify. The bill creates two paths. A worker would need either at least 20 years in physically demanding jobs or 15 points based on the age at which they performed that work.

Qualifying work between ages 18 and 34 would earn 0.5 points per year. Work between 35 and 44 would earn one point, while ages 45 to 54 would earn 1.5 points. Each qualifying year at 55 or older would be worth two points.

You would generally need to spend at least eight months of the year in a qualifying occupation for that year to count. The system also gives greater weight to physical work performed later in life, when years of demanding work may become harder to sustain.

Social Security would decide which jobs qualify

Your job title alone wouldn't necessarily determine whether you could claim full benefits at 60. The bill directs the Social Security Administration to create a list of physically demanding occupations and update it every three years.

Under the bill, an occupation would qualify if it places substantial physical demands on workers that could reasonably be expected to make performing that job, or other physically demanding work, more difficult at an advanced age.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics measures physical job demands using factors such as how much workers have to lift, carry, push, pull, stand, walk, climb, stoop, kneel, crouch, or crawl. Those kinds of demands could help inform which occupations SSA ultimately considers physically demanding under the bill. Being in a broad industry associated with physical work wouldn't automatically guarantee eligibility.

Released: The Definitive Guide to Retirement Income (Sponsor)

Most people spend their entire working lives focusing on one thing: growing a pile of money. Then they retire and discover the skill they actually need is close to the opposite. Turning that pile into steady income, year after year, through good markets and bad, without ever running out. It may be the least discussed and most consequential transition in personal finance, and plenty of otherwise careful investors walk into it with no real plan.

That is exactly what The Definitive Guide to Retirement Income helps answer.1 It is a free guide from Fisher Investments covering what your retirement will really cost, where the cash flow should come from, and how much you can safely withdraw each year. Learn More Here ›

What full benefits at 60 could mean financially

The financial impact could be significant for someone who otherwise planned to claim Social Security early. Under current rules, someone born in 1960 or later who starts collecting at 62 receives 70% of the benefit they would receive by waiting until their full retirement age of 67.

Say your full benefit at 67 would be $2,000 a month. Claiming at 62 under current rules could reduce it to about $1,400 a month, a difference of roughly $600.

The proposal could give eligible workers another option: leaving a physically demanding career earlier without accepting the permanent reduction that normally comes with claiming Social Security before full retirement age.

Social Security faces a funding shortfall

Notably, expanding benefits would come as Social Security is already facing financial pressure. The 2026 Social Security Trustees Report projects that the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund will be able to pay full scheduled benefits until the fourth quarter of 2032. After that, continuing income would cover about 78% of scheduled benefits if Congress doesn't make changes.

The Blue Collar Social Security Fairness Act doesn't address that broader funding shortfall. Lawmakers would therefore still have to confront Social Security's finances separately even if they decided some physically demanding workers should receive full benefits earlier.

Your retirement age isn't changing yet

The Blue Collar Social Security Fairness Act is only a proposal. Stevens introduced H.R. 10608 in the House on September 24, and it was referred to the House Ways and Means Committee. It would have to pass Congress and be signed into law before anyone could claim benefits under the proposed rules.

Until then, existing Social Security retirement ages still apply. People born in 1960 or later generally reach full retirement age at 67 and can begin claiming reduced retirement benefits at 62.

So if you're approaching retirement, don't build your financial plan around receiving full Social Security at 60 just yet.

Bottom line

The Blue Collar Social Security Fairness Act could let some Americans who have spent much of their careers doing physically demanding work collect their full Social Security benefit at 60 instead of waiting until 67.

You'd need 20 qualifying years or 15 points under the bill's weighted system, and Social Security would determine which occupations count. The proposal could change your retirement plan if it becomes law, but today's claiming rules remain in place, so you should not assume you can claim full benefits at 60 unless the proposal becomes law.

AARP Benefits
  • Huge discounts on travel, groceries, prescriptions and more
  • Access to financial planning resources and health tools
  • Join AARP and get 25% off with automatic renewal


Financebuzz logo

Thanks for subscribing!

Please check your email to confirm your subscription.