Phasing of State Pension Age

mumps

Figgerty wrote: »

I was happy to work longer to equalise the state pension age to 65 and planned on that basis. Then the Government decided to increase the age to 66 + and because of being born at the end of '53 my age group suffered more than most other.

As to equality of pay, I recall that it was around the mid eighties before my pay increased in line with male counterparts. I was not doing the same job all my working life so only received equal pay after working for about 15 years.

It was a different world, I remember working in an office, late 60s and early 70s. Twelve of us worked in the office first six were men with us sitting behind the earned almost double what we did. The job was divided in two, the women did the first calculation and the men finished it off, for some strange reason their part of the job was higher value than ours.

My daughter had a job when she was at school, less than ten years ago, when she was at uni she got a payment of several hundred pounds as there had been a challenge on equal pay and the women had won. She was working for our local council.

Nick_C

mumps wrote: »

It was a different world, I remember working in an office, late 60s and early 70s. Twelve of us worked in the office first six were men with us sitting behind the earned almost double what we did. The job was divided in two, the women did the first calculation and the men finished it off, for some strange reason their part of the job was higher value than ours.

My daughter had a job when she was at school, less than ten years ago, when she was at uni she got a payment of several hundred pounds as there had been a challenge on equal pay and the women had won. She was working for our local council.

The recent Local Government case is totally ridiculous. Local councils were deemed to have broken the law because dinner ladies are paid less than dustmen; and that is undoubtedly true. However, the jobs are totally different. But dustmen are more likely to be men and dinner ladies are more likely to be women, so this was considered by the courts to be discriminatory. This makes a nonsense of paying an appropriate wage for the job. Any woman working on the dustcarts for the last 40 years, or any man working in a school kitchen, will have been precisely the same as their co-workers.

The fact is some jobs are likely to continue to attract people of one sex or the the other, and employer's can no longer simply pay people the correct rate for the job.

Is a person starting work at 6am, working outside in all weathers, and doing hard physical work, worth more than someone working indoors doing something undemanding at a sociable time of day? In my book, undoubtedly yes. Sex shouldn't be a factor.

Figgerty

molerat wrote: »

But any years you contribute after 2016 will add to that new SP figure, you may still be able to achieve the maximum, just make sure you earn in excess of £112 per week (2015 figure).

I found this on the DWP website:

If your starting amount is less than the full new State Pension

You may be able to get more State Pension by adding more qualifying years on your National Insurance record after 5 April 2016 (until you reach the full new State Pension amount or reach State Pension age - whichever is first).
Each qualifying year on your National Insurance record after 5 April 2016 will add about £4.32 a week (which is £151.25 divided by 35) to your new State Pension.

It seems I may be able to retire next year, pay extra years NI contributions (to make up for being contracted out of SERPS) and still get a full one tier state pension when I reach state pension age. If that is the case why are my over 35 years contributions not taken into account.

molerat

Figgerty wrote: »

I found this on the DWP website:

It seems I may be able to retire next year, pay extra years NI contributions (to make up for being contracted out of SERPS) and still get a full one tier state pension when I reach state pension age. If that is the case why are my over 35 years contributions not taken into account.

At April 2016 the 35 years will be taken into account but have the contracted out deduction or you receive the 30 years + additional pension whichever is higher. Both methods use the maximum years applicable to the scheme - 30 or 35 irrespective of how many over that you have got. You can then add additional years to make up.

jem16

Figgerty wrote: »

It seems I may be able to retire next year, pay extra years NI contributions (to make up for being contracted out of SERPS) and still get a full one tier state pension when I reach state pension age.

Whether it's worth it or not will depend on the cost of paying those contributions. That is, as yet, unknown.

If that is the case why are my over 35 years contributions not taken into account.

Under the current rules you need 30 years. Your pension is calculated under current rules.

Under the new rules you need 35 years. Your pension is calculated under the new rules.

As you have been contracted out a deduction will be made from the new rules which will work out far less than what you will get under the current rules. Transition arrangements have been put in place to protect you as you will get the higher of the two calculations.

You can't mix and match the years to suit. If you want the 35 years to be taken into account you will have a pension that is less than you would get taking into account your 30 years.

Which one do you want?

molerat

I had 39 years when I retired at 55 in 2009. My statement in Nov 2014 gave me the 2 figures as new £75.33 and old £129.91. After 2016 I hopefully should be able to buy more years, I await the announcement hoping they will keep the current class 3 rates increased by inflation as in the past. Mrs M is luckier as she only has 27 years but will be able to buy the missing years after 2006-7 for a reasonable price up until 2019. We have set aside just under £5K for 7 missing years this as the money will come back in just over 3 years - bargain.

mumps

Nick_C wrote: »

The recent Local Government case is totally ridiculous. Local councils were deemed to have broken the law because dinner ladies are paid less than dustmen; and that is undoubtedly true. However, the jobs are totally different. But dustmen are more likely to be men and dinner ladies are more likely to be women, so this was considered by the courts to be discriminatory. This makes a nonsense of paying an appropriate wage for the job. Any woman working on the dustcarts for the last 40 years, or any man working in a school kitchen, will have been precisely the same as their co-workers.

The fact is some jobs are likely to continue to attract people of one sex or the the other, and employer's can no longer simply pay people the correct rate for the job.

Is a person starting work at 6am, working outside in all weathers, and doing hard physical work, worth more than someone working indoors doing something undemanding at a sociable time of day? In my book, undoubtedly yes. Sex shouldn't be a factor.

My daughter wasn't working as a dinner lady when she was a 15 year old schoolgirl:rotfl:I think this was a different case.

Figgerty

jem16 wrote: »

.
Which one do you want?

I want the one that makes the most of my very full NI contributions and will give me the highest pension.

I thought my pension would be based on the new rules as I don't reach state pension age until March 2019.

I applied for a pension statement today but will not receive it for some time as they are very busy with current pensioner enquiries on the new state pension top up scheme.

Figgerty

molerat wrote: »

I had 39 years when I retired at 55 in 2009. My statement in Nov 2014 gave me the 2 figures as new £75.33 and old £129.91. After 2016 I hopefully should be able to buy more years, I await the announcement hoping they will keep the current class 3 rates increased by inflation as in the past. Mrs M is luckier as she only has 27 years but will be able to buy the missing years after 2006-7 for a reasonable price up until 2019. We have set aside just under £5K for 7 missing years this as the money will come back in just over 3 years - bargain.

I am a bit wary of paying extra years as like you I have paid 35+ years and am not getting any credit for the extra years paid. But ironically DWP will sell us extra years. I am also suspicious of paying the extra years as I may not live long enough to benefit.

Nick_C

mumps wrote: »

My daughter wasn't working as a dinner lady when she was a 15 year old schoolgirl:rotfl:I think this was a different case.

The reports have generally been about dinner ladies, but the legal principle holds true for groups of low paid jobs held by women.

eg

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2039869/Dinner-ladies-win-battle-equal-pay-court-settlement-900-workers.html

School dinner ladies, as well as hundreds of carers and cleaners, have won an epic battle for equal pay.
Thousands of female workers could now win payouts after Sheffield city council agreed on an undisclosed out-of-court settlement with 900 women.
The individual payments are thought to range from around ‘a couple of hundred pounds to tens of thousands’, a union source has said.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-16844478

Nearly 1,000 female workers, including dinner ladies, cleaners and carers, are to receive five years' back pay after an equality dispute with Bury Council.
The council and trade union Unison reached an agreement ahead of a Court of Appeal hearing next month.
Bury was the first council targeted by Unison in 2007 in a legal fight for the women to get the same bonuses as men in similar low paid jobs.
The agreement concerns women in mainly lower paid work, including carers, catering assistants, cooks, cleaners, domestic assistants, school crossing patrol attendants and home carers, who were paid less than male workers doing comparable jobs.

http://thejusticegap.com/2013/04/stefan-cross-hated-by-the-unions-loved-by-dinner-ladies-and-lawyers/

Although the first equal pay legislation took effect in 1975, it wasn’t until 1995 that a legal action by Stefan Cross and on behalf of the Cleveland ‘dinner ladies’ kick-started a wave of settlements and equal-pay cases being brought through the courts. In the Cleveland case, 1,500 women received a £5 million payout. After that, the 1997 ‘single status agreement’ was constructed to abolish pay inequalities through pay and grading reviews in each local authority. A similar agreement in the NHS called ‘Agenda for Change’ was reached in 2004. But as negotiations dragged on interminably and councils pleaded poverty, women turned to lawyers because they felt their claims were either being stalled or under-settled.

The equal pay litigation that Stefan Cross pioneered changed the legal landscape. At the end of last year Birmingham city council, the country’s largest local authority, was reported to face a potential bill of £757m to settle its equal pay claims in favour of 170 low-paid women staff.