Meet the 93-year-old grocery store worker who loves his job — and has no plans to stop
"It's so much fun. I've got lovely customers," he told Business Insider. "I think I'll hang about a bit — I won't dash off at 95."
Shipton started working at Waitrose, an upmarket British supermarket chain, on a three-month contract in 2011 before being offered a permanent role.
"Every week the same customers are coming back time and time again," he said. "They're great, I love them."
"I don't feel like it's work — it's more like play, to be honest."
He described Waitrose as an incredible employer. Shipton said when he'd only been working at the store for about four years, he broke his hip while gardening but was given three months paid leave to recover.
"And when I went back, they made sure that I had everything I needed to make life easy for me," he said.
Shipton decided to apply for the supermarket job after reading a book by John Spedan Lewis, who established the John Lewis Partnership, which owns Waitrose along with the John Lewis department store chain. It's the UK's largest employee-owned business and all staff have a stake in the business.
"I figured this man was going to be good to work for," he said. "I figured, although he died, his business was still running, and it was running as they organized it."
Shipton said he'd previously worked at another supermarket for six years but wasn't entirely happy there.
His career spanned a range of industries. He worked in electronics, as a maintenance controller for his city council and on a freelance basis as a computer programmer, and repairing antique furniture.
Shipton attended college for two years but decided it wasn't for him.
"They weren't teaching me what I wanted to know," he said, so he decided to join the army.
"I thoroughly enjoyed it, but I could see that when I got to the age of 45 I was going to become grown out," he said.
Shipton then worked in sales and marketing for big electronics companies. "I've always wanted to do something."
'Curious about the world'
Shipton said he was "at a loss" for about a year when his wife, Julia Marise, died in 2021, followed by his cat a year later.
"Then I thought, 'right, I'll take on some Ukrainian refugees,'" he said.
Shipton said he spent his school days with Jewish refugees after World War II.
"There was a lot of information about Auschwitz and so on, which made me think, you know, how can people start a war and treat people so badly?" he said. When Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, Shipton felt he had to do something to help.
He wrote to the chairman of John Lewis to help Oksana get a job with the retailer. Her son, Illia, is in his final year of school and due to go to college next year.
"They're fabulous people," he said. "I might have cooked three dinners in the last three years."
Shipton said he and Illia have bonded over their shared interest in math. "I'm very interested in anti-matter and I'm studying that at the moment."
No retirement plans
The 93-year-old also regularly paints and reads. "I try and learn on a daily basis almost. I'm curious about the world. I'm curious about people."
Shipton said he's never retired — and has no plans to do so: "I just enjoy working. As I say, it's not work, it's play."
A few months ago Shipton said he was thinking of working until 95, but has decided to continue even longer. "My life is very full."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
21 minutes ago
- USA Today
We're creating AI that could surveil US citizens. And the government is in on it.
Tech companies' lack of transparency and accountability in developing surveillance tools that governments can use is unacceptable. President Donald Trump recently gathered CEOs for a summit about renewing the United States 'spiritually and financially.' At the top of the agenda was a closer look at 'American values' such as faith and freedom. There is cause for alarm, however. Centuries after Americans declared independence from the British monarchy, our freedom and liberty are under threat − not only from foreign governments like China, but potentially our own. America's surveillance state is spreading as the federal government collects personal data of hundreds of millions of Americans. In the age of artificial intelligence, with data collection accelerating at an unprecedented rate, our privacy has never been more vulnerable. Who is the culprit? The data collectors range from the National Security Agency to Silicon Valley's cadre of data-hungry technology companies. Add to that list a new organization: Palantir. While it is not a household name like Google or Netflix, it is soon to be a common domestic concern. The technology company's surveillance operation has exploded in recent months, raising the possibility of creating a full-fledged surveillance state. Opinion: AI knows we shouldn't trust it for everything. I know because I asked it. Since January, Palantir has received more than $113 million in federal funds, according to The New York Times, not including a $795 million Defense Department contract awarded in May. While the federal government increased data sharing across agencies (with Palantir's help), the company continues to shop its technology to the Social Security Administration and the Internal Revenue Service. AI technology could be repurposed for sinister uses We are talking about technology that can be weaponized. While Palantir's current focus is to identify people in the United States illegally, tracking movements in real time, the company is also building the infrastructure that could be used for a massive surveillance state. Former Palantir employees have warned about the potential for the company's AI tools to surveil American citizens with a disregard for personal privacy. It is not so far-fetched. Palantir's AI software is used by the Israeli Defense Forces to strike targets in Gaza. It is used to assist the U.S. Defense Department in analyzing drone footage. And it has been used by the Los Angeles Police Department to forecast crime patterns. This is called 'predictive policing.' If "Minority Report"was not a horror movie before, it is now. Given the government's penchant for abusing power (see: COVID-19 censorship or the NSA spying scandal), does this not seem like an obvious move against our civil liberties? For years, the NSA engaged in the mass surveillance of Americans' telephone records, as was exposed in 2013. Between 2001 and 2007, government wiretapping − executed without warrants − affected millions of U.S. citizens. Now, the same agencies are tapping into the power of AI to expand government surveillance in once unimaginable ways. Opinion: AI is changing our world. At what point will it change our reality? Of course, the federal government can already access a wide range of our personal data, but it is often separated by agency. Washington, DC, can create exponentially more detailed profiles on all of us by sharing data with the help of Palantir's AI tools. Even when surveilling noncitizens, the government's data collection inevitably tracks individual Americans based on their own interactions with these noncitizens. The government's data collection is based on information from police departments, financial institutions and other entities, like Palantir. Big government and big tech partnership raises concerns Even if the alliance between the government and Palantir works as intended, it is a potential threat to our civil liberties. Political dissidents could become targets. Not even those with limited public personas are safe from the state's detailed profiling machine. These systems are not perfect, and neither are our leaders. What happens when AI systems fail? What happens when data collection goes haywire? Palantir is hardly alone. OpenAI recently launched OpenAI for Government, which aims to equip federal, state and local leaders with advanced AI tools. OpenAI claims to serve the 'public good' and 'bolster national security readiness,' but why would private citizens take that at face value? What does 'readiness' actually mean, in practice? At the moment, many of our elected officials do not have answers to these questions, or they are just ignoring them. The same goes for OpenAI and Palantir, which are all too comfortable amassing ever-larger federal contracts and greater market share. This lack of transparency or accountability is unacceptable. The only thing worse than the overreach of Big Government is Big Tech in bed with Big Government. For those who care about freedom and liberty, now is the time to speak up, before it is too late. Peyton Hornberger serves as communications director at The Alliance for Secure AI, a nonprofit organization that educates the public about the implications of advanced artificial intelligence.
Business Insider
22 minutes ago
- Business Insider
The millennial case against having baby number 3
Victoria Lamson and her husband once entertained the idea of having a third child. Then, they considered the logistics. Even having their two children was a challenge. To alleviate financial strain, they "intentionally put five years in between" having children, Lamson, 38, told Business Insider. The couple is raising them in San Francisco, the most expensive US city. They send their 7-year-old son to a nearby parochial school because the public school system in San Francisco is "definitely struggling," Lamson said. When her 2-year-old daughter is old enough, she will attend the same school. Private school costs in the city average $26,000 per child annually. Moving, in order to afford a third child, would also be difficult — both her and her husband's families live nearby. Plus, she and her husband's careers have undergone many changes. Lamson pivoted from sales to PR, ending her first contract PR role when she gave birth to her second child. She spent part of her maternity leave looking for a new job. Meanwhile, her husband, who works in tech recruiting, has experienced a decline in business with the recent tech layoffs. "Putting all those factors together, it really just doesn't make sense for us anymore," Lamson said. Lamson and her husband join other millennials, who are between the ages of 29 and 44, averaging two kids max. Along with the millennials who are having fewer kids or remaining child-free, the generation is often blamed for America's shrinking birth rate. There isn't one economic or cultural reason as to why so many millennials are two-and-done with having kids. While childcare costs and fertility issues play substantial roles, there has also been a sea change in what an ideal family — and family size — looks like. Barely making do with two When it comes to family size, millennials aren't that different from their predecessors. According to a 2020 Pew Research Center Report, millennial women average 2.02 kids. At similar ages, Gen X women had 2.05 kids and boomers 2.07. Pamela Smock, a professor of sociology at the University of Michigan, said having two kids has been an American ideal since the 1960s. The difference between the generations is that millennials are less likely to have kids than previous generations. In that sense, a young family with two kids is no longer the norm, but, for some, a symbol of luxury. "People see marriage and childbearing as something to do once they feel economically comfortable," Smock said. To many, that means not having any debt and being able to afford a mortgage. The average millennial borrower owes $42,000 in student loan debt, part of why it's so difficult for millennials to buy their first homes. Comparatively, 45% of baby boomers bought their first homes between the ages of 25 and 34. Work has also changed, Smock said. Gone are the lifelong jobs that require a basic college degree. Millennials are known as the " job-hopping generation," which also impacts their sense of security as costs keep rising. Stephanie Fornaro, a 40-year-old mom of two in Dallas, has a 20-year-old daughter in college and a 7-year-old son. She had her daughter when she was 20, but delayed having her son until her early 30s. "Financially, I was in a different season in my life to afford a second child," she said, adding that she divorced a few years after giving birth to her daughter. It was only when she remarried in 2017 that she felt secure enough to have another kid. Wendie N. Choudary, a sociologist and lecturer at Binghamton University, told BI that in addition to rent or housing costs, millennial parents also have to deal with astronomically high childcare costs, paying an annual average of $11,000 per child. Fornaro, who founded and runs a national childcare agency, said a third child would have a huge financial impact on her family. To keep up with her job, she would need a full-time nanny — roughly $80,000 a year in Dallas. Childcare costs are so high that some parents struggle to even have their second child. Katie Waldron, who lives in Long Island, New York, previously told Business Insider that she and her husband want a second child soon, but are considering moving to the UK to be closer to his family and find more affordable childcare services. "The burden of childcare costs and, equally, the lack of emotional support as we go through our parenting journey make it impossible to have another," she said. Millennials are having kids later Economic uncertainty also plays a role in millennials having kids later than past generations, Smock said, thus affecting how many they have. Millennials' median age for first-time parents is 27.3, a significant increase from the 1970s when it was the norm to have kids at 21. Depending on when they start having kids, timing the third can be tricky. More parents are having kids in their 40s, past the fertility peak at 37 years old. Even if the plan is to have more than two kids, it's not necessarily in the parents' control, Smock said. Not everyone can afford IVF, which can cost $12,000 and require six rounds to achieve success. Having kids past 35 also increases the chances of conditions like preeclampsia, gestational diabetes, premature birth, or genetic disorders in the fetus. Parents considering a third child in their late 30s or early 40s might not feel the risk is worth it. Sometimes, a rough pregnancy is enough to deter wanting more kids. Lamson, who had her first child at 31 and second at 36, felt a huge difference in those five years. At 31, she said it was easy to stay very active and exercise four times a week. The second time was more challenging. "I had really low energy throughout my entire pregnancy," she said. "I struggled with a lot of pain, so even when I would try to just get out and walk, I could only kind of do so for a period of time before I didn't feel all that well." "I attribute it a lot to age," she said, adding that she ended up going to physical therapy to alleviate some symptoms. With more choice, parents choose fewer kids After World War II, it was normal to get married at 19 and have kids in rapid succession, Smock said. But with more choices, millennials realized "they don't have to follow the path that their parents and grandparents took," she said. In recent years, there's been an increased online interest in " trad wives" and the merits of large families. However, it hasn't shown much of a dent in what most people want, Julia A. Behrman, an associate professor of sociology at Northwestern University who researches how values shape a person's ideal family size, told BI. "We are pretty consistently seeing these average ideal family sizes of about 2.5," Behrman said. Most actually plan to have fewer: roughly 1.8 on average among people in their 20s and 30s. In Behrman's research, she's found that people with more progressive views on gender norms and household labor tend to want fewer kids — often because they are aware of how childrearing disproportionately falls on mothers. Even if parents want two or more kids, Behrman's research found that it doesn't mean it's their top priority. Other aspects of family life, like financial stability, rank higher. For the parents who can technically swing three kids, it could mean a notable decline in their quality of life. Fornaro, who grew up as one of eight children and felt neglected because her dad and stepmom struggled to raise them all, doesn't want her kids to experience the same. She said having a third wouldn't just impact how much she could contribute to her kids' college tuition or inheritances. It would also change how much time she gets to spend with them. "We are a pretty active family," she said. Traveling and going on their boat would be harder with an infant. Taking her son to his extracurriculars — jujitsu, baseball, and football — would also be much harder with a newborn. And with Fornaro's daughter in college, caring for a baby would make it difficult for Fornaro to visit her. Lamson even felt a big difference in what she could do after having a second kid. She and her husband took their son to Europe when he was 10 months old because he had an easygoing demeanor. "My daughter doesn't have the same personality; she's a little bit more challenging," Lamson said. They've opted for more staycations and plan to travel more when their daughter is older. Having a third child would be financially "really limiting" for vacations, not to mention the logistics of wrangling three kids onto a flight. It's not that millennial parents don't love parenting or a house full of kids. Fornaro fell in love with being a mom after her first child. Lamson wanted a third. They just wanted to give more to their existing family. "I wanted my kids to have my undivided attention," Fornaro said. "I felt like that was one thing that I didn't get out of my parents."
Business Insider
22 minutes ago
- Business Insider
Top strategist Vincent Deluard predicts a summer slump in stocks — but says 'recessions have been canceled'
The record-breaking stock market will tumble before September, but a recession effectively is "canceled," a leading strategist told Business Insider. "I expect US stocks to experience a sharp but brief correction in the summer," Vincent Deluard, the director of global macro strategy at StoneX, a financial services network, told BI in an interview. In a recent note, Deluard raised the prospect of a "brutal but brief" sell-off in late July or early August. He based the call on Donald Trump's tariff-negotiation period ending on August 1 and potentially spooking markets; the likelihood of further interest-rate cuts being delayed because of accelerating inflation and a tightening labor market; and the narrow breadth of the latest market rally, he said, adding that narrow rallies often lead to a correction within a month. He added in his note that foreign investors were anxious about "Trump's antics" with tariffs, the deficit, and their exposure to the US economy. He predicted selloffs would be short-lived as overseas buyers can't resist Big Tech stocks given their dominant market positions and central roles in the AI revolution. Deluard told BI he expects "several steep corrections" in stocks over the next two years due to "erratic policymaking, pressure from rising long-term bond yields, and selling from foreign investors." 'Recessions have been canceled' The macro specialist told BI there was a risk of a "brief stagflationary slowdown," but he ruled out a prolonged downturn as "recessions have been canceled by the shift to intangible assets, permanent stimulus, and demographics." Deluard spelled out his thinking in a note in May. He highlighted that the US economy has spent just 1% of the past 16 years in recession, down from around 40% of each decade between the 1860s and 1930s. He added that the main changes were a transition from an industrial economy to a less volatile services one, big rises in government spending on healthcare and social support programs for an ageing population that have acted as a "permanent economic stimulus," and policymakers adopting a "whatever it takes" approach to avoiding recessions. Deluard told BI that the Federal Reserve might have to raise its inflation target from 2% to as much as 4%, because officials will realize they can't aim lower in an era of sustained deficit spending. He said that that would be "quite positive" for stocks, as it would support higher corporate earnings and lower interest rates. Deluard, an adjunct professor of finance at Saint Mary's College of California, told BI the housing market would likely remain weak due to "poor affordability, growing supply, and high and sticky mortgage rates." He suggested house prices would "cool down but not crater" over the next two years, buoyed by higher construction costs, rising incomes, and low unemployment.
