Increase in State Pension Age

zagfles

real1314 wrote: »

OP -

And what year is actually 66 years later than 1954?

Do you need a clue? It's 20-something and it's something-20.

It's a 2 digit number repeated.....

Yes, that's right; It's 2020.

Err...yes, but had the state pension age stayed at 65 then they'd get their pension in 2019. (1954+65). So they did increase the state pension age before 2020. But that's not the issue...

Oh, hang on, isn't that the year that the coalition said they wouldn't increase the pension age before?

That's the issue. The "coalition" never said that. They published a consultation document in June 2010, just one month after the coalition came into existance, about the timing of the state pension age increase to 66.

So when exactly did the coalition make this supposed promise? A few weeks before publishing the consultation :rotfl:

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/when-the-state-pension-age-should-increase-to-66-call-for-evidence

Batchy

For every one that thinks this is bad think of the ones doing well who were forced to retire early at 60 and couldnt stay on at work as it was and used to be compulsory retirement at that age. Think of what it cost them... how do they Unsign this petition to have their say?

dunstonh

Another petition request but someone that doesnt actually know what they are talking about. The state pension age has moved from 65 to 66 (and will continue to move upwards to 68 over time).

The move from 60 to 65 for women was almost two decades ago and consultation started on that about 23 years ago. Starting a petition in 2014 for something that was put into legislation in 1995 is silly.

Pollycat

dunstonh wrote: »

Another petition request but someone that doesnt actually know what they are talking about. The state pension age has moved from 65 to 66 (and will continue to move upwards to 68 over time).

The move from 60 to 65 for women was almost two decades ago and consultation started on that about 23 years ago. Starting a petition in 2014 for something that was put into legislation in 1995 is silly.

I think this just about says it all. :T

jiltedpensioner

Yes, the petition is about the acceleration in the increase in the State Pension age not the principle of increasing pension age or equalising women with men.

I re-read the petition as I was beginning to wonder if we are all reading the same petition. This is what was the Petition says and what was contained in the Coalition Agreement:

“We will phase out the default retirement age and hold a review to set the date at which the State Pension age starts to rise to 66, althoughit will not be sooner than 2016 for men and 2020 for women“

However, the Coalition Government have broken this promise by accelerating the rise in the State Pension Age.

Most women accepted the first increase in their pension age with ‘good grace’ and without complaint. However, when the Government emboldened by the lack of protest, targeted the same group of women again for another increase, this was when the petition was set up.

The increase in State Pension age could be introduced more gradually. It was Europe that dictated to the UK Government that it must be accelerated:

"In the same year [2010] Europe decided that it was unfair to raise male retirement age more quickly and so the Spending Review set out another more rapid change for women; the women’s state pension age would now be increased to 65 by 2018 and both men and women would have a retirement age of 66 by 2020”

Interestingly, France ignored this directive and reversed the retirement age to 60 years stating:
“We committed to put this measure in place quickly for social justice for those who started working early,..” - Social Affairs Minister Marisol Touraine.

If you agree with the increase in the State Pension age and the equalisation of the State Pension age for men and women but you do not agree with the acceleration in the increase in the State Pension age, then please sign the petition and write to your MP.

It is certainly not too late to protest, there is an election coming up.

As far as National Insurance contributions go, the amount of qualifying years was dropped to 30 years and then went up again:
“The Government has apologised to tens of thousands of workers who were given misleading advice about the National Insurance contributions they needed to make. Currently 30 years of contributions are needed for a full basic state pension, but this will rise to 35 years when the new "single-tier" pension is introduced in 2016.

However, in a letter sent to thousands of workers before the proposal to raise the requirement to 35 years was set out in a White Paper in January, the Government told them that the number of years needed had "been reduced" to 30 – a reference to a reduction that took effect in 2010. The letters made no mention of the possibility of a rise back to 35 years. One reader contacted The Sunday Telegraph after she received her letter the weekend after the White Paper was published.” Richard Evans, Investment Editor at Telegraph Media Group

greenglide

It just doesnt make sense!

The petition claims to be about the accelerating of the equalisation and extension of the state pension age which has a relatively limited impact but then talks about people being disadvantaged by 5 years and more. It also rants about civil servants, judges etc who get the state pension at the same time as everyone else and who are in a group who are disadvantaged by the single tier pension changes.

So, get a life, move on, find something real to complain about which hasn't actually happened. You had the chance to complain while the legislation was going through parliament - did you make use of your rights then?

It is not as if it was an all secret. I knew all about in going as far back as the 90s!

Pollycat

jiltedpensioner wrote: »

Yes, the petition is about the acceleration in the increase in the State Pension age not the principle of increasing pension age or equalising women with men.

I re-read the petition as I was beginning to wonder if we are all reading the same petition. This is what was the Petition says and what was contained in the Coalition Agreement:

“We will phase out the default retirement age and hold a review to set the date at which the State Pension age starts to rise to 66, althoughit will not be sooner than 2016 for men and 2020 for women“

However, the Coalition Government have broken this promise by accelerating the rise in the State Pension Age.

Most women accepted the first increase in their pension age with ‘good grace’ and without complaint. However, when the Government emboldened by the lack of protest, targeted the same group of women again for another increase, this was when the petition was set up.

So why did you muddy the waters by blathering on about '6 years' in your original post?

jiltedpensioner wrote: »

As you know, anyone born after 6 October 1954 has a new State Pension age of 66 years. This is a loss of approximately £42,000 over the six years for every woman affected.

It's a very poor, ill-informed petition - and despite the fact that I'm a woman affected by the 2 changes - I wouldn't sign it on principle.

susan47

Personally, I just think everyone should retire at 65. I don't mind waiting the extra years - though my sister got her pension at 61 and she's only 6 years older than me - because I care about the future of my children and grandchildren. We can't give everybody what they want.

However, I do think the retirement age should apply to everyone no matter what job they're in. So whether it's NHS, teaching, military, they should all be the same. My brother-in-law has had full pension from the military since age 50 but was still fit enough to get full-time employement elsewhere afterwards. The policeman next door similarly got a generous pension at 50 (more than he expected, he says). Teaching friends claimed their pensions early. So - if everyone got them at 65, it wouldn't be a problem, the real problem is the numbers of those claiming them early and living longer in my opinion.

greenglide

But this is all about the State Pension, not pensions paid out by pension schemes which may be public or private sector which are all run over their own rules.

The public sector schemes are moving towards alignment with the SPA anyway although police, fire services and armed forces are all special cases - they are still changing but the target is different. NHS, local government, teachers etc are moving towards SPA in the future.

atush

Riding a desK? yeah I can see that . I can't see someone in an army fighting unit out in the heat of the Stan at age 50 or older.

Can't see a fire fighter doing what he has to do on the front line after 50 either.

So they either have to find them other jobs int he service or let them retire earlier. Training, desk jobs etc.

But as said, most Public sector workers ae going to have to work longer now.

Or as we told the OP, if you want to retire earlier, save outside pensions and inside a DC pension and you can.