55 year old women lose approx £30k in State Pension

cyclonebri1

custardy wrote: »

must admit in Royal mail you could see the guys over 50 quite literally falling to bits as the years went on
back,knee and hip problems are rife

With no desrespect, letters aren't heavy, lumps of iron are, hence my indignation, cheers mate.;)

custardy

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

With no desrespect, letters aren't heavy, lumps of iron are, hence my indignation, cheers mate.;)

walking for hours and up and down stairs takes its toll
i didnt realise it made those workers ailments less worthy
i can delete that reply if you find it so insulting?

Pollycat

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

With no desrespect, letters aren't heavy, lumps of iron are, hence my indignation, cheers mate.;)

It's not as though postmen/postwomen carry just one letter, though, is it?

They carry a sackful, as well as magazines and parcels - and as custardy says, they walk a significant distance as well.

dzug1

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

With no desrespect, letters aren't heavy, lumps of iron are, hence my indignation, cheers mate.;)

One letter isn't heavy.

A bag of letters is.


As an aside the original state pension scheme was funded on the basis that most claimants would live a year or two at most, and most people wouldn't get there in the first place.

cyclonebri1

custardy wrote: »

walking for hours and up and down stairs takes its toll
i didnt realise it made those workers ailments less worthy
i can delete that reply if you find it so insulting?

Sorry, I apologuise for my comment, but mine and your posts should stay in the topic as we both have issues with the proposed changes


Probably my having worked in engineering all my life and having too retire at 55 through ill health has highlighted my frustrations with "government policy". I wasn't considering the street posties job as a whole, just my own experiences.

Rant mode on;
How the hell anyone can expect such as builders, engineers, foundry workers, production line workers and yes, posties and other active workers, to continue in such physically demanding jobs up to and beyond present ages is beyond my understanding :mad::mad:

custardy

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

Sorry, I apologuise for my comment, but mine and your posts should stay in the topic as we both have issues with the proposed changes


Probably my having worked in engineering all my life and having too retire at 55 through ill health has highlighted my frustrations with "government policy". I wasn't considering the street posties job as a whole, just my own experiences.

Rant mode on;
How the hell anyone can expect such as builders, engineers, foundry workers, production line workers and yes, posties and other active workers, to continue in such physically demanding jobs up to and beyond present ages is beyond my understanding :mad::mad:

which is exactly why im looking to retrain(well one reason)
a few health issues over the last few years have opened my eyes to not wanting to do physically demanding work for another 30+! years
even if had stayed at RM the chances of my body surviving that a near non existent
however much better for the Gov' if the grafters drop off like flys before or soon after retirement

cyclonebri1

custardy wrote: »

which is exactly why im looking to retrain(well one reason)
a few health issues over the last few years have opened my eyes to not wanting to do physically demanding work for another 30+! years
even if had stayed at RM the chances of my body surviving that a near non existent
however much better for the Gov' if the grafters drop off like flys before or soon after retirement

Never a truer word, another years payments off the OAP

However the tide will turn. Old folks will soon be a major fraction of the voting public. I just hope that they/we can "remember", no offence intended, why we hold these values and why we want to protect our pension system in it's present form, Jessss we paid for it!!!

custardy

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

Never a truer word, another years payments off the OAP

However the tide will turn. Old folks will soon be a major fraction of the voting public. I just hope that they/we can "remember", no offence intended, why we hold these values and why we want to protect our pension system in it's present form, Jessss we paid for it!!!

its funny,during the last RM strikes(lets not get into that) I saw a retired postie being interviewed
complaining about the staff being on strike! Funny how those on final salary pensions who had a far easier time in the job forget

cyclonebri1

custardy wrote: »

its funny,during the last RM strikes(lets not get into that) I saw a retired postie being interviewed
complaining about the staff being on strike! Funny how those on final salary pensions who had a far easier time in the job forget

I do understand;),



:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

ALIBOBSY

mjm3346 wrote: »

Think yourself luck as you will probably avoid the rise to 66.

If the Conservatives get in men will have to wait an extra year for their state pension from 2016, with the pensionable age rising from 65 to 66.
For women the state pension age rise in stages to 65 by 2020. This will still happen; additionally, under the Conservatives, the age will rise again to 66 in 2020.

A 58 year old man earning £25,000/year will retire at 65 under Labour, the Conservatives will save him a total of £259 in National Insurance for which he will have to work a year longer.

The age increases are already there under Labour actually. Both myself and OH will not be able to retire until 67. Wrong to blame this on one party as well as incorrect.

The big problem is all those baby boomers a huge generation that those of us under 50 are paying for over and over.

The good news is the new rules also made it easier for people to qualify for a full pension, particularly good news for many women who didn't pay enough into the system to even qualify for the lowest amount and the same legislation is good news for carers both of children and the disabled as the system is now much fairer for claiming NI conts whilst looking after someone at home.

ali x